Weak.

Turkey's contribution to the naval blockade and Qatar's to the No Fly Zone, or at least Qatar's recognition of the rebels and the Transitional National Council as the sole legitimate authority in the country are symbolic and serve an important geo-political function, rather than a military function.

No boots on the ground, but very close by, just in case.....

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?se...cal&id=8039326

Nice dance. :dunce:

No different than when we went into Iraq.

Rut Ro....

'Al-Qaeda snatched missiles' in Libya


http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news...#ixzz1Hffm5oRa

Chad, like many of Libya's African neighbors kowtow to Ghadaffi, their sugar daddy.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1915484/

Chad, Sudan, etc. are also providing fighters under the direction of Ghaddafi's sons since he is apparently not all that confident that he has or will maintain the support of his own military.

Chad claiming that AlQaeda snatched missiles is much like Ghaddafi claiming that the rebels are Al Qaeda.

Who cares. I posted the news. There is enough stirring of this subject for us to be concerned. Esp since all the critics of Bush were not about his success in taking down a country in 2 weeks, but the aftermath, where a vacuum occurred and there is no evidence that it will be any different in Libya. Another Big Fail for Obama.

Continues:

http://bigpeace.com/kdavies/2011/03/...e-i-am-for-it/

Ghadaffi's support is crumbling around him, with the exception of his sons and "40 Listicked Virgins"

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/03/23/mo...ec1_lnk3|51358

The growing defections among his closest political supporters (some of whom are running for their lives to the West, if they can escape) and possibly his military are positive developments.

With that I bid you a good night.

Continues:

http://bigjournalism.com/rfutrell/20...a-a-hypocrite/

None of that addresses the issues. Who is going to take the place of the current government? Who is poised to fill the void? The Muslim Brotherhood? AQ? Who?

Obama made the assertion in a Dec. 20, 2007 interview with the Boston Globe when reporter Charlie Savage asked him under what circumstances the president would have the constitutional authority to bomb Iran without first seeking authorization from Congress.

"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation," Obama responded.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obam...ve-power-unde#

Two Andrew Breitbart columns. Nice!

Now there is an objective observer? What, no Beck or Limbaugh? :rolleyes:

No, Beck and Limbaugh are crazy. But if you would like to dispute their reports I would be glad to hear you try.

Now you attack the messenger. Isn't that a organized plan by Soros and his whores? Attack the messenger, don't dispute the message?

I would love to see you dispute his reports. Your turn.

Change your name to Unfair or at least Unbalanced. Your previous name quit like a big pussy.

And the leader of the country must be linked to terrorism.:neutral:

The fact that Gaddifi's support is crumbling certaintly addresses the issue of how events are transpiring in Libya.

To answer your question, presumably the National Transitional Council with leaders including a guy with a doctorate in strategic planning from Univ of Pittsburgh, a guy who organized an earlier plot to overthrow Gaddifi, a guy with a doctorate in economics from Michigan State Univ, a human rights lawyer...

They have as much of a structure in place as the Egyptians after they tossed Mubarak out, including the basics a transitional plan.

From your Wiki link ...
So it is a war. just checking.

According to that link the US has not even recognized it yet. In fact the only ones to formally do so are France, Qatar and the Arab League.
**They have asked for it and have been in contact with many other countries**

again from your link ...
Can you help me out with this? Are you referring to one of the men mentioned here or was there more info?
Seriously, I find this fascinating. The formation of a new gov't and all. Especially from square one.

Not exactly. Egypt had much outside contact and training even at the lowest levels of leadership. In particular were what and how its lower level military officers were trained. And similar knowledge gained via commercial enterprises. Libya has few people educated in concepts necessary for a democratic leadership. Even teaching foreign languages was all but banned in Libya to keep the people dumb and subservient.

Furthermore, rebel forces are many different and otherwise adversarial parties united only by one factor - a hate for Kaddafi. Once the common enemy is gone, then what?

Kaddafi is playing a wonderfully successful strategy to suck in the rebels, blast them back to Benghazi, and then suck them back in. His latest version makes air power less effective. It works because so little leadership and virtually no discipline exists among rebels ground forces. That knowledge will eventually come. But first the war must seesaw even for a full year. Rebel forces must learn to work with each other, learn about leadership, build common factors among who would otherwise be adversaries, understand concepts such as support and supply, and generally kill off so many peers to eventually earn and understand concepts not yet understood.

A quick fall of Kaddafi would be great in the short term and a long term disaster for Libya. Important in this war is for painful lessons to first be learned. A long war against a common enemy could be the catalyst that eventually creates a better Libya.

Just because a few top leaders are smart does not make a stable or productive country. Appreciate where most power must reside. And why western democracies are so successful. Among the little leaders (ie Captains and Sergeants) who finally learn concepts that western citizens take for granted. Libyans have been too isolated and too uneducated to have learned what makes a better human race. A long and painful war could be one solution. To teach so many Libyans how much they do not know and what is necessary to be able to learn.

Those lessons include respecting and cooperating with your adversaries. That means adversaries must spend a painfully long time together in the trenches. Where their number one purpose is to protect one another's lives.

This is summarizing what is necessary to "forge a nation". Kaddafi has spent 40 years destroying what is necessary to be a productive, peaceful, and growing nation. It will not be learned in months. A first step can be years suffering to earn a nation.

How long or at what expense did it take citizens of Lebanon, Cambodia, and Rwanda to finally learn these concepts? Libyians, with so many potential adversaries among the rebels and so little knowledge (grasp of the world), still have much to learn.

I dont disagree with most of what you say.

I was speaking to the process of putting a transitional plan in place not the actual process of governing.

Where they fall short and are not as equally prepared at any level is the capacity to implement that plan if/when it comes to that.

I would expect a long slow slog that will require considerable outside support, including peace keepers to basic support and assistance in learning how to manage and provide government services and lots in between.

It looks to me that the rebels have a lot to do still. I don't know if Gdfi's regime is "crumbling". I've seen a few defectors, but it will have to be in large numbers to turn the battlefield. The rebels are still outclassed in number, weapons, logistics, strategy and discipline.

Although I fear for Libya, at least the intervention has helped keep the overall Arab revolt moving.

Eventually military operations will result in negotiations at a peace table. Most of Kaddafi's people have no where to go. Critical to a peace settlement will be to give them an out. Currently none exists. And currently the military conditions are not yet ripe enough for any peace table talks.

Depending on how violent the warfare, this should probably continue for at least another month. Longer may be better for the long term stability of a settlement. But too many variables exist to really say how long it will take to, for example, discover a viable settlement. To get all parties so sick of war as to want that settlement. Critical to a settlement is for Kaddafi supporters to have someplace they might want to go. No such option exists yet. Only the very few who have something to offer in exchange have such options.

Critical to that transition will be the training of civilian equivalents of Captains and Sergeants. Egypt already had many capable people. Libya apparently has few. How many or how few is not really known. But a transition to a stable nation will be much longer.

The suggestion that Gaddafi's regime is "crumbling" is not just the defections of former top political associates, but the freezing of assets by the US, EU, Canada, South Africa, Malta, Turkey, etc., and the fact that Gulf Cooperation Council and Italy appear ready to broker oil deals with the rebels on oil fields under rebel control.

There is a reason why Gadaffi has made overtures to Britain, Greece, Turkey and other nations over the weekend to explore a political or diplomatic solution. While the overture of having Gadaffi step down to be replaced by one of his sons is a non-starter, the fact that he is even approaching these countries would suggest that there is some "crumbling" going on.

The various news sources I read are talking about a "military stalemate". That, plus international pressure, could lead to a sort-of-forced sort-of-negotiated ousting of Gadaffy Gaduck without an absolute bloodbath.

Meanwhile has anyone noticed the "toothless" French have done a similar intervention in Sierra Leone, using helicopter gunships to strike the forces of Gbagbo who refused to admit he lost an election a few months ago. The rebels election winner legitimate government other side have pretty much taken the capital.

LIBYA
'No blood for oil' is the chant not heard

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...#ixzz1IQba5N7W

Hey Ms. Powers, how about that Ivory Coast problem? Where are the US jets?

Oh, the humanity....

Ivory Coast: aid workers find 1,000 bodies in Duekoue


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/8423...n-Duekoue.html

No offense Merc but I feel most of the writers of the articles you post are out of touch with what is really going on (since none of the writers are trying to make any political point...:rolleyes:). There are very legitimate reasons to oppose the current war in Libya but most of the arguments I hear are completely missing the mark.

Let's not be so poltically correct. Most of the reaasons to oppose the current war are based in a hardened political agenda stated from day one. "We want Obama to fail." Harm to America and the world is good as long as the political agenda is protected.

Meanwhile, war throughout the world are ongoing without American action. Something that both Clinton and Obama has tried to encourage. Something that George Jr discouraged. The UN (and the French under UN authorization) has all but ended the war in Ivory Coast. Using concepts that an outmanned battalion of British marines also did so succesfully in Liberia. AU is active in Sudan. India performed a successful operation in Sierra Leone to all but end an uprising against an UN mandated peace settlement. How many know about India's successful deployment and combat? Few. Discussing reality does not help Obama to fail.

Democracy!!!!!


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110405/...sing_islamists

Holy shit! How is that working out for you Obamy? Samantha?

General: U.S. may consider troops in Libya

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/...#ixzz1IrtMwlxl

No shit! Well how about that!

Democrat says Libya costs run much higher
Lawmaker: White House ‘dramatically underestimating’ military expenditures

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...s-libya-missi/

FBI Counter-Terror Official: Al Qaeda 'Thrives' After Dictators Fall

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/fbi-co...ry?id=13386531

ShariaAmerica!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErzxO...mbedded#at=363

Great! Glenn Beck has discovered a new venue in the Cellar.

Did he also publish the word Supercallousedfragilemysticsplaguedwithhaliltosis?
I'm still trying to figure out his Islamofacists. I keep looking under the bed. And they are still not there.

Not just Beck. Stir in a little Pamela Geller and Frank Gafny, add a pinch of fearmongering and you get....Homer Simpson!

"Mypods and Boomsticks"

The Simpson family takes a trip to the Mapple Store at the Springfield Mall where Lisa gets her very own Mypod, and Bart interrupts an announcement from Steve Mobbs with his own voiceover, causing pandemonium to break loose in the store. On his way home from the mall, Bart narrowly escapes punishment and befriends a Muslim boy named Bashir. Homer becomes suspicious of Bart’s new friend and invites Bashir, his mother (guest voice Shohreh Aghdashloo, “24“) and his father over for dinner so he can investigate their supposed anti-American sentiments. Having already offended Bashir and his family at dinner, Homer goes to their home to apologize, but he instead snoops around their house, a la Jack Bauer, and uncovers what he believes to be a terrorist plot to blow up the Springfield Mall. The race is on as Homer tries to warn the residents of Springfield about the impending disaster.

http://www.watchcartoononline.com/th...nd-broomsticks

But we know from Beck, Geller, Gafny, etc that the Council on American-Islam Relations is a front group for terrorists, the Muslim Brotherhood (which has infiltrated the Obama administration) and the coming caliphate.

EU looking for boots on the ground in Libya...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...-ground-troops

The point was pretty good. The US government can burn bibles so as not to offend Muslims but some dumb ass burns a Koran in Florida and extremists go on a killing rampage. Hmmmmm..... no problem there?

No problem at all: it's less a question of offending a religion, and more a question of offending a backwards culture by making a statement that turns them into the enemy during treacherous wartime.

If you are offended by burning bibles U R DUMB

They are offended by burning korans because THEY R DUMB

BUT we have to calculate in their DUMB when we go into their country, it's tactical; otherwise the effort will FAIL.

And Mr. Smug in the video is saying it's not fair that we can't be DUMB, when we have to consider their DUMB.

Smug and DUMB at the same time is always nauseating.

Yea, point taken. I understand it from a tactical point of view. I just don't agree with the duplicity and acceptance by the world in general as they assign blame to the person who burned the Koran vs those who actually did the killing. We get a lot of that in our current world situation with unrest in the Middle East. Just struck a cord.

To make a valid point, first, statements must be based in reality. Where is the US government burning Bibles or Korans? Extremist spin begins by inventing a strawman. The US government is not burning books. Only burning through cash.

Mission Accomplished - another strawman created by extremists (and also why cash problems exist).

Looked under my bed. Still cannot find any islamofacists. Oh. They are all in lower Manhattan building a mosque so we will all die.

Instead, "assign blame" to who created these problems. When do we go after bin Laden?

They are in the Obama administration, because Obama had a Muslim pray at some official govt function, appointed a Muslim to the Homeland Security Advisory Council, appointed another Muslim to a senior policy position at DHS, changed the logo of the Missile Defense Agency (something about it morphing into an Islamic crescent and star)...

We have been infiltrated with Obama's full cooperation. Pam Geller and Frank Gafny tell us so.

Who is Pam Geller and Frank Gafny?

They are two of the ccountry's most vocal Islamophobes who see a Muslim terrorist under tw's bed.

Oh, please explain, how are they wrong? And Cite....

Pamela Geller has states that just about every Muslim organization in the US has ties to jihadists, or the Muslim brotherhood, and has infiltrated the Obama administration, all with:

I don't see where there is proof that she is wrong. Please provide a citation.

Further, I don't see where she says that "just about every Muslim organization in the US has ties to jihadists, or the Muslim brotherhood, and has infiltrated the Obama administration", your link does not prove that... Please cite.

Where are your citations about Frank Gafny?

Its kinda hard to prove a negative.

Here's more:

If you want to believe this crap, I doubt that anyone will change your mind.

Gafney and Geller both recently went so far as to claim the recent CPAC (conservative political action committee) meeting was infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood. :eek:

That settles it. I've got to get some eye glasses.

And Saddam also had WMDs. Same reasoning.

Good thing we wasted a $trillion on that myth. Otherwise we would not have this recession.

She is obliged to prove her claims. Especially when she does it promote hate. Why should we prove her wild speculations are wrong? Your logic also says massacring 5000 Americans in Iraq was justified because we did not prove George Jr and Cheney were lying. Total nonsense created by strawman logic. She is simply promoting the same hate that hyped fear of a Manhattan mosque. And the massacre of millions of Jews in Germany.

Like I said, do you have a factual non-partisan citation for that?

How about listening to her in her own words:

Pam Geller: CPAC Infiltrated By 'Muslim Brotherhood Activist

Her proof? Conservative Grover Norquist's wife is Muslim and they contribute to a Muslim charity.

Do you have factual evidence to prove that elements of the Muslim Brotherhood are not involved in the direct support of CPAC?

Its like the McCarthy red-baiting days all over again.

Make unsubstantiated charges that someone was a commie and demand that they prove they were not.

Looks like lots of people disagree... I don't know, but you have proven yourself to be partisan enough not to be trusted as a sole source.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/cpac...erhood-in-usa/

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/02/...rhood-at-cpac/

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/wei...otherhood.aspx

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/02/da...d-at-cpac.html

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/13/gaffney-cpac/

Like I said, I have no idea. But given the Muslim Brotherhoods long history of supporting violence, something is up. And what you posted does not prove Gellar wrong. I lean toward not trusting the relationship between CPAC and the Muslim Brotherhood if one exists.

Well I know that Saddam massacred hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Iranians. Did that make him a bad man? Are you going to defend him?

Your burden....

You don't believe this??? :eek:

Why? You think they are friends and want to recognize Israel as a legitimate state in the Middle East?

Is this false? Were these things not stated?

http://www.judicialwatch.org/about-us