[opdirorg]

The problem we have--is who is going to replace him? How many times have we seen in the middle east--that we think they're friends and they turn out to be foes?

Arguably, there's not a more dysfunctional part of the world than the M.E. Take out the brutal secular despot and you risk opening the door for the Islamists.

[ReggieRed]

The problem we have--is who is going to replace him? How many times have we seen in the middle east--that we think they're friends and they turn out to be foes?

Probably the most vital unanswered question of all. We'll just have to wait and see but I still think it was right to save those people without first finding out who they were. I'm hopeful that it's clear to the opposition after this show of military force that replacing Ghadaffi with another tyrant or becoming a haven for al Qaeda are not options.

[alecaf]

Dick Lugar, Gingrich.

Well then Newt has some explaining to do--because he was a critic of Obama for not getting congressional approval and stating he wasn't acting fast enough.

Mitch McConnell Senate republican minority leader is Obama's left wing man on this one.

So I really don't think you're getting much disention from Obama's actions coming from republicans who are actually in the congress or senate.

[alecaf]

Probably the most vital unanswered question of all. We'll just have to wait and see but I still think it was right to save those people without first finding out who they were.

I agree with Obama's action. But again--we all know it's over oil. This country administration after administration have watched rogue government's slaughter their citizens with no action.

It it concerns oil--we're right there.

[ErnestTU]

The only thing that was lacking was a clear end goal...

See, that kinda' important, don't ya think?

[opdirorg]

Was Obama alluding to American Exceptionalism at one point or was that my imagination?

[ErnestTU]

Obama's said that Gaddafi's got to go.

If Gaddafi doesn't go, then Obama looks stupid for, at the very best, running his mouth and, at worst, failing to realize that goal. Our involvement in any action over there will rightfully be viewed by the rest of the world as Obama trying to topple Gaddafi. Whether that's a fair assessment or not is of no consequence. It will be the assessment nonetheless.

Obama ran his mouth. One needs to wonder if he'll back it up...

[Bromymbollile]

You mean try to get Ghadaffi out? Yes I did hear him say that but I don't think he specifically said that the military mission will end when the regime falls which means there could be a NATO mission there for years if he clings to power. I think it's highly unlikely because the status quo simply isn't sustainable so time is on the POTUS' side.

Correct. But he said that would be an international assistance with the Libyans ultimately in charge of their own destiny as it should be.

[SQiTmhuY]

He literally hit the ball out of the park. If you didn't understand why the US hadn't intervened in Syria or Iran you do now. If you didn't understand why the military goal wasn't to remove Ghadaffi you do now. If you were looking for an Obama doctrine you pretty much got it tonight. The only thing that was lacking was a clear end goal but I think most us know that means when Ghadaffi is gone. The no-fly zone will be enforced until that time by NATO at limited cost to the US which I find reasonable since you usually bear most of the burden. It makes sense for the rest of us partners to share some of the burden and we will do just that. Obama never ceases to impress with his intelligence, poise and ability to analyze a situation.

ahoy Danny,

i thought the skipper did very well tonight, matey. i especially liked the part whar he explained why we're sendin' the fleet Libya and not other countries...he sounded multi-lateral (which i likes very much) and pragmatic.

i felt cheered o'er his sense 'o restraint on this matter.

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

[Nikitka]

[QUOTE]

He literally hit the ball out of the park.

Are you kidding me?

If you didn't understand why the US hadn't intervened in Syria or Iran you do now. There you go again, why are we in Libya? That you cannot understand, it is only for oil. Obama will not drill at home so he has to protect oil overseas.
That's all it is. All the rest he would not engage as there is no oil.

If you didn't understand why the military goal wasn't to remove Ghadaffi you do now. Yet, Obama said Ghadaffi must go. Yet he is not going after him. What BS.

If you were looking for an Obama doctrine you pretty much got it tonight. And that is what? It surly is not taking out Ghadaffi, which he said he has to go. But now he does not have to go. Does he or does he not?

The only thing that was lacking was a clear end goal but I think most us know that means when Ghadaffi is gone. Now you see it, there is no goal, nor is there any attempt to take Ghadiffi out has he said he has to go. He has no idea what is going on. Period


The no-fly zone will be enforced until that time by NATO at limited cost to the US And what may that cost be? We are still there and Obama has no idea how to pay for it. Does he?

which I find reasonable since you usually bear most of the burden. What is reasonable when Obama has no idea how to pay for anything?

It makes sense for the rest of us partners to share some of the burden and we will do just that. Again what is the cost and how has Obama said he was going to pay for anything?

Obama never ceases to impress with his intelligence, poise and ability to analyze a situation. He has no idea what he has got us into, or how to pay for anything, and how to get rid of Ghataffi, then I say he is stupid and I might also add he is the most stupid president ever.

[Nikitka]

ahoy Danny,

i thought the skipper did very well tonight, matey. i especially liked the part whar he explained why we're sendin' the fleet Libya and not other countries...he sounded multi-lateral (which i likes very much) and pragmatic.

i felt cheered o'er his sense 'o restraint on this matter.

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

Yes one liberal to another, that has no idea what his mission is or how to achieve it. You can say all the good stuff you want but when it comes down to it, Obama has no clue what his is doing or how to pay for anything. He is the most lost and ignorant president ever.

[SQiTmhuY]

Yes one liberal to another, that has no idea what his mission is or how to achieve it. You can say all the good stuff you want but when it comes down to it, Obama has no clue what his is doing or how to pay for anything. He is the most lost and ignorant president ever.

*shrugs*

ahoy Forplay,

me friend, yer just far too angry.

i really do think the President, our skipper, did a good job. he sounded reasonable and i found his little talk he gave ondeck well thought out.

no axis 'o evil talk...and no holy crusade in Libya. just a humanitarian misson that be supported by a multifaceted collection 'o countries, the United Nations, and even the sanction 'o the major players in the Middle East. perhaps ye have a yearnin' to follow the lead 'o Russia and China, but thats not the cut 'o the jib 'o this President.

*salutes*

- MeadHallPirate

[Jourgenz]

President Addresses Nation on Libya | C-SPAN

Obama is literally beating the war drums while he reads the words off the teleprompters. After every sentence he thumps the podium with his hands, making an audible "boom" sound, while he was saying that we went to war against Libya, not because Libya was a threat, but for our "values". Which is a frightening precedent when you consider that he did not even get statutory congressional approval from our elected representatives beforehand to send our military into an overseas civil war, ostensibly to defend our "values".

[GillTeepbew]

*shrugs*

ahoy Forplay,

me friend, yer just far too angry.

i really do think the President, our skipper, did a good job. he sounded reasonable and i found his little talk he gave ondeck well thought out.

no axis 'o evil talk...and no holy crusade in Libya. just a humanitarian misson that be supported by a multifaceted collection 'o countries, the United Nations, and even the sanction 'o the major players in the Middle East. perhaps ye have a yearnin' to follow the lead 'o Russia and China, but thats not the cut 'o the jib 'o this President.

*salutes*

- MeadHallPirate

I just love your common sense and honesty, Pirate!
You're my hero!

[forexsoft]

What were you guys expecting him to say? We attacked Libya because NATO allies demanded our help, quid pro quo for Iraq and Afghanistan? That we would attack Libya not Bahrain or Saudi Arabia because Gadaffi is our enemy and King Saud is not? That he didn't talk to the GOP leadership because they didn't have the huevos to back their own actions? The GOP demanded we attack, yet when he did, they dithered in their response in case it failed so they could have plausible deniability, gutless whimps. The only reason he finally decided to do it was the probability that it did save some lives of the demonstrators (rebels), so he had a weak but effective defense of his actions. Obama ate this "turd sandwich" (as he himself put it) because of political pressure from our allies and the spineless GOP, he handed it over to NATO as soon as the half assed French got prepared and the Brits could re-allocate their stretched forces. As usual, we were the only one's around the disaster area with assets when the poop hit the rotating blades. Maybe the Italians will provide pizza. The only completely honest player in this whole dog and pony show? Kucinich.

[GillTeepbew]

What were you guys expecting him to say? We attacked Libya because NATO allies demanded our help, quid pro quo for Iraq and Afghanistan? That we would attack Libya not Bahrain or Saudi Arabia because Gadaffi is our enemy and King Saud is not? That he didn't talk to the GOP leadership because they didn't have the huevos to back their own actions? The GOP demanded we attack, yet when he did, they dithered in their response in case it failed so they could have plausible deniability, gutless whimps. The only reason he finally decided to do it was the probability that it did save some lives of the demonstrators (rebels), so he had a weak but effective defense of his actions. Obama ate this "turd sandwich" (as he himself put it) because of political pressure from our allies and the spineless GOP, he handed it over to NATO as soon as the half assed French got prepared and the Brits could re-allocate their stretched forces. As usual, we were the only one's around the disaster area with assets when the poop hit the rotating blades. Maybe the Italians will provide pizza. The only completely honest player in this whole dog and pony show? Kucinich.

APPLAUSE!!!

[Jourgenz]

The US and UN are aiding the rebels , so what does the Obama admin know about the rebels?

Not much according to the latest Pentagon press briefing.

Pentagon Press Briefing| C-SPAN

Q: Do you know who the opposition is and does it matter to you?


A: We're not talking with the opposition, umm ahhh, We would like a much better understanding of the oppostion, we don't have it, ummm...ahhh... so yes it does matter to us, we're tryin' to fill in those gaps, knowledge gaps.

Next question

[tramadoldiscountes]

I deleted some offtopic posts which weren't dealing with the topic at all.

Discuss the topic, not each other.

[InsManKV]

Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation on Libya | The White House

Obama Explains U.S. Role in Libya | C-SPAN

Thoughts? My first question is why was he at some university giving a speech to the few people there, and not at the Oval Office speaking to the camera?

[ErnestTU]

Well, to be fair, it's not like there wasn't a camera in front of him. Where he gave the speech is far less important than the content. Also, I would hesitate to refer to NDU "some university".

I still haven't seen it...