Posted on 03/30/2011 6:55:47 PM PDT by Nachum
No Worries as our Marines will soon be on the ground with SpecOps to help them out.
Our aircraft now cannot tell the differance between the Libian forces and the heavy Toyotas.
Why not just knock out all the fuel and water tankers and leave Q’s forces 600 miles from home and out of gas and water?
I’m sure the rebels don/t have tankers!
Wouldn’t help. The rebels clusterf*** caravan could never take advantage of it.
The obvious thing to do is, if we’re halfway serious, to repeat the winning formula that brought down the Taliban (initially). Special Forces teams with Air Force forward air controllers on the ground with the rebels targeting smart bombs onto Qaddafi’s assets. It worked before.
Am I on the side of Kadafi, or am I on the side of Obama and Al Qaeda?
To paraphase Mohammed Ali, “Got nothing against no Moamar Kadafi, no Moamar Kadafi ever called me a bitter clinger or an Infidel”.
Looks like Obama has bitten off one too big to swallow this time (Larry Lawrence notwithstanding). Quite a pickle he’s gotten himself (and us) into.
Muammar’s army may be fourth rate but they’re up against an armed mob. No contest.
Too late for The One to cut and run. He’s going to have to go all-in. If I was on InTrade I’d be betting that he finally breaks down and goes for the decapitation strike before this drags on much longer.
My prediction is that it will end similar to the PLO in Beirut in 1982. We will temporarily occupy Benghazi, and then evacuate the rebel army and any supporters into exile. This way Obama can claim he was successful in preventing a massacre. He will forget he ever said that Qadafhi had to go.
This Tar Baby is costing Obama polling points by the day. His Henry V speech was a joke and we’re not laughing. His astonishing incompetence has pissed off both sides of the aisle and he’s hemorrhaging popularity fast.
First he had the brass hats on the hill explaining why a no-fly zone was impossible.
Then he says Qaddafi’s got to go.
Then he orders bombing without consulting Congress or even saying anything for nine days while on his Rio junket with the girls.
Then he trots out various spokesflacks to twist themselves in knots talking about “kinetic military action”.
Then he gives the worst speech of his career.
Now the rebels are once more on the run.
The MSM is screwing itself into the ground trying to explain away his idiocies and evasions for him.
The longer this goes on the more of a laughingstock he becomes.
How does a world-historical Messiah get himself out of this one?
I do not believe that Obama has the sack to go all in.
He’s stuck in the tar pits. It’s too late to run away. Either he wins or he loses. There is no Third Way here. If he “loses” Libya he can forget about 2012. I’m sure Valerie Jarret knows this even if he doesn’t.
A cornered rat is capable of anything
Complain to human resources about discrimination?
He does not.
I don’t think he wanted to get involved at all.
But, Hillary grew a pair while Obama was partying in Brazil.
Now we have to deal with it.
Obama cannot vote present on this.
o boy, just tell that to the millions of free Iraqi women and to those that are no longer afraid to speak out. Our troops have done a wonderful job in Iraq and Saddam was also paying for the murder of Israelis. What are you talking about?
o boy, just tell that to the millions of free Iraqi women and to those that are no longer afraid to speak out. Our troops have done a wonderful job in Iraq and Saddam was also paying for the murder of Israelis. What are you talking about?
The psychology of others is always fascinating. Here is an article by a journalist traveling to report on a vacation island in Tunisia who decided to see the Libya border situation instead. Facinating observations on the change in people’s behavior without a dictator scripting all behavior. I had heard earlier that in Benghazi the people were keeping the streets cleaner and showing personal responsibility in other ways. Will be interesting to see how it plays out in all these countries if they can keep cler of a new dictator.
http://english.aljazeera.net/photo_galleries/middleeast/201132113193061217.html
Not the most reliable source you got there.
The Brits did not really need to divide anyone because the natives - in the form of rival kingdoms - had typically been fighting each other for resources and supremacy for centuries, resulting in deep hatreds that were the result of real atrocities. What the British rule did - unintentionally - was unite local elites who wanted political power. They discovered that only by coming together under a common banner, could they have any hope of getting the traditional spoils of political rule - prestige and money. It is in this manner that many betrayed their own people and condemned them to rule by figures from neighboring tribes or kingdoms that had previously massacred them before the advent of British rule. This was the real tragedy of decolonization - it placed oppressed peoples under the rule of their oppressors simply because they had been administered as a single geographical unit/province under European rule. The independent countries were simply empires covering many (pre-European rule) kingdoms, but without the impartiality of British rule. This is the source of many of the internal genocides and civil wars in former European colonies.
British victories were cheap because they pre-dated nationalism - peasants saw these wars are the sport of kings, totally unrelated their day-to-day existence. Once nationalism (pretty much an appeal to ethnic solidarity) got fired up, local political elites got access to unlimited manpower and made it much more expensive for the Brits to crush rebellions.
Note that British rule generally coincided with massive increases in native populations, thanks to improvements in infrastructure, sanitation, etc. This actually made the jobs of colonial administrators much more difficult, since it also increased the number of recruits available to join rebel armies. For instance, Singapore's population was 10,000 in 1824; by independence in 1965, it had risen to almost 2m people, a 200-fold increase. It's one thing to crush a rebellion among a population of 10K, and quite another to deal with 2m people.
Keeping the Libyan oil flowing to Europe will bring down the price of oil in the US, which will be good for our economy. Basic economics. The current run up in oil prices is all caused by speculators and oil ETFs, since there is plenty of gas available. Except for the fear factor, a disruption in 2% of world oil production should not cause a 10% increase in oil prices. Do you know whether Soros is involved in oil ETFs and in how large an amount?
I heard similar about their firing RPGs - use the highest notch on the sights to make the rocket fly farther or something. Didn’t work well with close targets.
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.