The Obama Doctrine: Libya Is What A World Without U.S. Leadership Looks Like.

Wall St. J ^ | March 12, 2011

[Diogenesis]

Obama's Two Degrees of Separation from Farrakhan and Gaddafi
"It was no accident that terrorist President Gaddafi
of Libya referred incessantly to Obama as his son"

"Obama's ties to Libya, Gaddafi, conspiracy exposed,
Gaddafi financed Farrakhan, Nation of Islam....
the truth about why Obama’s was silent for so long
about the unrest in Libya, (especially in comparison to Egypt)
and his kid-glove treatment of Gaddafi is exposed. "

"Connecting the dots of Obama’s actions "

"..why President Obama has been mum on the subject of Libya
Obama's spiritual leader, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, has been tied to Gaddafi. "

[Cicero]

Well, I hate to say it, but the biggest mess so far is Egypt. That’s the one that Obama managed to turn into a revolutionary Nazi/Muslim train heading down the tracks.

We wouldn’t be having all this trouble in Libya if Obama hadn’t engineered the coup in Egypt and helped force Mubarak to step down. Now the Muslim Brotherhood is running wild.

[nascarnation]

I still think Baraq is holding off on picking a winner in Libya until he can evaluate which side will contribute most to his 2012 campaign.

[SandRat]

Well ... he sure hasn’t provided any.

[bill1952]

They bombed us with tanks, airplanes, missiles coming from every direction. . . .

Well, thats what war is when you go off half cocked.

We need international support, at least a no-fly zone.

Yeah, well, we didn't goad you into this "adventure."

Why is the world not supporting us?"

Because the world really does not see any need to do that. - Why should we spend blood & wealth for you?

[lmr]

I’ve seen many isolationist Paleo-Cons here on Free Republic that believe it’s ‘best’ if we step aside and let these ‘Animals’ cut each other throats. After all, they ‘Aren’t ready for Democracy’ and as ‘barbarians’ they ‘deserve to die.’ We ‘shouldn’t waste American blood’ (Even though no one has suggested invasion or occupation.)

Yeah, there are some people like that here, and they call themselves ‘Freepers.’

[lmr]

Why should we spend blood & wealth for you?

You are a perfect example of the type of 'person' I was talking about in Post#7.

[hinckley buzzard]

Why is the world not supporting us?" —Libyan rebel Mahmoud Abdel Hamid, March 10, 2011,

Umm...maybe because you are a moslem dirtbag just like the other moslem dirtbag? Hmm?

[Pearls Before Swine]

I’ve seen many isolationist Paleo-Cons here on Free Republic that believe it’s ‘best’ if we step aside and let these ‘Animals’ cut each other throats. After all, they ‘Aren’t ready for Democracy’....

Islamic gratitude is very short-lived. I remember that we helped the Taliban in Afghanistan... and they hosted Al-Qaeda. I remember how much the Muslims loved us for taking the lead against the Serbians with respect to Bosnia. I remember Muslim love from Kosovo. I remember Iraqis turning on us just a few months after we freed them from Saddam. I remember Palestinians ululating and passing out candy in the streets on 9/11.

Sure, Daffy is a monster, and I hope he loses. I'd support humanitarian aid at the borders, but I would not support direct air actions. Like I said, he is awful, but the ones who replace him will hate us despite any help we give. We're kaffirs, and gratitude of any than a most fleeting sort is evidently not a prime virtue of the Ummah.

Count me in the group you've named.

[MrEdd]

Sure, Daffy is a monster, and I hope he loses.

Both sides are warring monsters and I have zero problem with their war stretching out across decades.

I am okay with humanitarian aid to those who flee the country, or for civilians after the war so long as it is done strictly by private organizations and not one cent is raised through taxation.

[Carley]

They were in the streets cheering the return of the Pan Am 103 bomber.

Now they want our military lives to be jeopardized for them?

[lmr]

Umm...maybe because you are a moslem dirtbag just like the other moslem dirtbag? Hmm?

Qadaffi is a 'Muslim Dirtbag' too and a far more ruthless one. I happen to think that if we aren't going to assist then we should at least not send signals that we want the murderous dictator to win. It's a disgrace when we have the director of national intelligence declaring before the Senate Armed Services Committee, in a chilling example of self-fulfilling prophecy, that “over the longer term Qaddafi will prevail.” while Secretary Gates basically cops-out and says that a no-fly zone is logistically impossible. Our apathy is shameful and that we have to lie about it is repugnant. This isn't America. We've always stuck up for those clamoring for freedom. Why not just say we don't want to offend 'Arab Academia' and 'Paultards', it would be more honest.

[Salvavida]

And count me too. The amnesia is staggering. As I've posted before, the Libyan society isn't clean, much less the government. They always had the ability to protest, and they were mute when an agent for the Libyan state MURDERED our citizens in the most horrific way. Crickets from the Libyan people. Then they openly cheered and celebrated when that agent was repatriated on humanitarian reasons. Now all of a sudden, they want our military power in order to get a perceived better life, out of a prison of a culture they created themselves. Isn't that rich? God doesn't bless unjust societies. And none of them are worth the blood of one U.S. Marine private.

[lmr]

What’s really shameful about Obama isn’t necessarily that he’s only not going to assist but that people in his administration are saying Qadaffi is going to win. It’s almost like that’s the desired outcome. Disgusting. If anyone here supports that, they should be ashamed to call themselves Freepers.

[Zhang Fei]

I’ve seen many isolationist Paleo-Cons here on Free Republic that believe it’s ‘best’ if we step aside and let these ‘Animals’ cut each other throats. After all, they ‘Aren’t ready for Democracy’ and as ‘barbarians’ they ‘deserve to die.’ We ‘shouldn’t waste American blood’ (Even though no one has suggested invasion or occupation.)

We have spent $1T in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last decade. Compare that to Desert Storm, which cost us nothing, thanks to massive Saudi ($40B), Kuwaiti ($10B) and Japanese ($10B) subsidies. I think you need to stop dusting off the isolationist label. A country with a supremacist ideology and territorial ambitions comparable to Nazi Germany's has emerged in the Western Pacific. That country is China. For us to fritter our limited resources away fighting and nation-building in Muslim countries whose population have hated the non-Muslim world's guts (far more than their existing leadership, which tends to be moderate) since Islam came to being is an exercise in futility. We have bigger fish to fry. The colossus in the Far East is quietly building its forces in preparation for the coming struggle over the first and second island chains. It is time to set priorities.

[Zhang Fei]

It's a disgrace when we have the director of national intelligence declaring before the Senate Armed Services Committee, in a chilling example of self-fulfilling prophecy, that “over the longer term Qaddafi will prevail.”

That's just silly. He was asked for his opinion before a congressional committee, and he gave that opinion. Would you rather he lied?

Pansy Graham asked him about mortal threats to the US and he replied that they were China and Russia, on account of their large nuclear arsenals (and loose official rhetoric about the use of nukes against the US). Graham wanted Clapper fired for telling the truth. He wanted Clapper to say that North Korea and Iran were the biggest threats. Carl Levin (D) and Joe Manchin (D) also got in a few digs at Clapper. What planet are these senators living on?

[Pearls Before Swine]

What’s really shameful about Obama isn’t necessarily that he’s only not going to assist but that people in his administration are saying Qadaffi is going to win. It’s almost like that’s the desired outcome. Disgusting

I'm with you there. Obama doesn't care about anything except himself, politics, blacks, Marxism, and Islam, in that approximate order.

That makes it easy to see why he would immediately take a position against Mubarak and rethink it, and also why he'd have a hard time deciding which way to go on Qadaffi.

[lmr]

We have bigger fish to fry.

What a simplistic way you have of looking at things. If you can't see that the geopolitical situation is way more complicated than that, I can't help you.

[lmr]

He was asked for his opinion before a congressional committee, and he gave that opinion. Would you rather he lied?

Obama wants Qadaffi to win so we don't look like hypocrites when the House of Saud starts running over it's people with tanks. That's the real endgame here.