The Palin Doctrine??? My sides! 
Posted on 03/16/2011 2:02:35 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The call by the Arab League for Western military intervention in an Arab state — in this case asking that a UN “no-fly zone” be imposed over Libya – is not only without precedent but it puts in formal terms what Governor Palin stated three weeks ago should have been America’s response to the political and humanitarian crisis now unfolding there.
The former GOP vice presidential candidate was being interviewed on February 23rd on national television by Sean Hannity on a range of issues. On the Libya crisis, she proposed a no-fly-zone to protect the armed and un-armed opposition to the Qaddafi regime. Mrs. Palin’s formulation had been blogged about for nearly a week when it was echoed by the man who, before the Iraq war, had led the Iraq democratic movement in exile, Ahmed Chalabi.
A long-time foe of Saddam Hussein who has emerged as a leading figure in Iraq’s democratically elected legislature. Mr Chalabi recounted in the Wall Street Journal how President George H. W. Bush’s 1991 call for a popular uprising against Saddam had been heeded by the Iraqi people, only to have Saddam then murder some 30,000 of them from helicopter gunships while the Western world stood by.....
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
Did this actually happen to the tune of 30,000 people ? I don't remember hearing that.
I think that’s actually a low estimate.
Then please explain why you think a NFZ is the right position.
IMHO...
The U.S. should not be aiding or even commenting on the overthrow of a government unless we know exactly who the revolutionaries are and what their intent is, thereby enabling us to know if they would constitute a friend or foe.
Sarkozy wanting someone else to intervene is a big unknown to me, because I don’t know if he knows the id and intent of the revolutionaries and prefers dealing with them instead of qwadaffy, or he’s just generically supporting some vague concept of “freedom fighters” assuming the revolution is a good thing, or perhaps he has some reason specifically to want qwadaffy out, even though without knowing who the successors are that would also be a high risk move.
As Europe is Libya’s customer, perhaps they know who they want in there, but somehow I tend to think they don’t know what they’re getting into. The telltale sign of this is that they are not simply taking the action independently, they’re wanting someone else to do it. This leaves them free to ridicule “mistakes” in the future, as well as avoid political mess at home if they attempt to intervene and fail. Of course, anything more than a small operation could quickly become economically unfeasible. France does seem to be very tentative nowadays. It seems to me to be related to the insolvency of the U.S. government and the limitations it imposes on our ability to step in and play peacemaker.
Conservative candidates would be well advised to not assume that the opposite of Nobama is the correct decision, as tempting as that may seem. For the Nobama, this is probably a case of getting tired of foot-in-mouth syndrome and wanting to essentially “take a pitch” on this one. He appears to be keeping his communication to a minimum and keeping it just to generic blurbs, attempting to just ride out the next two years so relection won’t be eliminated by a huge, public, glaring mistake. They’re probably trying to figure out whether he will even be able to run based on some states wanting to see the original BC, which, of course, would also cause him to just bow out.
Sarah Palin is right and is a real leader. Imam Barak Husain Obama is a stupid coward and has disgraced the USA.
The Palin Doctrine??? My sides!
Despite the size of your font, the question should be....
Can we afford to NOT be the world enforcer anymore?
If you think the price we pay to defend freedom around the world is too high, you have little concept of the cost we would pay if we had not done so or no longer did so.
As opposed to the “Ron Paul Doctrine” which we should all take soooo seriously, right?
I am most emphatically not a supporter of Ron Paul’s isolationist crap.
=============================
Please explain exactly why you think a USA enforced NFZ in Libya is a good idea.
Who exactly are the rebels?
What exactly is their attitude toward the USA?
How would they govern?
Who is behind them?
What is their agenda, short/mid/long term?
How would a NFZ ground Libya's attack helicopters? (I'll help you with this one - it won't)
Why intervene in Libya as opposed to the multiple other civil wars or rebellions in the ME, Africa, Asia?
Can we afford not to be?
But they do not fly after dark or in the rain. And they seldom fly where anyone might return fire.
Yep, the Arab world could step up to the plate. The US has a jackass in charge and we are already used up.
Oh yeah, I heartily agree with you!
Who really cares? Would you rather our kids die for people who will turn on them after our guys secure a victory for them?
Can you show where any place we have intervened in the last 10 years that just loves America? Even after we shed blood for them?
You can’t, because it isn’t so.
All a No Fly Zone is, is neo con speak for nation building. So far that has been a dismal failure. We leave Iraq or Afghanistan, they go militant Islam. And everyone knows it.
No more, no less.
Direct hit!!!
Gaddafi is a terrorist responsible for the death of American citizens.
kosovo and Kurds Gerogia, Poland, Eastern Europe are several.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.