Hillary's Huge Libya Disaster

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Under Qaddafi Libya was a secular, stable, military dictatorship which kept all the Islamic crazies in the area under strict control. There were no terrorists problems.

As Secretary of State Qaddafi was Hillary's pet hate and she personally pushed for his removal.

Pity US and NATO got rid of him.

All these democracy seekers touch, turn to shit.

Jinx! Lol

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Under Qaddafi Libya was a secular, stable, military dictatorship which kept all the Islamic crazies in the area under strict control. There were no terrorists problems.

As Secretary of State Qaddafi was Hillary's pet hate and she personally pushed for his removal.

Pity US and NATO got rid of him.

All these democracy seekers touch, turn to shit.

STANDING OVATION

 

[toxicmedia]

Interesting first hand account of Hillary's obsession with Libya.

Hillary's Huge Libya Disaster

Rage,” Libya had a national budget surplus of 8.7 percent of GDP in 2010, with oil production at 1.8 million barrels per day, on track to reach its goal of 3 million barrels per day. Currently, oil production has decreased by over 80 percent. Following the revolution, the Libyan economy contracted by an estimated 41.8 percent, with a national deficit of 17.1 percent GDP in 2011.

Before the revolution, Libya was a secure, prospering, secular Islamic country and a critical ally providing intelligence on terrorist activity post–September 11, 2001. Qaddafi was no longer a threat to the United States. Yet Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strongly advocated and succeeded in convincing the administration to support the Libyan rebels with a no-fly zone, intended to prevent a possible humanitarian disaster that turned quickly into all-out war.

Within weeks of the revolution there were two valid cease-fire opportunities, one presented to the Department of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), and a second opportunity presented to U.S. Africa Command for direct military commander negotiations to effect Gaddafi’s abdication, in which I was personally involved. Both opportunities were rejected and shut down by Secretary Clinton. Internal communications that went public last year revealed that on March 18, 2011, a colonel in JCS wrote, “. . . Due to the UNSCR, Libyan forces sped up ops to get to Benghazi, and will soon cease fire. As expected. Our contact will arrange a face-to-face meeting with Saif, or a skype/video-telecon to open communications if time does not permit. It will have to be with a high level USG official for him to agree. If there will be an ultimatum before any ops, the USG must be in communication with the right leaders and hopefully listen for any answer. A peaceful solution is still possible that keeps Saif on our side without any bloodshed in Benghazi.” However, on March 14, 2011 Secretary Clinton had already met with rebel leaders in Paris, including Mahmoud Jibril, number two in the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, and had committed to support their revolution.

Despite valid ceasefire opportunities to prevent “bloodshed in Benghazi” at the onset of hostilities, Secretary Clinton intervened and quickly pushed her foreign policy in support of a revolution led by the Muslim Brotherhood and known terrorists in the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. One of the Libyan Rebel Brigade commanders, Ahmed Abu Khattala, would later be involved in the terrorist attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Articulating her indifference to the chaos brought by war, Secretary Clinton stated on May 18, 2013, to the House Oversight Committee and the American public, “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Secretary Clinton’s war actually did make a difference. It led to a very real and very tragic humanitarian disaster. Her bad judgment and failed policy resulted in the arming of terrorists, months of war and tens of thousands of causalities, the murder of the American ambassador and the deaths of three other brave Americans, continued civil war and the collapse of the Libyan economy, and a failed nation-state contributing to a tragic European migrant crisis. Clearly the Libyan disaster tops Secretary Clinton’s legacy of failure.

The revolution ended October 23, 2011, and Libya held its first democratic election on July 7, 2012. A second election was held on June 25, 2014. Despite efforts made by peaceful Libyan officials to establish a strong secular nation, radical Islamic elements rejected the election results and used military force to subvert the will of the Libyan people. As a direct consequence of the chaos caused by Secretary Clinton’s failed policy, there are now four entities competing for control of Libya: (1) the twice-elected democratic secular parliamentary government forced into exile in Tobruk by Islamist attacks, (2) the unelected radical Islamist-controlled government in Tripoli, (3) the savage ISIS terrorists who control the city of Sirte and (4) the UN-imposed Government of National Accord (GNA) recently placed ashore in abandoned buildings in Tripoli. The UN is attempting, with U.S. and European support, to impose a unity government (the GNA) that will include elements of sharia law in a new constitution. This approach was rejected twice by the Libyan people, who wanted a more secular government that is not founded in sharia.

The Libyan National Oil Company (NOC) continues to control limited commercial oil exports from certain oil fields through western ports. The democratically elected government in Tobruk has objected to the continued control of oil exports by the Islamist factions in Tripoli, and has recently established its own capability to export oil from an eastern port. However, to counter the Tobruk government, the UN recently imposed a unilateral embargo on an attempted eastern shipment of 650,000 barrels of oil. The UN embargo was lifted when contested by the UN representative of the elected Libyan government.

More recently the UN, with U.S. support, has threatened to impose travel and financial sanctions on Libyan politicians representing the elected government in Tobruk simply because they are resisting the authority of the UN-imposed GNA. And, in a truly absurd move, the United States is now considering authorizing arms shipments to the UN imposed GNA in Tripoli.



America can no longer continue to support Hillary’s legacy of failure in Libya. The United States needs to support democracy in Libya, not UN sanctions or arms shipments. And the United States should support Libyan efforts to provide internal security, critical to reestablishing full oil production and unimpeded export, in order to revitalize the failing Libyan economy. In doing so, the United States and Libya can together achieve peace—through economic and military strength.

U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Charles R. Kubic served worldwide for over 32 years as a Navy Seabee, and retired in 2005.

This is all great....

But Libya has not resonated outside the Fox News bubble, as a liability for Hillary.

The emails have a tiny bit, but Trump's liabilities have overshadowed anything Hillary might do.

Fox News righties are exposed to Republican electioneering all day, so of course it seems like a thing...but it's not

Hopefully they push hard enough to get her off the world stage.

You just relax and enjoy those delusions.

 

[Claudette]

I recall the cheering by the entire Obama admin and naming it "The Arab Spring" and how wonderful it was.

EVERY country that deposed their despot leaders have crumbled into anarchy - every single one of them. Libya is a cesspool of death and destruction.

Oh yeah and all you have to do is remember Benghazi to know what a failure Hitlery is.

 

[Hossfly]

Interesting first hand account of Hillary's obsession with Libya.

Hillary's Huge Libya Disaster

Rage,” Libya had a national budget surplus of 8.7 percent of GDP in 2010, with oil production at 1.8 million barrels per day, on track to reach its goal of 3 million barrels per day. Currently, oil production has decreased by over 80 percent. Following the revolution, the Libyan economy contracted by an estimated 41.8 percent, with a national deficit of 17.1 percent GDP in 2011.

Before the revolution, Libya was a secure, prospering, secular Islamic country and a critical ally providing intelligence on terrorist activity post–September 11, 2001. Qaddafi was no longer a threat to the United States. Yet Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strongly advocated and succeeded in convincing the administration to support the Libyan rebels with a no-fly zone, intended to prevent a possible humanitarian disaster that turned quickly into all-out war.

Within weeks of the revolution there were two valid cease-fire opportunities, one presented to the Department of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), and a second opportunity presented to U.S. Africa Command for direct military commander negotiations to effect Gaddafi’s abdication, in which I was personally involved. Both opportunities were rejected and shut down by Secretary Clinton. Internal communications that went public last year revealed that on March 18, 2011, a colonel in JCS wrote, “. . . Due to the UNSCR, Libyan forces sped up ops to get to Benghazi, and will soon cease fire. As expected. Our contact will arrange a face-to-face meeting with Saif, or a skype/video-telecon to open communications if time does not permit. It will have to be with a high level USG official for him to agree. If there will be an ultimatum before any ops, the USG must be in communication with the right leaders and hopefully listen for any answer. A peaceful solution is still possible that keeps Saif on our side without any bloodshed in Benghazi.” However, on March 14, 2011 Secretary Clinton had already met with rebel leaders in Paris, including Mahmoud Jibril, number two in the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, and had committed to support their revolution.

Despite valid ceasefire opportunities to prevent “bloodshed in Benghazi” at the onset of hostilities, Secretary Clinton intervened and quickly pushed her foreign policy in support of a revolution led by the Muslim Brotherhood and known terrorists in the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. One of the Libyan Rebel Brigade commanders, Ahmed Abu Khattala, would later be involved in the terrorist attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Articulating her indifference to the chaos brought by war, Secretary Clinton stated on May 18, 2013, to the House Oversight Committee and the American public, “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Secretary Clinton’s war actually did make a difference. It led to a very real and very tragic humanitarian disaster. Her bad judgment and failed policy resulted in the arming of terrorists, months of war and tens of thousands of causalities, the murder of the American ambassador and the deaths of three other brave Americans, continued civil war and the collapse of the Libyan economy, and a failed nation-state contributing to a tragic European migrant crisis. Clearly the Libyan disaster tops Secretary Clinton’s legacy of failure.

The revolution ended October 23, 2011, and Libya held its first democratic election on July 7, 2012. A second election was held on June 25, 2014. Despite efforts made by peaceful Libyan officials to establish a strong secular nation, radical Islamic elements rejected the election results and used military force to subvert the will of the Libyan people. As a direct consequence of the chaos caused by Secretary Clinton’s failed policy, there are now four entities competing for control of Libya: (1) the twice-elected democratic secular parliamentary government forced into exile in Tobruk by Islamist attacks, (2) the unelected radical Islamist-controlled government in Tripoli, (3) the savage ISIS terrorists who control the city of Sirte and (4) the UN-imposed Government of National Accord (GNA) recently placed ashore in abandoned buildings in Tripoli. The UN is attempting, with U.S. and European support, to impose a unity government (the GNA) that will include elements of sharia law in a new constitution. This approach was rejected twice by the Libyan people, who wanted a more secular government that is not founded in sharia.

The Libyan National Oil Company (NOC) continues to control limited commercial oil exports from certain oil fields through western ports. The democratically elected government in Tobruk has objected to the continued control of oil exports by the Islamist factions in Tripoli, and has recently established its own capability to export oil from an eastern port. However, to counter the Tobruk government, the UN recently imposed a unilateral embargo on an attempted eastern shipment of 650,000 barrels of oil. The UN embargo was lifted when contested by the UN representative of the elected Libyan government.

More recently the UN, with U.S. support, has threatened to impose travel and financial sanctions on Libyan politicians representing the elected government in Tobruk simply because they are resisting the authority of the UN-imposed GNA. And, in a truly absurd move, the United States is now considering authorizing arms shipments to the UN imposed GNA in Tripoli.



America can no longer continue to support Hillary’s legacy of failure in Libya. The United States needs to support democracy in Libya, not UN sanctions or arms shipments. And the United States should support Libyan efforts to provide internal security, critical to reestablishing full oil production and unimpeded export, in order to revitalize the failing Libyan economy. In doing so, the United States and Libya can together achieve peace—through economic and military strength.

U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Charles R. Kubic served worldwide for over 32 years as a Navy Seabee, and retired in 2005.

This is all great....

But Libya has not resonated outside the Fox News bubble, as a liability for Hillary.

The emails have a tiny bit, but Trump's liabilities have overshadowed anything Hillary might do.

Fox News righties are exposed to Republican electioneering all day, so of course it seems like a thing...but it's not

Hopefully they push hard enough to get her off the world stage.

You just relax and enjoy those delusions.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Under Qaddafi Libya was a secular, stable, military dictatorship which kept all the Islamic crazies in the area under strict control. There were no terrorists problems.

As Secretary of State Qaddafi was Hillary's pet hate and she personally pushed for his removal.

Pity US and NATO got rid of him.

All these democracy seekers touch, turn to shit.

This has always been the problem. We got the Shah kicked out of Iran (Nation Building) and what happened? We got Hussein kicked out of Iraq (Nation Building) and what happened? We got Quadaffi kicked out of Libya (Nation Building) and what happened? We TRIED to topple Syria (Nation Building) and what happened?

ALL of those countries were stable until we intervened. ALL OF THEM. However, presidents of the United States have the audacity to believe that the people's of the Middle East long for democracy - they do not. They have lived the same way for the last 5,000 years.

Hopefully we have learned our lesson - but something tells me that it just ain't so....

 

[toxicmedia]

Interesting first hand account of Hillary's obsession with Libya.

Hillary's Huge Libya Disaster

Rage,” Libya had a national budget surplus of 8.7 percent of GDP in 2010, with oil production at 1.8 million barrels per day, on track to reach its goal of 3 million barrels per day. Currently, oil production has decreased by over 80 percent. Following the revolution, the Libyan economy contracted by an estimated 41.8 percent, with a national deficit of 17.1 percent GDP in 2011.

Before the revolution, Libya was a secure, prospering, secular Islamic country and a critical ally providing intelligence on terrorist activity post–September 11, 2001. Qaddafi was no longer a threat to the United States. Yet Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strongly advocated and succeeded in convincing the administration to support the Libyan rebels with a no-fly zone, intended to prevent a possible humanitarian disaster that turned quickly into all-out war.

Within weeks of the revolution there were two valid cease-fire opportunities, one presented to the Department of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), and a second opportunity presented to U.S. Africa Command for direct military commander negotiations to effect Gaddafi’s abdication, in which I was personally involved. Both opportunities were rejected and shut down by Secretary Clinton. Internal communications that went public last year revealed that on March 18, 2011, a colonel in JCS wrote, “. . . Due to the UNSCR, Libyan forces sped up ops to get to Benghazi, and will soon cease fire. As expected. Our contact will arrange a face-to-face meeting with Saif, or a skype/video-telecon to open communications if time does not permit. It will have to be with a high level USG official for him to agree. If there will be an ultimatum before any ops, the USG must be in communication with the right leaders and hopefully listen for any answer. A peaceful solution is still possible that keeps Saif on our side without any bloodshed in Benghazi.” However, on March 14, 2011 Secretary Clinton had already met with rebel leaders in Paris, including Mahmoud Jibril, number two in the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, and had committed to support their revolution.

Despite valid ceasefire opportunities to prevent “bloodshed in Benghazi” at the onset of hostilities, Secretary Clinton intervened and quickly pushed her foreign policy in support of a revolution led by the Muslim Brotherhood and known terrorists in the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. One of the Libyan Rebel Brigade commanders, Ahmed Abu Khattala, would later be involved in the terrorist attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Articulating her indifference to the chaos brought by war, Secretary Clinton stated on May 18, 2013, to the House Oversight Committee and the American public, “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Secretary Clinton’s war actually did make a difference. It led to a very real and very tragic humanitarian disaster. Her bad judgment and failed policy resulted in the arming of terrorists, months of war and tens of thousands of causalities, the murder of the American ambassador and the deaths of three other brave Americans, continued civil war and the collapse of the Libyan economy, and a failed nation-state contributing to a tragic European migrant crisis. Clearly the Libyan disaster tops Secretary Clinton’s legacy of failure.

The revolution ended October 23, 2011, and Libya held its first democratic election on July 7, 2012. A second election was held on June 25, 2014. Despite efforts made by peaceful Libyan officials to establish a strong secular nation, radical Islamic elements rejected the election results and used military force to subvert the will of the Libyan people. As a direct consequence of the chaos caused by Secretary Clinton’s failed policy, there are now four entities competing for control of Libya: (1) the twice-elected democratic secular parliamentary government forced into exile in Tobruk by Islamist attacks, (2) the unelected radical Islamist-controlled government in Tripoli, (3) the savage ISIS terrorists who control the city of Sirte and (4) the UN-imposed Government of National Accord (GNA) recently placed ashore in abandoned buildings in Tripoli. The UN is attempting, with U.S. and European support, to impose a unity government (the GNA) that will include elements of sharia law in a new constitution. This approach was rejected twice by the Libyan people, who wanted a more secular government that is not founded in sharia.

The Libyan National Oil Company (NOC) continues to control limited commercial oil exports from certain oil fields through western ports. The democratically elected government in Tobruk has objected to the continued control of oil exports by the Islamist factions in Tripoli, and has recently established its own capability to export oil from an eastern port. However, to counter the Tobruk government, the UN recently imposed a unilateral embargo on an attempted eastern shipment of 650,000 barrels of oil. The UN embargo was lifted when contested by the UN representative of the elected Libyan government.

More recently the UN, with U.S. support, has threatened to impose travel and financial sanctions on Libyan politicians representing the elected government in Tobruk simply because they are resisting the authority of the UN-imposed GNA. And, in a truly absurd move, the United States is now considering authorizing arms shipments to the UN imposed GNA in Tripoli.



America can no longer continue to support Hillary’s legacy of failure in Libya. The United States needs to support democracy in Libya, not UN sanctions or arms shipments. And the United States should support Libyan efforts to provide internal security, critical to reestablishing full oil production and unimpeded export, in order to revitalize the failing Libyan economy. In doing so, the United States and Libya can together achieve peace—through economic and military strength.

U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Charles R. Kubic served worldwide for over 32 years as a Navy Seabee, and retired in 2005.

This is all great....

But Libya has not resonated outside the Fox News bubble, as a liability for Hillary.

The emails have a tiny bit, but Trump's liabilities have overshadowed anything Hillary might do.

Fox News righties are exposed to Republican electioneering all day, so of course it seems like a thing...but it's not

Jesus Sonny, when the United States has a MSM the REFUSES to (1) tell any story that might embarrass Barry and (2) lies in every other sentence they "report", what the hell do you expect!?!?

Goebbels is laughing from his grave....

Fine, but it's not a big factor is the election so far

Give it time. By the time we vote, CBS
,ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN will have Donald Trump convicted of raping little girls and Hillary being Cannozied by the Pope.

What exactly do you expect?

What you're experiencing is phony outrage.

Because you may be under the impression that Fox News is NOT in the tank, for Republicans...every bit as much, or more, than the mainstream is for the Democrats.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Interesting first hand account of Hillary's obsession with Libya.

Hillary's Huge Libya Disaster

Rage,” Libya had a national budget surplus of 8.7 percent of GDP in 2010, with oil production at 1.8 million barrels per day, on track to reach its goal of 3 million barrels per day. Currently, oil production has decreased by over 80 percent. Following the revolution, the Libyan economy contracted by an estimated 41.8 percent, with a national deficit of 17.1 percent GDP in 2011.

Before the revolution, Libya was a secure, prospering, secular Islamic country and a critical ally providing intelligence on terrorist activity post–September 11, 2001. Qaddafi was no longer a threat to the United States. Yet Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strongly advocated and succeeded in convincing the administration to support the Libyan rebels with a no-fly zone, intended to prevent a possible humanitarian disaster that turned quickly into all-out war.

Within weeks of the revolution there were two valid cease-fire opportunities, one presented to the Department of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), and a second opportunity presented to U.S. Africa Command for direct military commander negotiations to effect Gaddafi’s abdication, in which I was personally involved. Both opportunities were rejected and shut down by Secretary Clinton. Internal communications that went public last year revealed that on March 18, 2011, a colonel in JCS wrote, “. . . Due to the UNSCR, Libyan forces sped up ops to get to Benghazi, and will soon cease fire. As expected. Our contact will arrange a face-to-face meeting with Saif, or a skype/video-telecon to open communications if time does not permit. It will have to be with a high level USG official for him to agree. If there will be an ultimatum before any ops, the USG must be in communication with the right leaders and hopefully listen for any answer. A peaceful solution is still possible that keeps Saif on our side without any bloodshed in Benghazi.” However, on March 14, 2011 Secretary Clinton had already met with rebel leaders in Paris, including Mahmoud Jibril, number two in the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, and had committed to support their revolution.

Despite valid ceasefire opportunities to prevent “bloodshed in Benghazi” at the onset of hostilities, Secretary Clinton intervened and quickly pushed her foreign policy in support of a revolution led by the Muslim Brotherhood and known terrorists in the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. One of the Libyan Rebel Brigade commanders, Ahmed Abu Khattala, would later be involved in the terrorist attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Articulating her indifference to the chaos brought by war, Secretary Clinton stated on May 18, 2013, to the House Oversight Committee and the American public, “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Secretary Clinton’s war actually did make a difference. It led to a very real and very tragic humanitarian disaster. Her bad judgment and failed policy resulted in the arming of terrorists, months of war and tens of thousands of causalities, the murder of the American ambassador and the deaths of three other brave Americans, continued civil war and the collapse of the Libyan economy, and a failed nation-state contributing to a tragic European migrant crisis. Clearly the Libyan disaster tops Secretary Clinton’s legacy of failure.

The revolution ended October 23, 2011, and Libya held its first democratic election on July 7, 2012. A second election was held on June 25, 2014. Despite efforts made by peaceful Libyan officials to establish a strong secular nation, radical Islamic elements rejected the election results and used military force to subvert the will of the Libyan people. As a direct consequence of the chaos caused by Secretary Clinton’s failed policy, there are now four entities competing for control of Libya: (1) the twice-elected democratic secular parliamentary government forced into exile in Tobruk by Islamist attacks, (2) the unelected radical Islamist-controlled government in Tripoli, (3) the savage ISIS terrorists who control the city of Sirte and (4) the UN-imposed Government of National Accord (GNA) recently placed ashore in abandoned buildings in Tripoli. The UN is attempting, with U.S. and European support, to impose a unity government (the GNA) that will include elements of sharia law in a new constitution. This approach was rejected twice by the Libyan people, who wanted a more secular government that is not founded in sharia.

The Libyan National Oil Company (NOC) continues to control limited commercial oil exports from certain oil fields through western ports. The democratically elected government in Tobruk has objected to the continued control of oil exports by the Islamist factions in Tripoli, and has recently established its own capability to export oil from an eastern port. However, to counter the Tobruk government, the UN recently imposed a unilateral embargo on an attempted eastern shipment of 650,000 barrels of oil. The UN embargo was lifted when contested by the UN representative of the elected Libyan government.

More recently the UN, with U.S. support, has threatened to impose travel and financial sanctions on Libyan politicians representing the elected government in Tobruk simply because they are resisting the authority of the UN-imposed GNA. And, in a truly absurd move, the United States is now considering authorizing arms shipments to the UN imposed GNA in Tripoli.



America can no longer continue to support Hillary’s legacy of failure in Libya. The United States needs to support democracy in Libya, not UN sanctions or arms shipments. And the United States should support Libyan efforts to provide internal security, critical to reestablishing full oil production and unimpeded export, in order to revitalize the failing Libyan economy. In doing so, the United States and Libya can together achieve peace—through economic and military strength.

U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Charles R. Kubic served worldwide for over 32 years as a Navy Seabee, and retired in 2005.

This is all great....

But Libya has not resonated outside the Fox News bubble, as a liability for Hillary.

The emails have a tiny bit, but Trump's liabilities have overshadowed anything Hillary might do.

Fox News righties are exposed to Republican electioneering all day, so of course it seems like a thing...but it's not

Jesus Sonny, when the United States has a MSM the REFUSES to (1) tell any story that might embarrass Barry and (2) lies in every other sentence they "report", what the hell do you expect!?!?

Goebbels is laughing from his grave....

Fine, but it's not a big factor is the election so far

Give it time. By the time we vote, CBS
,ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN will have Donald Trump convicted of raping little girls and Hillary being Cannozied by the Pope.

What exactly do you expect?

What you're experiencing is phony outrage.

Because you may be under the impression that Fox News is NOT in the tank, for Republicans...every bit as much, or more, than the mainstream is for the Democrats.

OK...So FOX is in the tank for republicans. Let's do the simple math here, shall we? MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, Every major newspaper in the US, ALL Internet outlets including Facebook, YAHOO, etc. Against what? FOX and a few talk radio stations. Yeah, I don't get your point.

What is the score? 5,000 to 150?

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Barack Obama .. Mr. Black President, used AL QUEDA terrorists, murderers, and rapists as his 'ground troops' .. including monsters that call themselves 'The Brigade to rid Libya of black skin.'

The brigade for boiling and burning blacks
The brigade for boiling and burning blacks | Thought Leader







Obama knew all this was going on .. and he did nothing about it.

The Libyan people gathered in the largest demonstration in world history to support Gaddafi and oppose Obama and NATO destruction of their country. Obama didn't care what the Libyan people wanted .. and his lie is revealed just seconds into this video ..



Democrats remain silent as a mouse on these horrors because obviously they don't give a fuck about these people either .. and because there was no republican to blame.

May Obama rot in Hell forever for what he did to Libya.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Our UN Ambassador's Shocking False Rape Claim

Back in the spring of 2011, in an attempt to persuade nations growing increasingly skeptical about NATO-led attacks on Libya, especially India, Russia and China, Rice went before a closed door meeting of the United Nations Security Council and announced that Gaddafi's forces were issuing Viagra, the drug used to treat erectile dysfunction, to soldiers "so that they go out and rape" civilians in areas that support the rebels. "This story was taken so seriously that some people started writing to Pfizer to get it to stop selling Viagra to Libya, since its product was allegedly being used as a weapon of war." http://allafrica.com/stories/201110281053.html?page=7

According to news reports, Rice's allegation was false. "There is no evidence that Libyan military forces are being given Viagra and engaging in systematic rape against women in rebel areas, US military and intelligence officials told NBC News on Friday." (The story is archived here: US intel: NO evidence of VIAGRA as weapon in LIBYA)

The news report notes that "several diplomats said Rice provided no evidence for the Viagra allegation, which they said was made in an attempt to persuade doubters the conflict in Libya was not just a standard civil war but a much nastier fight . . . ." Less delicate voices were more blunt: "Rice is a liberal interventionist who was one of those to persuade Obama to intervene in Libya. She utilized this myth because it helped her make the case at the UN that there was no 'moral equivalence' between Gaddafi's human rights abuses and those of the insurgents." http://allafrica.com/stories/201110281053.html?page=7

To our knowledge, Ms. Rice has never bothered to explain her claim, never apologized, never expressed regret about it. This, despite the fact that it would be difficult to imagine a false claim about a matter more serious because it was uttered to buttress support for a policy that exposes soldiers in combat and innocent civilians to the most serious risk imaginable. The fact that this false rape claim was made by a leading official of the most powerful nation on earth should be a grave concern to the entire world community. Yet, we saw no condemnations nor expressions of outrage by anyone, including the GOP and women's groups, regarding this flagrant abuse of the power to cry rape.

more
Community of the Wrongly Accused: Our UN Ambassador's Shocking False Rape Claim

Amnesty questions claim that Gaddafi ordered rape as weapon of war
Amnesty questions claim that Gaddafi ordered rape as weapon of war

Susan Rice’s Viagra Hoax: The New Incubator Babies
Susan Rice’s Viagra Hoax: The New Incubator Babies « Antiwar.com Blog

Sid Blumenthal Floated Disputed Gaddafi Viagra Rape Rumor In Confidential Memo To Hillary
Sid Blumenthal Floated Disputed Gaddafi Viagra Rape Rumor In Confidential Memo To Hillary

 

[RandallFlagg]

Our UN Ambassador's Shocking False Rape Claim

Back in the spring of 2011, in an attempt to persuade nations growing increasingly skeptical about NATO-led attacks on Libya, especially India, Russia and China, Rice went before a closed door meeting of the United Nations Security Council and announced that Gaddafi's forces were issuing Viagra, the drug used to treat erectile dysfunction, to soldiers "so that they go out and rape" civilians in areas that support the rebels. "This story was taken so seriously that some people started writing to Pfizer to get it to stop selling Viagra to Libya, since its product was allegedly being used as a weapon of war." http://allafrica.com/stories/201110281053.html?page=7

According to news reports, Rice's allegation was false. "There is no evidence that Libyan military forces are being given Viagra and engaging in systematic rape against women in rebel areas, US military and intelligence officials told NBC News on Friday." (The story is archived here: US intel: NO evidence of VIAGRA as weapon in LIBYA)

The news report notes that "several diplomats said Rice provided no evidence for the Viagra allegation, which they said was made in an attempt to persuade doubters the conflict in Libya was not just a standard civil war but a much nastier fight . . . ." Less delicate voices were more blunt: "Rice is a liberal interventionist who was one of those to persuade Obama to intervene in Libya. She utilized this myth because it helped her make the case at the UN that there was no 'moral equivalence' between Gaddafi's human rights abuses and those of the insurgents." http://allafrica.com/stories/201110281053.html?page=7

To our knowledge, Ms. Rice has never bothered to explain her claim, never apologized, never expressed regret about it. This, despite the fact that it would be difficult to imagine a false claim about a matter more serious because it was uttered to buttress support for a policy that exposes soldiers in combat and innocent civilians to the most serious risk imaginable. The fact that this false rape claim was made by a leading official of the most powerful nation on earth should be a grave concern to the entire world community. Yet, we saw no condemnations nor expressions of outrage by anyone, including the GOP and women's groups, regarding this flagrant abuse of the power to cry rape.

more
Community of the Wrongly Accused: Our UN Ambassador's Shocking False Rape Claim

Amnesty questions claim that Gaddafi ordered rape as weapon of war
Amnesty questions claim that Gaddafi ordered rape as weapon of war

Susan Rice’s Viagra Hoax: The New Incubator Babies
Susan Rice’s Viagra Hoax: The New Incubator Babies « Antiwar.com Blog

Sid Blumenthal Floated Disputed Gaddafi Viagra Rape Rumor In Confidential Memo To Hillary
Sid Blumenthal Floated Disputed Gaddafi Viagra Rape Rumor In Confidential Memo To Hillary

I have said this for years, since the 90s. The "man" behind Hillary (the murderer) Clinton has NEVER been Bill. It has always been Sid Blumenthal. That guy, is one of the most dangerous puppet masters in Washington DC. Cross him at your own peril.

 

[JBond]

Why do you blame the horrors and disaster of the destruction of Libya on Hillary Clinton?

Obama was the president. It was Obama's war.

Libs... Too lazy to read first hand accounts of their Goddess and then follow up asking stupid questions. Sigh...

 

[toxicmedia]

This is all great....

But Libya has not resonated outside the Fox News bubble, as a liability for Hillary.

The emails have a tiny bit, but Trump's liabilities have overshadowed anything Hillary might do.

Fox News righties are exposed to Republican electioneering all day, so of course it seems like a thing...but it's not

Jesus Sonny, when the United States has a MSM the REFUSES to (1) tell any story that might embarrass Barry and (2) lies in every other sentence they "report", what the hell do you expect!?!?

Goebbels is laughing from his grave....

Fine, but it's not a big factor is the election so far

Give it time. By the time we vote, CBS
,ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN will have Donald Trump convicted of raping little girls and Hillary being Cannozied by the Pope.

What exactly do you expect?

What you're experiencing is phony outrage.

Because you may be under the impression that Fox News is NOT in the tank, for Republicans...every bit as much, or more, than the mainstream is for the Democrats.

OK...So FOX is in the tank for republicans. Let's do the simple math here, shall we? MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, Every major newspaper in the US, ALL Internet outlets including Facebook, YAHOO, etc. Against what? FOX and a few talk radio stations. Yeah, I don't get your point.

What is the score? 5,000 to 150?

You're adorable.

You've also just stumbled onto why Fox News's ratings are so high, compared to the rest.

Fox New's ratings are not high because they're exceptional, they're high because Roger Ailles, Rupert Murdock, Karl Rove, and the bunch needs tight control of the GOP message.

Haven't you wondered...what with how popular Fox is...that there aren't competing networks?

The GOP is using Stalinist era media tactics. Have just one outlet do you can control the message

 

[RandallFlagg]

Jesus Sonny, when the United States has a MSM the REFUSES to (1) tell any story that might embarrass Barry and (2) lies in every other sentence they "report", what the hell do you expect!?!?

Goebbels is laughing from his grave....

Fine, but it's not a big factor is the election so far

Give it time. By the time we vote, CBS
,ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN will have Donald Trump convicted of raping little girls and Hillary being Cannozied by the Pope.

What exactly do you expect?

What you're experiencing is phony outrage.

Because you may be under the impression that Fox News is NOT in the tank, for Republicans...every bit as much, or more, than the mainstream is for the Democrats.

OK...So FOX is in the tank for republicans. Let's do the simple math here, shall we? MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, Every major newspaper in the US, ALL Internet outlets including Facebook, YAHOO, etc. Against what? FOX and a few talk radio stations. Yeah, I don't get your point.

What is the score? 5,000 to 150?

You're adorable.

You've also just stumbled onto why Fox News's ratings are so high, compared to the rest.

Fox New's ratings are not high because they're exceptional, they're high because Roger Ailles, Rupert Murdock, Karl Rove, and the bunch needs tight control of the GOP message.

Haven't you wondered...what with how popular Fox is...that there aren't competing networks?

The GOP is using Stalinist era media tactics. Have just one outlet do you can control the message

Hey dumbass.....MSNBC and CNN have been sucking hind tit to FOX for the last 20 years. Why? Because Americans aren't as stupid as you liberal, communist assholes take them to be.

You want propaganda? You go to MSNBC. You want a democrat slant? You go to CNN. You want both sides of the story? You go to FOX.

The only "Stalinist era Media tactics" come from you - communists.

 

[Hossfly]

Jesus Sonny, when the United States has a MSM the REFUSES to (1) tell any story that might embarrass Barry and (2) lies in every other sentence they "report", what the hell do you expect!?!?

Goebbels is laughing from his grave....

Fine, but it's not a big factor is the election so far

Give it time. By the time we vote, CBS
,ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN will have Donald Trump convicted of raping little girls and Hillary being Cannozied by the Pope.

What exactly do you expect?

What you're experiencing is phony outrage.

Because you may be under the impression that Fox News is NOT in the tank, for Republicans...every bit as much, or more, than the mainstream is for the Democrats.

OK...So FOX is in the tank for republicans. Let's do the simple math here, shall we? MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, Every major newspaper in the US, ALL Internet outlets including Facebook, YAHOO, etc. Against what? FOX and a few talk radio stations. Yeah, I don't get your point.

What is the score? 5,000 to 150?

You're adorable.

You've also just stumbled onto why Fox News's ratings are so high, compared to the rest.

Fox New's ratings are not high because they're exceptional, they're high because Roger Ailles, Rupert Murdock, Karl Rove, and the bunch needs tight control of the GOP message.

Haven't you wondered...what with how popular Fox is...that there aren't competing networks?

The GOP is using Stalinist era media tactics. Have just one outlet do you can control the message

BULL Hockey. Fox News is the only network that doesn't cover up the truth. The rest of those scumbag networks are too busy rimming Obama/Clinton ass cracks.

 

[toxicmedia]

Fine, but it's not a big factor is the election so far

Give it time. By the time we vote, CBS
,ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN will have Donald Trump convicted of raping little girls and Hillary being Cannozied by the Pope.

What exactly do you expect?

What you're experiencing is phony outrage.

Because you may be under the impression that Fox News is NOT in the tank, for Republicans...every bit as much, or more, than the mainstream is for the Democrats.

OK...So FOX is in the tank for republicans. Let's do the simple math here, shall we? MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, Every major newspaper in the US, ALL Internet outlets including Facebook, YAHOO, etc. Against what? FOX and a few talk radio stations. Yeah, I don't get your point.

What is the score? 5,000 to 150?

You're adorable.

You've also just stumbled onto why Fox News's ratings are so high, compared to the rest.

Fox New's ratings are not high because they're exceptional, they're high because Roger Ailles, Rupert Murdock, Karl Rove, and the bunch needs tight control of the GOP message.

Haven't you wondered...what with how popular Fox is...that there aren't competing networks?

The GOP is using Stalinist era media tactics. Have just one outlet do you can control the message

BULL Hockey. Fox News is the only network that doesn't cover up the truth. The rest of those scumbag networks are too busy rimming Obama/Clinton ass cracks.

Wow......really

I've heard about people like you but never actually encountered one in the wild.

You think Fox News is more "truthful" than other news networks??????

Wait right here!!! I'll be right back!

Don't go anywhere!!!

 

[toxicmedia]

Fine, but it's not a big factor is the election so far

Give it time. By the time we vote, CBS
,ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN will have Donald Trump convicted of raping little girls and Hillary being Cannozied by the Pope.

What exactly do you expect?

What you're experiencing is phony outrage.

Because you may be under the impression that Fox News is NOT in the tank, for Republicans...every bit as much, or more, than the mainstream is for the Democrats.

OK...So FOX is in the tank for republicans. Let's do the simple math here, shall we? MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, Every major newspaper in the US, ALL Internet outlets including Facebook, YAHOO, etc. Against what? FOX and a few talk radio stations. Yeah, I don't get your point.

What is the score? 5,000 to 150?

You're adorable.

You've also just stumbled onto why Fox News's ratings are so high, compared to the rest.

Fox New's ratings are not high because they're exceptional, they're high because Roger Ailles, Rupert Murdock, Karl Rove, and the bunch needs tight control of the GOP message.

Haven't you wondered...what with how popular Fox is...that there aren't competing networks?

The GOP is using Stalinist era media tactics. Have just one outlet do you can control the message

Hey dumbass.....MSNBC and CNN have been sucking hind tit to FOX for the last 20 years. Why? Because Americans aren't as stupid as you liberal, communist assholes take them to be.

You want propaganda? You go to MSNBC. You want a democrat slant? You go to CNN. You want both sides of the story? You go to FOX.

The only "Stalinist era Media tactics" come from you - communists.

Wow, and some dumb ass thanked this post.

Don't expect me to stick up for the mainstream media

 

[RandallFlagg]

Give it time. By the time we vote, CBS
,ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN will have Donald Trump convicted of raping little girls and Hillary being Cannozied by the Pope.

What exactly do you expect?

What you're experiencing is phony outrage.

Because you may be under the impression that Fox News is NOT in the tank, for Republicans...every bit as much, or more, than the mainstream is for the Democrats.

OK...So FOX is in the tank for republicans. Let's do the simple math here, shall we? MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, Every major newspaper in the US, ALL Internet outlets including Facebook, YAHOO, etc. Against what? FOX and a few talk radio stations. Yeah, I don't get your point.

What is the score? 5,000 to 150?

You're adorable.

You've also just stumbled onto why Fox News's ratings are so high, compared to the rest.

Fox New's ratings are not high because they're exceptional, they're high because Roger Ailles, Rupert Murdock, Karl Rove, and the bunch needs tight control of the GOP message.

Haven't you wondered...what with how popular Fox is...that there aren't competing networks?

The GOP is using Stalinist era media tactics. Have just one outlet do you can control the message

BULL Hockey. Fox News is the only network that doesn't cover up the truth. The rest of those scumbag networks are too busy rimming Obama/Clinton ass cracks.

Wow......really

I've heard about people like you but never actually encountered one in the wild.

You think Fox News is more "truthful" than other news networks??????

Wait right here!!! I'll be right back!

Don't go anywhere!!!

As he runs off to find some left wing, commie website that agrees with his bullshit.

 

[EriktheRed]

Interesting first hand account of Hillary's obsession with Libya.

Hillary's Huge Libya Disaster

Rage,” Libya had a national budget surplus of 8.7 percent of GDP in 2010, with oil production at 1.8 million barrels per day, on track to reach its goal of 3 million barrels per day. Currently, oil production has decreased by over 80 percent. Following the revolution, the Libyan economy contracted by an estimated 41.8 percent, with a national deficit of 17.1 percent GDP in 2011.

Before the revolution, Libya was a secure, prospering, secular Islamic country and a critical ally providing intelligence on terrorist activity post–September 11, 2001. Qaddafi was no longer a threat to the United States. Yet Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strongly advocated and succeeded in convincing the administration to support the Libyan rebels with a no-fly zone, intended to prevent a possible humanitarian disaster that turned quickly into all-out war.

Within weeks of the revolution there were two valid cease-fire opportunities, one presented to the Department of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), and a second opportunity presented to U.S. Africa Command for direct military commander negotiations to effect Gaddafi’s abdication, in which I was personally involved. Both opportunities were rejected and shut down by Secretary Clinton. Internal communications that went public last year revealed that on March 18, 2011, a colonel in JCS wrote, “. . . Due to the UNSCR, Libyan forces sped up ops to get to Benghazi, and will soon cease fire. As expected. Our contact will arrange a face-to-face meeting with Saif, or a skype/video-telecon to open communications if time does not permit. It will have to be with a high level USG official for him to agree. If there will be an ultimatum before any ops, the USG must be in communication with the right leaders and hopefully listen for any answer. A peaceful solution is still possible that keeps Saif on our side without any bloodshed in Benghazi.” However, on March 14, 2011 Secretary Clinton had already met with rebel leaders in Paris, including Mahmoud Jibril, number two in the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, and had committed to support their revolution.

Despite valid ceasefire opportunities to prevent “bloodshed in Benghazi” at the onset of hostilities, Secretary Clinton intervened and quickly pushed her foreign policy in support of a revolution led by the Muslim Brotherhood and known terrorists in the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. One of the Libyan Rebel Brigade commanders, Ahmed Abu Khattala, would later be involved in the terrorist attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Articulating her indifference to the chaos brought by war, Secretary Clinton stated on May 18, 2013, to the House Oversight Committee and the American public, “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Secretary Clinton’s war actually did make a difference. It led to a very real and very tragic humanitarian disaster. Her bad judgment and failed policy resulted in the arming of terrorists, months of war and tens of thousands of causalities, the murder of the American ambassador and the deaths of three other brave Americans, continued civil war and the collapse of the Libyan economy, and a failed nation-state contributing to a tragic European migrant crisis. Clearly the Libyan disaster tops Secretary Clinton’s legacy of failure.

The revolution ended October 23, 2011, and Libya held its first democratic election on July 7, 2012. A second election was held on June 25, 2014. Despite efforts made by peaceful Libyan officials to establish a strong secular nation, radical Islamic elements rejected the election results and used military force to subvert the will of the Libyan people. As a direct consequence of the chaos caused by Secretary Clinton’s failed policy, there are now four entities competing for control of Libya: (1) the twice-elected democratic secular parliamentary government forced into exile in Tobruk by Islamist attacks, (2) the unelected radical Islamist-controlled government in Tripoli, (3) the savage ISIS terrorists who control the city of Sirte and (4) the UN-imposed Government of National Accord (GNA) recently placed ashore in abandoned buildings in Tripoli. The UN is attempting, with U.S. and European support, to impose a unity government (the GNA) that will include elements of sharia law in a new constitution. This approach was rejected twice by the Libyan people, who wanted a more secular government that is not founded in sharia.

The Libyan National Oil Company (NOC) continues to control limited commercial oil exports from certain oil fields through western ports. The democratically elected government in Tobruk has objected to the continued control of oil exports by the Islamist factions in Tripoli, and has recently established its own capability to export oil from an eastern port. However, to counter the Tobruk government, the UN recently imposed a unilateral embargo on an attempted eastern shipment of 650,000 barrels of oil. The UN embargo was lifted when contested by the UN representative of the elected Libyan government.

More recently the UN, with U.S. support, has threatened to impose travel and financial sanctions on Libyan politicians representing the elected government in Tobruk simply because they are resisting the authority of the UN-imposed GNA. And, in a truly absurd move, the United States is now considering authorizing arms shipments to the UN imposed GNA in Tripoli.



America can no longer continue to support Hillary’s legacy of failure in Libya. The United States needs to support democracy in Libya, not UN sanctions or arms shipments. And the United States should support Libyan efforts to provide internal security, critical to reestablishing full oil production and unimpeded export, in order to revitalize the failing Libyan economy. In doing so, the United States and Libya can together achieve peace—through economic and military strength.

U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Charles R. Kubic served worldwide for over 32 years as a Navy Seabee, and retired in 2005.

Why do you blame the horrors and disaster of the destruction of Libya on Hillary Clinton?

Obama was the president. It was Obama's war.

Because Obama isn't running for President this year, silly.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Interesting first hand account of Hillary's obsession with Libya.

Hillary's Huge Libya Disaster

Rage,” Libya had a national budget surplus of 8.7 percent of GDP in 2010, with oil production at 1.8 million barrels per day, on track to reach its goal of 3 million barrels per day. Currently, oil production has decreased by over 80 percent. Following the revolution, the Libyan economy contracted by an estimated 41.8 percent, with a national deficit of 17.1 percent GDP in 2011.

Before the revolution, Libya was a secure, prospering, secular Islamic country and a critical ally providing intelligence on terrorist activity post–September 11, 2001. Qaddafi was no longer a threat to the United States. Yet Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strongly advocated and succeeded in convincing the administration to support the Libyan rebels with a no-fly zone, intended to prevent a possible humanitarian disaster that turned quickly into all-out war.

Within weeks of the revolution there were two valid cease-fire opportunities, one presented to the Department of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), and a second opportunity presented to U.S. Africa Command for direct military commander negotiations to effect Gaddafi’s abdication, in which I was personally involved. Both opportunities were rejected and shut down by Secretary Clinton. Internal communications that went public last year revealed that on March 18, 2011, a colonel in JCS wrote, “. . . Due to the UNSCR, Libyan forces sped up ops to get to Benghazi, and will soon cease fire. As expected. Our contact will arrange a face-to-face meeting with Saif, or a skype/video-telecon to open communications if time does not permit. It will have to be with a high level USG official for him to agree. If there will be an ultimatum before any ops, the USG must be in communication with the right leaders and hopefully listen for any answer. A peaceful solution is still possible that keeps Saif on our side without any bloodshed in Benghazi.” However, on March 14, 2011 Secretary Clinton had already met with rebel leaders in Paris, including Mahmoud Jibril, number two in the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, and had committed to support their revolution.

Despite valid ceasefire opportunities to prevent “bloodshed in Benghazi” at the onset of hostilities, Secretary Clinton intervened and quickly pushed her foreign policy in support of a revolution led by the Muslim Brotherhood and known terrorists in the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. One of the Libyan Rebel Brigade commanders, Ahmed Abu Khattala, would later be involved in the terrorist attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Articulating her indifference to the chaos brought by war, Secretary Clinton stated on May 18, 2013, to the House Oversight Committee and the American public, “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?”

Secretary Clinton’s war actually did make a difference. It led to a very real and very tragic humanitarian disaster. Her bad judgment and failed policy resulted in the arming of terrorists, months of war and tens of thousands of causalities, the murder of the American ambassador and the deaths of three other brave Americans, continued civil war and the collapse of the Libyan economy, and a failed nation-state contributing to a tragic European migrant crisis. Clearly the Libyan disaster tops Secretary Clinton’s legacy of failure.

The revolution ended October 23, 2011, and Libya held its first democratic election on July 7, 2012. A second election was held on June 25, 2014. Despite efforts made by peaceful Libyan officials to establish a strong secular nation, radical Islamic elements rejected the election results and used military force to subvert the will of the Libyan people. As a direct consequence of the chaos caused by Secretary Clinton’s failed policy, there are now four entities competing for control of Libya: (1) the twice-elected democratic secular parliamentary government forced into exile in Tobruk by Islamist attacks, (2) the unelected radical Islamist-controlled government in Tripoli, (3) the savage ISIS terrorists who control the city of Sirte and (4) the UN-imposed Government of National Accord (GNA) recently placed ashore in abandoned buildings in Tripoli. The UN is attempting, with U.S. and European support, to impose a unity government (the GNA) that will include elements of sharia law in a new constitution. This approach was rejected twice by the Libyan people, who wanted a more secular government that is not founded in sharia.

The Libyan National Oil Company (NOC) continues to control limited commercial oil exports from certain oil fields through western ports. The democratically elected government in Tobruk has objected to the continued control of oil exports by the Islamist factions in Tripoli, and has recently established its own capability to export oil from an eastern port. However, to counter the Tobruk government, the UN recently imposed a unilateral embargo on an attempted eastern shipment of 650,000 barrels of oil. The UN embargo was lifted when contested by the UN representative of the elected Libyan government.

More recently the UN, with U.S. support, has threatened to impose travel and financial sanctions on Libyan politicians representing the elected government in Tobruk simply because they are resisting the authority of the UN-imposed GNA. And, in a truly absurd move, the United States is now considering authorizing arms shipments to the UN imposed GNA in Tripoli.



America can no longer continue to support Hillary’s legacy of failure in Libya. The United States needs to support democracy in Libya, not UN sanctions or arms shipments. And the United States should support Libyan efforts to provide internal security, critical to reestablishing full oil production and unimpeded export, in order to revitalize the failing Libyan economy. In doing so, the United States and Libya can together achieve peace—through economic and military strength.

U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Charles R. Kubic served worldwide for over 32 years as a Navy Seabee, and retired in 2005.

Why do you blame the horrors and disaster of the destruction of Libya on Hillary Clinton?

Obama was the president. It was Obama's war.

Because Obama isn't running for President this year, silly.

,, which demonstrates the disingenuous stupidity of the OP.