Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is stupid. Really.
On many levels i have an opinion on this:
1-after the Leftist turds attacked the US, then begged us to intervene in Darfur, and now this, I am of mind to tell the Leftist assholes: "Fuck you" after the pounding Bush and Conservatives took since 2003, for in essence, what would be doing to Khadafi exactly what was done to Saddam.
2-as a humanitarian, seeing armed animals defending Khadafi the dictator as they slaughter civilians does not sit well with me
3-if we allow Khadafi to survive in power against this rebellion, he will be VERY angry at the West, and might unleash levels of terrorism against Europe and the US on a level we have not yet seen before
This is stupid. Really.
On many levels i have an opinion on this:
1-after the Leftist turds attacked the US, then begged us to intervene in Darfur, and now this, I am of mind to tell the Leftist assholes: "Fuck you" after the pounding Bush and Conservatives took since 2003, for in essence, what would be doing to Khadafi exactly what was done to Saddam.
2-as a humanitarian, seeing armed animals defending Khadafi the dictator as they slaughter civilians does not sit well with me
3-if we allow Khadafi to survive in power against this rebellion, he will be VERY angry at the West, and might unleash levels of terrorism against Europe and the US on a level we have not yet seen before
Bottom line, even though the Leftist trash can choke to death after their endless screeching over the "illegal war on iraq," the hornet's nest of terrorism that Libya would become if Khadafi retained power would be untenable; he would seek massive revenge against the West for its support of the rebels, and would come after the US/EU like a woman scorned.
That I cannot accept, so at this point, we in the West have no choice, since we've openly sided with the rebels - we HAVE to depose him, and soon.
But that's another bag of worms. Who the heck are these rebels? They could be worse that Khadafi. They may turn it into another Iran.
"At a time when the United States has adopted a policy of preemptive action in its war on terrorists - and is portrayed here as encouraging student street protests - the 1953 overthrow of Mohammad Mossadegh's government is taking on fresh relevance for some Iranians.
Organized by the CIA and the British SIS to secure Iran's oil resources from a possible Soviet takeover and secure Iran's oil resources, the coup marked America's first intervention in the Middle East. Its aftershocks are still being felt.
The end of Iran's first democratic government ushered in more than two decades of dictatorship by Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, who relied on US aid and arms. The anti-American backlash in 1979 shook the whole region and helped spread Islamic militancy."
I don't really care about partisan politics right now. I am more concerned with the issue at hand: Are we going to war with Libya?
And is it the right decision. At this point I dont think it is.
WASHINGTON (AP) - Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Thursday that a U.N. no-fly zone over Libya would require bombing targets inside the country, and a deputy acknowledged that Moammar Gadhafi's forces were making huge gains against the opposition.
Clinton gave her assessment during a visit to Tunisia and ahead of a planned U.N. vote, making clear the risk of possible military intervention as world powers considered broader steps to protect civilians and pressure the Libyan leader.
"A no-fly zone requires certain actions taken to protect the planes and the pilots, including bombing targets like the Libyan defense systems," Clinton said as she neared the end of a Middle East trip dominated by worries about Libya.
Both the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., and the top Republican, Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, expressed frustration with the administration and its articulation of policies.
Senators were in disagreement over the no-fly zone. Lugar doubted that U.S. interests would be served and said the step would require a declaration of war from Congress under the War Powers Act. He asked that Arab governments pay for any U.S. military involvement.
My Way News - Clinton: No-fly zone means bombing Libyan targets
Another war for liberal/ progressives/ centrists/ communist to protest. Liberals will send more of our young men, and women into harms way then turn against then, and not support them when they get there. Doesn't everyone feel safer now?
If Sen Lugar doubts the US interests will be served by the no fly zone is it safe to say that someone else's interest is more important ?
What would ever give you that idea?~BH
I have this sneaky feeling that the UN didn't vote for the no fly zone to protect Libyans.
I don't think the US voted "yes" because they care about Libyans.
Whoever "interests" are going to be served should take the lead.
I think he would have been a poor prez, equally disappointing as what we're seeing right now. I think we can do better than involving ourselves in ME entanglements.
Holy shit!
Inside classified Hill briefing, administration spells out war plan for Libya | The Cable
Several administration officials held a classified briefing for all senators on Thursday afternoon in the bowels of the Capitol building, leaving lawmakers convinced President Barack Obama is ready to attack Libya but wondering if it isn't too late to help the rebels there.
Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Bill Burns led the briefing and was accompanied by Alan Pino, National Intelligence Officer for the Near East, Gen. John Landry, National Intelligence Officer for Military Issues, Nate Tuchrello, National Intelligence Manager for Near East, Rear Adm. Michael Rogers, Director of Intelligence for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Rear Admiral Kurt Tidd, Vice Director of Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Several senators emerged from the briefing convinced that the administration was intent on beginning military action against the forces of Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi within the next few days and that such action would include both a no-fly zone as well as a "no-drive zone" to prevent Qaddafi from crushing the rebel forces, especially those now concentrated in Benghazi.
"It looks like we have Arab countries ready to participate in a no-fly and no-drive endeavor," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told reporters after the briefing.
Asked what he learned from the briefing, Graham said, "I learned that it's not too late, that the opposition forces are under siege but they are holding, and that with a timely intervention, a no-fly zone and no-drive zone, we can turn this thing around."
Asked exactly what the first wave of attacks would look like, Graham said, "We ground his aircraft and some tanks start getting blown up that are headed toward the opposition forces."
As for when the attacks would start, he said "We're talking days, not weeks, and I'm hoping hours, not days," adding that he was told the U.N. Security Council resolution would be crafted to give the international community the authority to be "outcome determinant" and "do whatever's necessary.".........
You realize if we do go to war, we would currently be in Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Three Muslim countries. There could be serious ramnifications for these actions. I'm talking at least a regional conflict.
I'll do you one better, I believe we are not far from attacking Iran, which should have been done instead of just about everything else over there...
)
Impossible. Obama is on vacation, and nobody is doing anything. This can't have possibly happened.
I have this sneaky feeling that the UN didn't vote for the no fly zone to protect Libyans.
I don't think the US voted "yes" because they care about Libyans.
Whoever "interests" are going to be served should take the lead.
Maybe the UN has some interests in us getting into another war....
You realize if we do go to war, we would currently be in Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Three Muslim countries. There could be serious ramnifications for these actions. I'm talking at least a regional conflict.
I'll do you one better, I believe we are not far from attacking Iran, which should have been done instead of just about everything else over there...
I don't think we will do that. I think that will be Israel.
The way things are looking reminds me an awful lot about WW1. Things started off innocently enough.......
On many levels i have an opinion on this:
1-after the Leftist turds attacked the US, then begged us to intervene in Darfur, and now this, I am of mind to tell the Leftist assholes: "Fuck you" after the pounding Bush and Conservatives took since 2003, for in essence, what would be doing to Khadafi exactly what was done to Saddam.
2-as a humanitarian, seeing armed animals defending Khadafi the dictator as they slaughter civilians does not sit well with me
3-if we allow Khadafi to survive in power against this rebellion, he will be VERY angry at the West, and might unleash levels of terrorism against Europe and the US on a level we have not yet seen before
Bottom line, even though the Leftist trash can choke to death after their endless screeching over the "illegal war on iraq," the hornet's nest of terrorism that Libya would become if Khadafi retained power would be untenable; he would seek massive revenge against the West for its support of the rebels, and would come after the US/EU like a woman scorned.
That I cannot accept, so at this point, we in the West have no choice, since we've openly sided with the rebels - we HAVE to depose him, and soon.
But that's another bag of worms. Who the heck are these rebels? They could be worse that Khadafi. They may turn it into another Iran. We have zero information here.
Which is just how they like it. ~BH
What's the point. Ghadafi has already slaughtered his citizens and is now in control again.
The point is that, if McCain were President right now, we'd already have military intervention in Libya that could be anything from a "no fly zone" to boots on the ground.
This is why I voted for Obama.
Here is the liberal rope-a-dope by, gotohell. This may come as a surprise but McCain, isn't the President. Your home boy Obama bin Lyin, is in the hot seat. Remember?
I will say this though. If McCain were in the White House we'd have a President that was competent enough to lead.
LAMB: But you said you voted for Barack Obama.
HULSMAN: I did. Because, given the choices, which is what one has to do, I thought Mr. Obama had never run anything, which disturbed me, given this crisis, a great deal. But neither has Senator McCain. And McCain, more than Obama, is a prisoner of the Cold War, because of what happened to him in his wonderful service, which I honor.
But the very qualities that made McCain very effective in a bipolar Cold War world - clarity, decisiveness, courage, leading - in a multi-polar world are bullying, misunderstanding, making things simple that are complicated. Hes a Greek tragedy. Hes outlived his time.
And I thought that Obama, being younger and understanding this more, was a better bet.
Also, Im no fan of Mrs. Palin. And to quote Mark Hanna about Teddy Roosevelt, I couldnt leave that cowboy one heartbeat away from the presidency."
I think he would have been a poor prez, equally disappointing as what we're seeing right now. I think we can do better than involving ourselves in ME entanglements.
I agree that McCain would have been a lousy president.
BUT, as bad as Obama? I can't see it. Obama is BY FAR the worst president we have had in my lifetime - including Jimmy Carter. It's hard to imagine some one less competent than Obama.
Holy shit!
Inside classified Hill briefing, administration spells out war plan for Libya | The Cable
Several administration officials held a classified briefing for all senators on Thursday afternoon in the bowels of the Capitol building, leaving lawmakers convinced President Barack Obama is ready to attack Libya but wondering if it isn't too late to help the rebels there.
Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Bill Burns led the briefing and was accompanied by Alan Pino, National Intelligence Officer for the Near East, Gen. John Landry, National Intelligence Officer for Military Issues, Nate Tuchrello, National Intelligence Manager for Near East, Rear Adm. Michael Rogers, Director of Intelligence for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Rear Admiral Kurt Tidd, Vice Director of Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Several senators emerged from the briefing convinced that the administration was intent on beginning military action against the forces of Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi within the next few days and that such action would include both a no-fly zone as well as a "no-drive zone" to prevent Qaddafi from crushing the rebel forces, especially those now concentrated in Benghazi.
"It looks like we have Arab countries ready to participate in a no-fly and no-drive endeavor," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told reporters after the briefing.
Asked what he learned from the briefing, Graham said, "I learned that it's not too late, that the opposition forces are under siege but they are holding, and that with a timely intervention, a no-fly zone and no-drive zone, we can turn this thing around."
Asked exactly what the first wave of attacks would look like, Graham said, "We ground his aircraft and some tanks start getting blown up that are headed toward the opposition forces."
As for when the attacks would start, he said "We're talking days, not weeks, and I'm hoping hours, not days," adding that he was told the U.N. Security Council resolution would be crafted to give the international community the authority to be "outcome determinant" and "do whatever's necessary.".........
Impossible. Obama is on vacation, and nobody is doing anything. This can't have possibly happened.
