Sarah Palin: Here’s to Libya’s Freedom

Sarah Palin Facebook ^ | Tuesday February 22, 2011 | Sarah Palin

[Nickname]

He’s busy crafting a strategy for blaming skyrocketing fuel prices on “corporate greed” and nationalizing domestic energy production.

[reasonisfaith]

Nobody’s doing any “congratulating.” Yet you repeat the word as though you want to perpetuate a lie.

Palin is speaking out against a dictator shooting down hundreds of his own people.

Doing this while not worrying how it might affect her politically down the road is more evidence that she knows when to do what’s right, and more reason why she needs to be our next President.

[Robert Drobot]

"When it comes to Libya, neither side is worthy of our accolades. Yes the guy is a brutal anti-US tyrant. He was also an isolated buffoon, grinding out his time on this planet in relative obscurity.
"Is the Iranian model being implemented in Libya, and tied at the hip with other states that are also tied at the hip with Iran going to be better for America, Europe, and the planet in general?
"HELL NO!
"In situations like this, it is best to keep one’s yap shut and let the locals destroy each other in relative silence. This does not end well. Congratulating anyone at this point is only going to provide the powder to blow up in your face later on.
"Someone once said, “Silence is bliss.” In this instance, they would have been a sage."

"Silence is golden" ~~ "Ignorance is bliss"

Silence is golden : A proverbial saying, often used in circumstances where it is thought that saying nothing is preferable to speaking. As with many proverbs, the origin of this phrase is obscured by the mists of time. There are reports of versions of it dating back to Ancient Egypt. The first example of it in English is from the poet Thomas Carlyle, who translated the phrase from German in Sartor Resartus [1831].

[Louis Foxwell]

I did not expect to weigh in on this thread. The number of isolationists who have exposed themselves suckered me in. I will grant that there is something more than simply anti Palin sentiments playing out here.
Xenophobia strikes a people who are overwhelmed by conditions in the world and wish only to be left alone. Sadly their attempts to isolate themselves from their worse fears always brings that which they fear to their doorstep.
Sarah is an intuitive politician. Her sentiments are built on a strong Christian foundation. She can be relied on to do and say what is most appropriate from a genuinely American point of view. She understands that this nation was founded on a belief in God and a reliance on His providence. This is not to say that she is hide bound or dogmatic. She is practical and willing to change her position when circumstances require it or when she is demonstrably wrong.
Doing nothing in the (near, sic) ME is not an option for the US given ours and our ally Israel’s interests. Obama has amply demonstrated that he has no time for Israel and is vitally interested in promoting the interests of those seeking a Caliphate rule over the ME. His comments and actions have supported every effort of Iran and the MB to destabilize our allies and bring chaos to the ME.
Surely a voice that expresses uniquely US sentiments ought to be welcome in these times, the misogynist ravings of sexually oppressed males and jealosies of catty females notwithstanding.
Sarah? Some see only a pretty face. Others see a mind and heart in harmony with the ideals that gave us a free nation.

[unseen1]

good point

[NeoCaveman]

I’m disappointed.

It seems Sarah is going down the path of Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard, which is bankrupting our nation messing in the affairs of other nations.

It’s both an electoral and fiscal loser of a policy.

[unseen1]

agreed. We can either shape events or have events shape us.

[unseen1]

It is also a good way to avoid ww3 but I guess you don’t care about that little problem.....

[NeoCaveman]

It is also a good way to avoid ww3 but I guess you don’t care about that little problem.....

Foreign entanglements are what get you into World Wars.

[BillM]

“How would you have liked it if she had congratulated the youth who topped the Shah’s government in Iran, forgetting about the hostage aspect of it for this discussion?”

Sarah Palin, Mother and private citizen of the United States was about 10 years old when the Shah was toppled. You reach a little too far to spew your negative unhinged fantasies

[unseen1]

That is crazy. Before both WW1 and WW2 the USA was isolationist. Study history please....Wislon ran for reelection on the slogan “He kept us out of War” then was pulled into WW1 no matter what he wanted. After WW1 American congress would not approve of the league of nations nor ratify the Treaty of Versailles because views like yours....we cut our military withdrew from the world. which allowed madmen like Hitler, Toto, and Mussolini to grow unchecked.....

The Crash of 1929 made the country even more inward looking...The protectionism bills passed during that time prolonged the depression. While other countries armed themselves and madman grew in power the USA did nothing. Our foreign holdings taken at the turn of the century like the Philippines was understaffed, our navy was forgotten.

We were ill prepared for WW2 and could not project power around the world to stop it form starting......

For the last 70 years American’s engagement in the world has stopped another world war from starting. The wars have been brief and local. Do you think without the USA and NATO the USSR would be gone form the face of the world?

[NeoCaveman]

Wilson got us into WW1 to bail out Great Britian right after the bastard lied through an election about keeping us out.

Versailles was a travesty. The League of Nations was a joke just as is the UN.

Besides, we are broke.

Bankrupted by empire-like overreach, like Spain and France and Britian before us. History keeps repreating

[unseen1]

Palin would never have congratulate the fall of the Shah's government. She unlike many on this thread understands the difference between American’s allies and their enemies.....

[NeoCaveman]

Do you think without the USA and NATO the USSR would be gone form the face of the world?

The Wall fell in 1989 and yet NATO is still around.

That's part of the problem, like any government program it outlives its problem.

[unseen1]

Frist we are not broke. We have a cash flow problem because our leaders refuse to tap into our assets. Energy production being one of the biggest. Economic growth will go a long way to reducing our Debt and the best way to get that economic growth is to tap into our energy assets. We are also having a cash flow problem because of overregulation and over taxation.

The League of Nations and Versailles would hav ebeen better if the USa was a part of it no? Our failure to engage in world affairs allowed others to write and make both. we and the world were shaped by the will of others because we failed to take the responsibility for our own destiny and failed to take responsibility for world events....

Our debt has little to do with our “empire” it has everything to do with our lack of politcal leadership and internal policies.

[unseen1]

Yeah because we should immediately do away with success. NATO has helped avoid another European War. That in and of itself is reason enough to continue the alliance.

[NeoCaveman]

You keep mentioning avoiding war:

Like Korea, Viet Nam, Serbia/Kosovo, Gulf War 1, Gulf War 2, Afghanistan, and I’m sure I’m missing a few.

Some success their avoiding war.

[unseen1]

All of those wars don't add up to a month of WW2 lost and dead. I guess you have problems with understand differing degrees. the USA lost 12,000 on Okinawa alone. with another 26,000 wounded. Japan lost 100,000+ soldiers and more than 100,000 civilians... that was one battle. the firebombing of Dresden cost 80,000 people their lives in one night. the atomic bombs dropped on Japan caused 100,000’s of lives lost in a matter of minutes.

All of those wars you mention were local affairs and while some of them were bloody they did not spread and the war lost was in thousands of Us soldiers instead of the 100,000 ‘s........

Your way leads to bigger more deadly wars. It is a proven historical fact. The world will fill vacuums in power. If we do not lead others will and those others will more than likely not have peaceful intentions....or do you think this one time in the history of mankind it would be different?

[DoughtyOne]

I agree that Obama is a write-off. I’m not convinced going into Libya would prove productive. We’ve seen from Iraq what the first few years of a takeover can look like. We also have Magadishu as a reference. While the populace in Libya isn’t as armed (I don’t think) and there aren’t war-lords on every block striving for control, it could still get very ugly if the people of Libya rejected our help.

If we went in, we’d have to stay for years, so that a stable government could be formed. Then the locals would probably think we had hand-picked someone, and be motivated to reject them too.

We have to remember also that these are the same people who partied in the streets every time the Gadfly did something anti-US too.

I’m not convinced sending out troops in would be a good idea.

[DoughtyOne]

Thank you DixieChick2000. Take care...