[LarryRda]

I can only imagine what kind of bullshit story Obama is going to shovel us this evening on Libya. The mixed messages from the WH & staff were all telling as far as their lack of a clear goal/mission. The US and UN are aiding the rebels , so what does the Obama admin know about the rebels? What kind of govt do they expect to spring up if and when Gaddaffi (whom they aren't targeting )
clears out. Why didn't Barry call an emergency session of congress prior to his getting the US involved? And finally, what happened to how Barry feels about presidential powers under the US constitution? (see my sig line).

Put your tall boots on tonight, it's gonna get deep!

[miel]

He's going to land on the deck of an aircraft carrier in a golden flight suit and step out of a plane he seemingly piloted and proudly outline how well everything is going in front of banners that state "Rapid Kinetic Nation Building AOK for USA"

[Butiqueso]

I figure he is gonna say the US is gonna support the rebels, an "attaboy" cheer and let others hopefully do the dirty work, thereby keeping us out of it as much as possible. Obama ain't comfortable with this imo. I think he knows these wars at times like these are empire killers.

[Chito]

I know!
I know!

Attachment 11093
It's good when I do it!

[JacksHH]

I figure he is gonna say the US is gonna support the rebels, an "attaboy" cheer and let others hopefully do the dirty work, thereby keeping us out of it as much as possible. Obama ain't comfortable with this imo. I think he knows these wars at times like these are empire killers.

It would probably help quite a bit if he had the least bit of a clue who the "rebels" are.

[Butiqueso]

It would probably help quite a bit if he had the least bit of a clue who the "rebels" are.

ain't our intelligence agencies stellar? Why ain't Obama on the streets of Libya, asking everyone he meets? If the CIA can't find out, Obama should go. Where is 007 when you need him?

[ErnestTU]

What time doth O'Siah speak?

[erubresen]

The speech is at 1930, then his handlers will be on the usual shows to apply the proper spin.

[ErnestTU]

Is that Eastern time?

I guess O'Siah doesn't want those of us on the left coast, who have jobs, to hear wha he has to say.

Fuck it; I'm six minutes from the house...

[JacksHH]

ain't our intelligence agencies stellar? Why ain't Obama on the streets of Libya, asking everyone he meets? If the CIA can't find out, Obama should go. Where is 007 when you need him?

That's sort of the point. If our intelligence doesn't know, why are we supporting them?

[Butiqueso]

That's sort of the point. If our intelligence doesn't know, why are we supporting them?

There isn't much that we do that makes much sense to me, and I will add this one to it.

My best guess would be because Libya does have oil. Oil. The life blood of Western Economies. Our achilles heel, the size of Mt. Everest. My guess anyways.

[alecaf]

Well--I don't know about this speech. It's either Obama has made a dramatic change to the right--or this action is a fein toward the 2012 elections. It's not that I am against what he did--but again as we see--we will involve ourselves into matters that involve OIL. Lybia--is the maker of light sweet crude--IOW the best of the best of oil. The idea that Obama did this to protect the citizens against Kadafy--I question. After all--we watched this same thing in Iran--(even though they have oil) we don't get much of it. We did nothing. We're watching Syria right now shooting protestors--and we're not going to do anything. They don't have oil.

So the motive of this intervention is really in our own best interests--and I would just wish once--that a President would admit it. How many rogue governments have slaughtered it's citizens--while we've sat back and watched? They didn't have oil.

[Bromymbollile]

There isn't much that we do that makes much sense to me, and I will add this one to it.

My best guess would be because Libya does have oil. Oil. The life blood of Western Economies. Our achilles heel, the size of Mt. Everest. My guess anyways.

The Western powers and others were already in control of Libya's oil when the revolution began once Gaddafi decided to start attacking them as protestors. Such nations were previously already dealing with Gaddafi to get the oil despite his track record. Oil isn't the reason because the US and others were much better off backing Gaddafi to let him crush the rebellion as quickly as possible to let the oil keep flowing, keep their contracts with him intact, etc.

[VUzgOhgv]

It would probably help quite a bit if he had the least bit of a clue who the "rebels" are.

It didn't seem to bother the Republicans when Bush backed the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan.

[ReggieRed]

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.

[Bromymbollile]

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

He explained that too insofar as tactics he'll use to try to get him out. Whether one wishes to agree or not with his strategy either genuinely or spuriously is another matter, but he explained his plan of action and their reasons, which are corroborated by what he's done to date already.

[ReggieRed]

He explained that too insofar as tactics he'll use to try to get him out. Whether one wishes to agree or not with his strategy either genuinely or spuriously is another matter, but he explained his plan of action and their reasons, which are corroborated by what he's done to date already.

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.

[alecaf]

It didn't seem to bother the Republicans when Bush backed the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan.

Which Republicans are bothered by this action? Listening to John McCain--he's Obama's wing man on this one.

[ReggieRed]

Which Republicans are bothered by this action? Listening to John McCain--he's Obama's wing man on this one.

Dick Lugar, Gingrich.

[alecaf]

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.

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?