Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Na Na Na Na.......Goodbye!


SayItAintSoJoe
 Share

Recommended Posts

Maniacal tyrant in power for 40+ years goes down roughly 6 months after Obama kicks off NATO attack without US boots on the ground or any US casualties and it was a perfect success, right? No....It took too long according to Graham and McCain:

 

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) praised the end of the Gadhafi regime in Libya on Sunday but criticized U.S. leadership for not removing Libya's leader more quickly.

 

"We regret that this success was so long in coming due to the failure of the United States to employ the full weight of our airpower," the senators wrote in a joint statement.

 

If McCain would have won the election we'd be at war right now with Iran and we'd have a whole lot of boots on the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) praised the end of the Gadhafi regime in Libya on Sunday but criticized U.S. leadership for not removing Libya's leader more quickly.

 

 

Bitter, party of two, your table is ready.

Edited by bushwacked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If McCain would have won the election we'd be at war right now with Iran and we'd have a whole lot of boots on the ground.

Whether true or not, I agree that this was an incredibly stupid move on his part. I and like the guy a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether true or not, I agree that this was an incredibly stupid move on his part. I and like the guy a lot.

 

 

The problem with McCain and Graham is that they are has-beens as far as the new GOP is concerned no matter how far they try to distance themselves from Immigration Reform (McCain) and Climate Change (Graham). They're like in some sort of political limbo right now. I don't think America is that much into this story right now. The smart republicans will just avoid it and go on hammering the pres. on the economy. Plus who helped them write that statement anyway? No American likes to see the words "the failure of the United States".

Edited by SayItAintSoJoe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maniacal tyrant in power for 40+ years goes down roughly 6 months after Obama kicks off NATO attack without US boots on the ground or any US casualties and it was a perfect success, right? No....It took too long according to Graham and McCain:

 

 

 

If McCain would have won the election we'd be at war right now with Iran and we'd have a whole lot of boots on the ground.

 

Serious question, why is he being removed from power?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly wouldn't put any blame on Obama for how long this foreign revolution would take... but I also wouldn't give him credit for its apparent success. Sometimes whether he likes it or not, its just not about him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly wouldn't put any blame on Obama for how long this foreign revolution would take... but I also wouldn't give him credit for its apparent success. Sometimes whether he likes it or not, its just not about him.

Pretty much agree with this. Never been a fan of interfering with other countries absent clear and present danger. If they want to get out from under the yoke of a dictator, they will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly wouldn't put any blame on Obama for how long this foreign revolution would take... but I also wouldn't give him credit for its apparent success. Sometimes whether he likes it or not, its just not about him.

 

 

I'm going to have to give him some credit on this one. Sometimes it's not what you do, but what you don't do. We could have taken a very different approach here. The US could have done too much (Iraq), too little (Syria), or just enough (Libya). I think we got it right this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to have to give him some credit on this one. Sometimes it's not what you do, but what you don't do. We could have taken a very different approach here. The US could have done too much (Iraq), too little (Syria), or just enough (Libya). I think we got it right this time.

 

He couldn't have put boots on the ground, it wouldn't have been politically palatable to the public. His own base wants out of afghanistan. He would have been castigated by both sides for actually putting troops there. I'm with ursa and savage to some extent, though I'm not above helping a revolution if it's clear the cause will be friendly to us. The frogs helped us out. :wacko: For the CIA to start one is entirely different, but aiding one that's already going?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He couldn't have put boots on the ground, it wouldn't have been politically palatable to the public.

But getting our fingers into yet another pie via military conflict is politically palatable? ??

 

Wait I forgot who I was talking about. Obama can do no wrong. If this was Bush doing this, I think very likely people would be all over him, evil war-monger, blah de blah. Obama does it and it's more of a "whatever." Even if he'd sent in some troops, I bet the outcry would have been minimal unless he sent a ton (which was even more of a no-brainer not to do).

 

IMO let these loons solve their own problems. It's not like him staying or not staying in power will destabilize the world, or even that region of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly wouldn't put any blame on Obama for how long this foreign revolution would take... but I also wouldn't give him credit for its apparent success. Sometimes whether he likes it or not, its just not about him.

 

Do remember however that it was the Obama admin and our NATO allies that made this possible by preventing a massive strike against the rebels that might have put an end to the uprising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone tell me why we are removing this guy? Anyone? Anyone?

 

Because the Libyan people, just like the Iraqis, "yearn for freedom"? :wacko: Isnt "yearning for freedom" the threshold for military involvement these days?

 

Or did someone see an old trailer and think they wuz makin anthrax?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing good, for the US, can come from this situation in Libya.

 

If Qadaffi remains in power he views as a force that helped out the rebels. If the rebels gain power they will view us as an almost passive observer and wonder why we didn't do more to help.

 

Also, the country will be divided into factions/tribes and it will be chaos there for many years. Half the country will want to kill us, the other half won't care if they do.

 

At least with Qadaffi there was a central figure to deal with, a person that could be bought (though we really didn't own the guy.) Now you're going to be dealing with 4, 5, 6, 7 different power brokers all of whom can be bought, but none of whom can be trusted. It's gonna be messy.

 

McCain and Graham should have kept their mouths shut. What they said is petty and out of pure partisanship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually surprised more isn't being made of this: W's Risk Board approach to establishing democracy in the middle east appears to be bearing fruit this year. Not sure how true it is one way or another, but that thought hasn't been discussed at all and frankly that's a bit of a disservice to what we've invested over there, and certainly deserves a look - much more of a look than Obama's Cairo speech quite frankly. :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually surprised more isn't being made of this: W's Risk Board approach to establishing democracy in the middle east appears to be bearing fruit this year. Not sure how true it is one way or another, but that thought hasn't been discussed at all and frankly that's a bit of a disservice to what we've invested over there, and certainly deserves a look - much more of a look than Obama's Cairo speech quite frankly. :wacko:

 

These are all sovereign countries each with their own internal issues. I highly doubt the West coming into Iraq with force to initiate an extremely messy regime change has much to do with self directed uprisings throughout the region. All my own opinion of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's ok, my local tea-bag representative has been basically calling it an illegal/unconstitional military intervention on his facebook page.

 

I think on balance, it was a good thing and fairly important to NATO that we support that mission. I think a president mccain would have involved the US military to very much the same extent (though to much different domestic reactions from both left and right).

 

however, would you care to make the case that it doesn't violate the war powers resolution?

 

in any case, I don't think we measure the success or lack thereof based on how long it took. the measure will come when we see what the qadafi regime is replaced with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information