We should buy these people some Irish Spring, and then maybe they wouldn't smell so bad.
Here's the recent record of Obama foreign policy, vis-a-vis the Middle East:
Egypt - The Muslim Brotherhood is in power, after a popular uprising against a by-comparison benign dictatorship.New Egyptian 'President' Morsi attempts to take dictatorial powers and pronounce a theocracy despite all assurances from the White House and State Department that the Muslim Brotherhood is a peaceful, democratic organization that hasn't the slightest intention of setting up a brutal, thuggish, reactionary regime of religious and political repression that supports terrorists.
Egyptians who took to the streets in the name of reforming the previous regime of President-for-Life Hosni Mubarak didn't sign up for this MB bullshit, so they're back in the streets attempting to reform or overthrow this regime before, it too, ossifies into an Iranian-style dictatorship. Obama backed the wrong horse. Why? Who knows?
Insanity is not a disease; it's a defense mechanism.The opinions expressed here are disturbing and often disgusting to those with no sense of humor. I make no apologies for them, either. Contact the Lunatic at Excelsior502@gmail.com.
Showing posts with label Libya. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Libya. Show all posts
Friday, December 14, 2012
Arab Spring, My Ass...
Labels:
Afghanistan,
Assad,
Barack Obama is Incompetent,
Benghazi,
Egypt,
Foreign Affairs,
Hillary Clinton,
Iran,
Libya,
Obama,
September 11,
Susan Rice,
Syria,
Taliban,
Terrorism,
War on Terror
Friday, October 26, 2012
The Presidency of Because I Said So...
Remember when you were a child, and you asked your parents a question they didn't want to answer, or maybe you were forbidden to do something, and this circumstance confused your tiny little brain to the extent that you were actually motivated to ask that most-innocent and eternal of questions:
Why?
And your parents, flummoxed, perhaps impatient, could not bother to give you a reasonable facsimile of a definitive, logical, coherent answer, and would simply retort in a brusque tone:
Because I said so....
The subject, at that point, was assumed to be closed.
As you got older, you got another version of this dodge, this inability to answer a direct question with a measured argument, and it went something like this:
You'll understand when you grow up...
And this dialectic, more than anything else, I believe, describes the last four years of the Obama Administration to a tee.
Why?
And your parents, flummoxed, perhaps impatient, could not bother to give you a reasonable facsimile of a definitive, logical, coherent answer, and would simply retort in a brusque tone:
Because I said so....
The subject, at that point, was assumed to be closed.
As you got older, you got another version of this dodge, this inability to answer a direct question with a measured argument, and it went something like this:
You'll understand when you grow up...
And this dialectic, more than anything else, I believe, describes the last four years of the Obama Administration to a tee.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Hillary and Benghazi...
So, the Hildebeest took 'responsibility' for the lack of security that got four Americans killed in Benghazi, did she? Taking one for The Team, as the old saying does, is she? The Obamatards must be operating under the mistaken belief that now that someone has taken 'responsibility' for the Benghazi Disaster the subject is officially closed, probably much like they believed Al' Qaeda was finished after bin Laden was shot in the fucking face.
Well, no, the whole thing ISN'T over, Mr. President. It's only getting started.
Just because Hillary says "it's my fault...", doesn't make it all go away. It doesn't mean we can all, as you people like to say. "move on"
The fact remains that someone is lying to us, and we need to know the truth, especially from someone who promised us more transparency than we could ever imagine when he was elected.
Well, no, the whole thing ISN'T over, Mr. President. It's only getting started.
Just because Hillary says "it's my fault...", doesn't make it all go away. It doesn't mean we can all, as you people like to say. "move on"
The fact remains that someone is lying to us, and we need to know the truth, especially from someone who promised us more transparency than we could ever imagine when he was elected.
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Douchebag of the Week: The Arab Street...
This is the first time in the history of the prestigious Douchebag of the Week Award that an entire ethnic or religious group has won the big prize.
Mind you, this is no simple accomplishment given the normally very low standards of mindless behavior that are required to even be nominated. In this case, something unprecedented has occurred, and an entire people has displayed such egregious behavior that I am forced to conclude that what was once (wholesale douchebaggery) the exclusive domain of only the worst of individuals -- a politician, a media figure, perhaps a denizen of Hollywood -- has gone viral, and infected an entire ethnicity.
Mind you, this is no simple accomplishment given the normally very low standards of mindless behavior that are required to even be nominated. In this case, something unprecedented has occurred, and an entire people has displayed such egregious behavior that I am forced to conclude that what was once (wholesale douchebaggery) the exclusive domain of only the worst of individuals -- a politician, a media figure, perhaps a denizen of Hollywood -- has gone viral, and infected an entire ethnicity.
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Never Retreat in The Face of Ignorant Savages...Just Kill Them...
I haven't talked about Islam for some time now. Probably because on a good day, it's hardly worth talking about; it is, after all, a system of thought and behavioral control imposed by force upon perhaps the most insanely inbred population on Planet Earth. Seventy generations of inbreeding have conspired to create in the Modern Arab something that evolutionary scientists would say is impossible; a modern day Neanderthal, only with a smaller brain and greater capacity for irrational violence.
With regards to the recent attacks on American embassies in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and Yemen, and ahead of those that are about to occur in Iraq and Afghanistan, it would do well to finally understand what the Israelis have been telling us for 60 years, already; it does not pay to treat Arab Muslims as human beings, for any gesture of friendship, any offer to peacefully co-exist, any attempt to negotiate in good faith, is axiomatically taken by them as a sign of weakness.
With regards to the recent attacks on American embassies in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and Yemen, and ahead of those that are about to occur in Iraq and Afghanistan, it would do well to finally understand what the Israelis have been telling us for 60 years, already; it does not pay to treat Arab Muslims as human beings, for any gesture of friendship, any offer to peacefully co-exist, any attempt to negotiate in good faith, is axiomatically taken by them as a sign of weakness.
Labels:
Egypt,
History,
Iran,
Iraq,
Islam,
Islamonazis,
Libya,
Terrorism,
War on Terror
Friday, October 21, 2011
Khaddaffi Dead, NATO Protects Next Dictator-in-Waiting...
While the news of the gruesome and all-too-late death of Colonel Moammar Khadaffi is welcome, it should not be greeted with all the expressions of hope that many in the Obama Administration, particularly President Frequent-Flyer-Miles, himself, have attached to the event.
Despite the evocation of a belief that, with this brutal jerkoff now pushing up the daisies, Libya is on the path to democracy, exasperating experience (and history) has often shown that no such thing will happen, nor should it be expected to happen, without continued sacrifices in blood, treasure and political capital by the West. Particularly, by the United States.
Despite the evocation of a belief that, with this brutal jerkoff now pushing up the daisies, Libya is on the path to democracy, exasperating experience (and history) has often shown that no such thing will happen, nor should it be expected to happen, without continued sacrifices in blood, treasure and political capital by the West. Particularly, by the United States.
Friday, April 01, 2011
Professor Hanson: Libya, Explained...
Seriously, this man is a National Treasure. Perhaps once hyperinflation finally kicks in we could put his face on the $10,000,000 bill?
By the way, I've just re-read the Professor's Carnage and Culture. It's a classic, and still a great read 10 years later.
By the way, I've just re-read the Professor's Carnage and Culture. It's a classic, and still a great read 10 years later.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Pressed for Time Today...
No insanity for you today, as I'm up to my armpits in important personal stuff. Check this page tomorrow for some juicy stuff, including a new Bad Medicine screed, and Ten Reasons Why the Klan and Taliban Are Not the Same (in response to the King hearings two weeks ago).
So for today, you will have to be content with a mini-roundup of navel gazing on the pressing questions of the day: What Was That About Smart Diplomacy, Again? and What happens when you give the Children Matches and Car Keys?
I want to know what happened to all them anti-war protestors since we started bombing Libya for no reason anyone can adequately explain. Haven't seen a single aging hippie with a "No Blood for Oil" sign, nor a single Code Pink lunatic (more like Code Pork) protesting this 'war of choice'. George W. Bush was a warmonger with no Exit Strategy who was killing innocent civilians, but Barack Obama is an enlightened Savior, even if we can't tell who it is, exactly, we're shooting at and dropping bombs on.
I guess it's because we have the Arab League on our side (yeah, right. Check this and this), or because The One is never, ever wrong, because if he was, it might disprove or cause people to question that whole left-wing ideology thingy, and simply reinforce the prevailing notion that Lefties are a) retards, b) irresponsible retards, and c) lying, irresponsible retards.
Then again, maybe the whole thing is just some sorry excuse for a joke?
So for today, you will have to be content with a mini-roundup of navel gazing on the pressing questions of the day: What Was That About Smart Diplomacy, Again? and What happens when you give the Children Matches and Car Keys?
I want to know what happened to all them anti-war protestors since we started bombing Libya for no reason anyone can adequately explain. Haven't seen a single aging hippie with a "No Blood for Oil" sign, nor a single Code Pink lunatic (more like Code Pork) protesting this 'war of choice'. George W. Bush was a warmonger with no Exit Strategy who was killing innocent civilians, but Barack Obama is an enlightened Savior, even if we can't tell who it is, exactly, we're shooting at and dropping bombs on.
I guess it's because we have the Arab League on our side (yeah, right. Check this and this), or because The One is never, ever wrong, because if he was, it might disprove or cause people to question that whole left-wing ideology thingy, and simply reinforce the prevailing notion that Lefties are a) retards, b) irresponsible retards, and c) lying, irresponsible retards.
Then again, maybe the whole thing is just some sorry excuse for a joke?
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Ten Thoughts on Libya...
In no particular order:
1. The U.S. has 'permission' from the United Nations to bomb Libyan forces in the form of a single Resolution, so the Obamatards say this particular application of military force is good and just. George W. Bush had 17 United Nations Resolutions on his side, and yet, action in Iraq was wrong. Yet another example of Liberal hypocrisy; it's almost not even worth the effort to call attention to all the contradictions, anymore.
2. GWB was criticized for getting the U.S. involved in an Iraqi Civil War and a Afghan Civil War , and we, the Public, were assured that both would be 'quagmires' from which we would never be able to extricate ourselves, because we had no 'Exit Strategy'. Barack Obama has just embroiled the United States in the Libyan Civil War, with no clear objective other than 'separating' the two sides, and 'protecting civilians' (by dropping bombs in close proximity to them?) . To what end, no one seems to know. If this is the emergence of an 'Obama Doctrine', then it's pretty much consistent with all of his other policies, to date: when you finally do get around to taking action, talk it to death for as long as possible beforehand, make certain you can't clearly explain your objective, execute in half-assed fashion, make certain your fingerprints aren't all over it, and leave someone else in a position to take the heat (in this case, Britain and France), make sure you're out of the country so that you don't have to answer any questions from the Press or Congress.
So, here we are, engaged in 'combat operations' to 'prepare the battlefield' (a battlefield which will see no U.S. Ground Troops?) in order to 'prevent violence against civilians', and yet, there will be no commitment of soldiers -- that we know of -- to maintain what cannot be achieved by an air campaign alone, let alone one in which we're only involved 'on the front end', i.e. the preservation of peace, and the removal of Khaddaffi.
3. Obama crows that the Arab League has blessed this operation, yet as of this morning, no Arab League forces are involved (there was just a news report of Qattari forces 'moving into position', but no one is quite sure what this means). No one has explained just why the Arab League has given it's official Okie-Dokie to this thing, because it's not as if the Arab League has been known for, or has an interest in, supporting democratic movements within the Arab World, so I have to question their motives, too.
4. If I hear the phrases 'unique capabilities', 'front-end' and 'no American Ground Troops' or 'We did not lead this...' again, I shall tear my hair out. It seems no spokesperson for the Administration can talk about this thing without using words designed to calm the fears of pantybunched American Left Wingers, who get nervous every time you start a war because someone, somewhere, might be freed from totalitarian oppression. They'd rather let Libyans live under a dictatorship and remain squishily 'pacifist'...unless there's union violence somewhere, then that's okay.
5. One report has stated that Canada, Denmark, and Norway have each contributed six planes to this operation. How long do you think it'll be before some moron in the Taliban Wing of the GOP frames this as an occurrence of the number 6-6-6, and calls the faithful to hoard canned goods and ammo in the compound/church, prepare for the Rapture, and label Barack Obama the Antichrist?
6. Does anyone actually know who these rebels are, and what the fuck they want, other than no more Khaddaffi? Have we just aided a bunch of people who will form another Iranian-style theocracy or Taliban? I rather doubt they want constitutional democracy, pluralistic society.- and WiFi access. They are NOT fighting to make Libya safe for Starbuck's and Arby's.
7. Khadaffi needed to be whacked because he announced that he would 'show no mercy' towards his people, but when Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds, or hunted them in helicopters after Gulf War I, Libtards were deadly silent. This proves once again, that a Liberal abhors violence...unless they, or others of totalitarian mindset, get to inflict it. They believe their brand of violence is somehow always benevolent, and is always applied in an altruistic way.
8. Everyone agrees that Khadaffi must go, but President Odingbat keep saying 'no troops on the ground'. If you think you can get rid of him with an air campaign, guess again. Saddam Hussein hung on despite No-Fly Zones and Sanctions, Slobadan Milosevic, likewise, held out despite Clinton's bombing campaign. You cannot control events on the ground from the air. Ronald Reagan bombed Khaddaffi in 1982, and he's held on to the present day. Barack Obama couldn't even be a pimple of Reagan's Ass, on his best day.
9. Libtards like to crow that American force only leads to the creation of more terrorists, and now they've just used force against a regime that has actually used terrorism as a weapon against it's enemies. Good going. I live in New York, douchebags, and now we're on super-duper-hyper alert, even if no one in City Government (oxymoron) has asked us to be.
10. Last night on the idiot box, Geraldo Rivera was all worked up over Libyan WMD's, particularly Mustard Gas. I seem to remember Saddam Hussein having WMD's, including Mustard Gas -- just ask the Kurds -- and that fact never registered with liberals. Even when Iraqi WMD's were found, they pretended as if that was no big deal, and no justification-after-the-fact for GWB's military adventurism in Iraq.
Discuss...
1. The U.S. has 'permission' from the United Nations to bomb Libyan forces in the form of a single Resolution, so the Obamatards say this particular application of military force is good and just. George W. Bush had 17 United Nations Resolutions on his side, and yet, action in Iraq was wrong. Yet another example of Liberal hypocrisy; it's almost not even worth the effort to call attention to all the contradictions, anymore.
2. GWB was criticized for getting the U.S. involved in an Iraqi Civil War and a Afghan Civil War , and we, the Public, were assured that both would be 'quagmires' from which we would never be able to extricate ourselves, because we had no 'Exit Strategy'. Barack Obama has just embroiled the United States in the Libyan Civil War, with no clear objective other than 'separating' the two sides, and 'protecting civilians' (by dropping bombs in close proximity to them?) . To what end, no one seems to know. If this is the emergence of an 'Obama Doctrine', then it's pretty much consistent with all of his other policies, to date: when you finally do get around to taking action, talk it to death for as long as possible beforehand, make certain you can't clearly explain your objective, execute in half-assed fashion, make certain your fingerprints aren't all over it, and leave someone else in a position to take the heat (in this case, Britain and France), make sure you're out of the country so that you don't have to answer any questions from the Press or Congress.
So, here we are, engaged in 'combat operations' to 'prepare the battlefield' (a battlefield which will see no U.S. Ground Troops?) in order to 'prevent violence against civilians', and yet, there will be no commitment of soldiers -- that we know of -- to maintain what cannot be achieved by an air campaign alone, let alone one in which we're only involved 'on the front end', i.e. the preservation of peace, and the removal of Khaddaffi.
3. Obama crows that the Arab League has blessed this operation, yet as of this morning, no Arab League forces are involved (there was just a news report of Qattari forces 'moving into position', but no one is quite sure what this means). No one has explained just why the Arab League has given it's official Okie-Dokie to this thing, because it's not as if the Arab League has been known for, or has an interest in, supporting democratic movements within the Arab World, so I have to question their motives, too.
4. If I hear the phrases 'unique capabilities', 'front-end' and 'no American Ground Troops' or 'We did not lead this...' again, I shall tear my hair out. It seems no spokesperson for the Administration can talk about this thing without using words designed to calm the fears of pantybunched American Left Wingers, who get nervous every time you start a war because someone, somewhere, might be freed from totalitarian oppression. They'd rather let Libyans live under a dictatorship and remain squishily 'pacifist'...unless there's union violence somewhere, then that's okay.
5. One report has stated that Canada, Denmark, and Norway have each contributed six planes to this operation. How long do you think it'll be before some moron in the Taliban Wing of the GOP frames this as an occurrence of the number 6-6-6, and calls the faithful to hoard canned goods and ammo in the compound/church, prepare for the Rapture, and label Barack Obama the Antichrist?
6. Does anyone actually know who these rebels are, and what the fuck they want, other than no more Khaddaffi? Have we just aided a bunch of people who will form another Iranian-style theocracy or Taliban? I rather doubt they want constitutional democracy, pluralistic society.- and WiFi access. They are NOT fighting to make Libya safe for Starbuck's and Arby's.
7. Khadaffi needed to be whacked because he announced that he would 'show no mercy' towards his people, but when Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds, or hunted them in helicopters after Gulf War I, Libtards were deadly silent. This proves once again, that a Liberal abhors violence...unless they, or others of totalitarian mindset, get to inflict it. They believe their brand of violence is somehow always benevolent, and is always applied in an altruistic way.
8. Everyone agrees that Khadaffi must go, but President Odingbat keep saying 'no troops on the ground'. If you think you can get rid of him with an air campaign, guess again. Saddam Hussein hung on despite No-Fly Zones and Sanctions, Slobadan Milosevic, likewise, held out despite Clinton's bombing campaign. You cannot control events on the ground from the air. Ronald Reagan bombed Khaddaffi in 1982, and he's held on to the present day. Barack Obama couldn't even be a pimple of Reagan's Ass, on his best day.
9. Libtards like to crow that American force only leads to the creation of more terrorists, and now they've just used force against a regime that has actually used terrorism as a weapon against it's enemies. Good going. I live in New York, douchebags, and now we're on super-duper-hyper alert, even if no one in City Government (oxymoron) has asked us to be.
10. Last night on the idiot box, Geraldo Rivera was all worked up over Libyan WMD's, particularly Mustard Gas. I seem to remember Saddam Hussein having WMD's, including Mustard Gas -- just ask the Kurds -- and that fact never registered with liberals. Even when Iraqi WMD's were found, they pretended as if that was no big deal, and no justification-after-the-fact for GWB's military adventurism in Iraq.
Discuss...
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Told You So...
This was all too easy to predict...
Good thing the U.N. authorized that No-Fly Zone, huh?
Personally, I'd let them slaughter each other, and then for good measure, bomb whoever was left alive.
Also:
Khadaffi taunts the West because he can.
Let's see if the Great Hopenchanger can pull a speech out of his teleprompter for this thorny issue. After he's done playing golf in Brazil, of course. Gotta keep the priorities in order.
Good thing the U.N. authorized that No-Fly Zone, huh?
Personally, I'd let them slaughter each other, and then for good measure, bomb whoever was left alive.
Also:
Khadaffi taunts the West because he can.
Let's see if the Great Hopenchanger can pull a speech out of his teleprompter for this thorny issue. After he's done playing golf in Brazil, of course. Gotta keep the priorities in order.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Guess Who's Running for President in 2012, Part II...
Report: Hillary 'fed up' with President who can't decide if it's Tuesday or Wednesday.
Moral of the story: when you lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas.
I guess when Hillary took that Sec. State job, the first real one she's ever had, she figured it would mean no work. I've had managers exactly like Obama , who change their minds more than they change their underwear, or who defer making decisions in order to avoid looking stupid and unqualified. People like that expect others to do all the heavy lifting so that they can reap all the rewards. They never put their name to anything, if they can avoid it, and have the ability to generate tons of useless memos that are full of hemming-and-hawing language that's intended to ensure that they can always be on both sides of any issue.
The first Rule of Management on Wall Street was always "never be in the room when a decision gets made...", and apparently that's the new Golden Rule at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Even yesterday's "victory" in the United Nations -- the permission to setup a No-Fly Zone in Libya -- was a sterling example of Obama not taking (any) action, and waiting for someone else to provide him with a fig leaf. Now that a No-Fly Zone is 'authorized' let me tell you what happens in Libya next:
1. Khadaffi doesn't let anyone in his Air force fly as much as a paper airplane or kite. They don't really need to anymore, having basically crushed the rebellion.
2. Khadaffi tells his air defense crews to keep their radars turned off, their guns unloaded, and to not even give coalition warplanes as much as a dirty look.
3. Khadaffi tries to look all reasonable, and maybe even makes false overtures to the rebels (by the way, can we stop calling them 'Rebels'? If they succeed they're only going to vote to install a Khomeini-like theocracy, anyways. These are not 'rebels', they're terrorists-in-training).
4. Just in case some sandy little douche in Libya doesn't get the message and fires a spitball at one of our planes anyway, the Obama Admin. will handcuff our guys with a set of rules of engagement that only allows them to fire, even in self-defense, every other Thursday between 12:58 and 1:00 pm. There won't be any shooting back, because that makes a mess and 'only creates more terrorists'.
5. When the 'International Community' finally gets bored with waiting for Khadaffi's flyboys to take their chances, they'll start bombing planes on the ground. Bombing Khadaffi's troops, however, will be a different story. That would make sense, which is why it won't happen, even with all that 'by all means necessary' bullshit. After the Libyan Air Force is destroyed on the ground, and the pilots come back from vacation, Khadaffi will use the nation's oil money to buy a new-and-improved Libyan Air Force...from Russia and China, two countries which"abstained' from yesterday's 'historic' vote.
6. Safe from the threat of air attack due to Western cowardice and an abundance of misplaced caution, and secure in the knowledge that even when 'justified' the 'International Community' will agonize over giving any order to shoot at anyone, Khadaffi's tanks, artillery and terrorists (they ain't soldiers) will move into Benghazi and make the Rape of Nanking look like an out-of-control frat party.
(Ed. Note: Personally, I don't give a shit if Libyans are killing each other. It only means there will be fewer terrorists for us to kill later on. Unless we intend to bomb both sides, this whole thing was a dog-and-pony show).
Khadaffi has already won. Because he was given three weeks to do so. Because Barack Obama couldn't find it in himself to make 'the right' call. He'd rather just say "Khadaffi Must Go", and then let someone else handle the details.
You just know that The Hildebeest goes home seething every evening. First, she finds herself sympathizing with John McCain in that "I can't believe I lost to this fucking douchebag!" way. Second, she's kicking herself in the ass for having been lured out of the Senate. She now sees this as a monumental mistake; had she been there, she could have gauged the political winds well enough to have been on the record against ObamaCare, and thus improved her chances for a 2012 Presidential victory. Finally, it must be dawning upon her that even if she were to pull off a masterstroke of diplomacy and actually solve a real problem in the world, Barack Obama would either claim credit for her victory, or more likely, turn all her work to shit with indecision and irresolution.
She's this-close to quitting. You can see it in her face. Five minutes after she does, you know that "Exploratory Committee" thing starts, and the effort to keep Bill in his doghouse begins anew. She's getting the Crusty Ol' Black Pantsuit out of mothballs.
In retrospect, it now appears that a Clinton Presidency in 2008 would have been the lesser of three evils, and frankly, considering the way the field is shaping up now for 2012, I wouldn't be surprised if she actually won if she were in it.
Then again, I have no sympathy for the bitch. She's made her bed. It will be interesting to see how she spins having been part of the most ineffective and conceited Administration since Jimmy Carter into a qualification, and maybe even electoral gold.
UPDATE: Danish socialists were ready to bomb Khadaffi before Obama was. What does this tell you (h/t Mark Steyn).
Moral of the story: when you lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas.
I guess when Hillary took that Sec. State job, the first real one she's ever had, she figured it would mean no work. I've had managers exactly like Obama , who change their minds more than they change their underwear, or who defer making decisions in order to avoid looking stupid and unqualified. People like that expect others to do all the heavy lifting so that they can reap all the rewards. They never put their name to anything, if they can avoid it, and have the ability to generate tons of useless memos that are full of hemming-and-hawing language that's intended to ensure that they can always be on both sides of any issue.
The first Rule of Management on Wall Street was always "never be in the room when a decision gets made...", and apparently that's the new Golden Rule at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Even yesterday's "victory" in the United Nations -- the permission to setup a No-Fly Zone in Libya -- was a sterling example of Obama not taking (any) action, and waiting for someone else to provide him with a fig leaf. Now that a No-Fly Zone is 'authorized' let me tell you what happens in Libya next:
1. Khadaffi doesn't let anyone in his Air force fly as much as a paper airplane or kite. They don't really need to anymore, having basically crushed the rebellion.
2. Khadaffi tells his air defense crews to keep their radars turned off, their guns unloaded, and to not even give coalition warplanes as much as a dirty look.
3. Khadaffi tries to look all reasonable, and maybe even makes false overtures to the rebels (by the way, can we stop calling them 'Rebels'? If they succeed they're only going to vote to install a Khomeini-like theocracy, anyways. These are not 'rebels', they're terrorists-in-training).
4. Just in case some sandy little douche in Libya doesn't get the message and fires a spitball at one of our planes anyway, the Obama Admin. will handcuff our guys with a set of rules of engagement that only allows them to fire, even in self-defense, every other Thursday between 12:58 and 1:00 pm. There won't be any shooting back, because that makes a mess and 'only creates more terrorists'.
5. When the 'International Community' finally gets bored with waiting for Khadaffi's flyboys to take their chances, they'll start bombing planes on the ground. Bombing Khadaffi's troops, however, will be a different story. That would make sense, which is why it won't happen, even with all that 'by all means necessary' bullshit. After the Libyan Air Force is destroyed on the ground, and the pilots come back from vacation, Khadaffi will use the nation's oil money to buy a new-and-improved Libyan Air Force...from Russia and China, two countries which"abstained' from yesterday's 'historic' vote.
6. Safe from the threat of air attack due to Western cowardice and an abundance of misplaced caution, and secure in the knowledge that even when 'justified' the 'International Community' will agonize over giving any order to shoot at anyone, Khadaffi's tanks, artillery and terrorists (they ain't soldiers) will move into Benghazi and make the Rape of Nanking look like an out-of-control frat party.
(Ed. Note: Personally, I don't give a shit if Libyans are killing each other. It only means there will be fewer terrorists for us to kill later on. Unless we intend to bomb both sides, this whole thing was a dog-and-pony show).
Khadaffi has already won. Because he was given three weeks to do so. Because Barack Obama couldn't find it in himself to make 'the right' call. He'd rather just say "Khadaffi Must Go", and then let someone else handle the details.
You just know that The Hildebeest goes home seething every evening. First, she finds herself sympathizing with John McCain in that "I can't believe I lost to this fucking douchebag!" way. Second, she's kicking herself in the ass for having been lured out of the Senate. She now sees this as a monumental mistake; had she been there, she could have gauged the political winds well enough to have been on the record against ObamaCare, and thus improved her chances for a 2012 Presidential victory. Finally, it must be dawning upon her that even if she were to pull off a masterstroke of diplomacy and actually solve a real problem in the world, Barack Obama would either claim credit for her victory, or more likely, turn all her work to shit with indecision and irresolution.
She's this-close to quitting. You can see it in her face. Five minutes after she does, you know that "Exploratory Committee" thing starts, and the effort to keep Bill in his doghouse begins anew. She's getting the Crusty Ol' Black Pantsuit out of mothballs.
In retrospect, it now appears that a Clinton Presidency in 2008 would have been the lesser of three evils, and frankly, considering the way the field is shaping up now for 2012, I wouldn't be surprised if she actually won if she were in it.
Then again, I have no sympathy for the bitch. She's made her bed. It will be interesting to see how she spins having been part of the most ineffective and conceited Administration since Jimmy Carter into a qualification, and maybe even electoral gold.
UPDATE: Danish socialists were ready to bomb Khadaffi before Obama was. What does this tell you (h/t Mark Steyn).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

