Posted on 05/29/2011 9:44:12 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
Sen. John McCain on Sunday said Libyan civilians are dying in large part because the Obama administration has refused to commit the full weight of the nation’s military to the fight to overthrow strongman Col. Moammar Gadhafi.
“This thing could have been over a long time ago,” Mr. McCain, an Arizona Republican who was the party’s 2008 presidential nominee, said on “Fox News Sunday.”
(snip)
A quicker end to the fighting, which must include the removal of Col. Gadhafi from power, Mr. McCain said, would make it less likely that terrorists would gain a foothold in Libya.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
This part is certainly true. If regime change was the goal, not this R2P load of bull, it could've been over long ago.
If it's not the goal, keep out of Gaddafi's way and let him squash the insurrection.
Seriously, John McCain, we have NO business involved in Libya's affairs. None. Zero. No boots. No air strikes. No military advisors. No arms.
Zonies are responsible for reelecting this RINO AGAIN!!!
He could have prevented the Obama debacle but TRYING TO WIN!
He could have requested proof of eligibility.
He could have pointed out that BeHO and the Dims discussed stealing the 401Ks October 22 and 23 2008... but he did not.
Last election he became a border hawk.... AFTER sponsoring an amnesty bill with Teddy Kennedy just 2 years before.
His daughter is a full blown left wing liberal politician wannabe.
PAY ATTENTION PEOPLE!!!
Sound like another war, juan was out of the loop on that one as well.
Did Darth Resident alter the deal again?
Will you ever tire of selling yourself and country for a senate seat??? Doesn't appear so.
I cannot understand why we as a nation seem compelled to engage in undeclared wars halfway round the planet and at the same time do not intervene in the affairs of oppressive regimes in our own neighborhood. Venezuela and Cuba come to mind.
The founders put the requirement for a formal declaration of war by Congress in the Constitution for a very specific reason — to prevent the rise of the imperial presidency we’ve experienced since WWII. Over 100,000 American lives have been lost since WWII, and untold trillions of dollars of US taxpayer money spent, in lengthy undeclared wars which did not advance our strategic interests.
We can no longer afford to be the world’s policeman trying to bring democracy to areas of the planet where the cultural and economic environment is not favorable to representative government. We have enough problems at home. It is long past time for us to pack up, bring our soldiers and weapons home. Let the rest of the world duke it out.
In Asia we might actually find we benefit from India, Pakistan, Iran, and Vietnam growing their military strength to counter the China threat instead of depending on the US military. It is very possible European outlook on the world would be very different had European taxpayers covered the cost of defending themselves from Russia during the post WWII era instead of getting a free ride from the US taxpayer. The situation in the Middle East today would almost certainly be better had Sadaam been left in power in Iraq to counter Iran.
In their writings the founding fathers warned their generation and future generation about the follies and dangers of “foreign adventures”. If our experience over the past 100 years has not taught us a painful lesson, perhaps the impending financial collapse of our currency and economy will end the foolishness.
I am not a flaming leftist or pacifist. I am however a conservative who believes in the rule of law and interpreting the Constitution as written. If Congress declares a war after careful deliberation, I will support it. If the President invades foreign nations without obtaining Congressional approval within 60 days, I oppose it. This has nothing to do with supporting our troops.
If true, we would have something in common with the Libyans. Obama's lack of commitment to America is hurting us too.
The question Palin supporters don’t want asked.
After Vietnam we said we would never allow this to happen again.
Yet, we are still in Afghanistan after 10 years.
Libyans wanting to kill each other hurts Libyans.
Jeez, shut this old man up....he’s almost as worse as Obama. I can’t tell at times.
There are two native elements that might be capable of running a government in eastern Libya: The Sanussiya Sufi brotherhood or the Muslim Brotherhood and its Islamist allies. The Sanussi, which supported the deposed King Idris, seem a very weak reed. The Muslim Brotherhood was persecuted by Qaddafi throughout his tenure, but seems to be trying to rebuild. Unfortunately, I can find no good reporting on eastern Libya, and just who it is and what rebel element NATO supports seems an open question.
McCain is such a moron. What does he want, boots on the ground. We are committed in two wars and now he wants a third?
The man must be eating lead paintchips or washes his hands in Mercury.
This from the jackwagon that does not believe the War Powers Act is a law.
FUJMc.
well you seem to know much greater detail than me!!!
but the US Government’s own report on the Islamist fighters going to Afghanistan was pretty convincing to me.
http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2011/03/17/libyan-rebellion-has-radical-islamist-fervor-benghazi-link-islamic-militancyus-milit
Libyan rebellion has radical Islamist fervor: Benghazi link to Islamic militancy: U.S. Military Document Reveals
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/263150/re-qaddafi-was-right-mark-steyn
Re: Qaddafi Was Right? March 26, 2011 By Mark Steyn
http://libyarevolt.wordpress.com/2011/03/07/wikileaks-confirmed-al-quaeda-gets-hold-on-eastern-libya/
WikiLeaks confirmed: Al-Quaeda gets hold on eastern Libya!
...bottom line, i don’t think bombing Quadafi is in the US interest. but it does help the Islamists “arab spring”, from Tunisia to Yemen...
and Obama reportedly met with the M.B. 2 months before Mubarak was ousted. And now Obama supports funding the “arab spring” with billions.
and i think him and Samantha Powers, are itching to give the “Libyan” treatment to Israel. i think it all fits, especially when Powers basically wrote that long ago in her report about “humanitarian interventions”.
I agree with you 100%. The only war since WW2 that was justified is the invasion of Afghanistan. Now that Osama Bin Laden is dead, we need to immediately withdraw our troops. Effective by the end of this year.
If NATO is arming the LIFG — actually or through stupidity — then all bets are off. Tangentially, I have no evidence but I feel sure that the Egyptian Islamists must be supporting and arming the LIFG actives in Libya.
The reason that I would tie the Muslim Brotherhood to the LIFG is that shortly after its creation the Brotherhood created a fighting group: It was forced to as its younger members became more and more radicalized. That event caused nothing but decades of trouble in Egypt. Today, even though the world-wide Muslim Brotherhood leadership that resides in Egypt can publicly deplore terrorism, it will not jettison its more radical Islamist partners such as the Egypt Islamic Jihad, the LIFG, the Jamaat al-Islamiya, the fighting elements within Hamas, etc. Thus, it now seems increasingly clear that an LIFG victory in eastern Libya would presage a Muslim Brotherhood government for that region. More depressing by far, it doesn’t appear as though NATO has an alternative.
You have no idea how many people agree with this - liberals + conservatives - notice I didn't say Democrats and Republicans. If someone who we could believe would run on this platform I think it would be a landslide. Wars have bankrupted many a nation.
Their excuses were/are infantile.
As a matter of hindsight, I would think the first Iraq war was just as essential in our national interest. Saddam had taken Kuwait and there was every indication that he was also going to invade Saudi which would have put him in control of 60% of the world’s oil supply and created global economic havoc. I suspect that is why Bush Sr was able to build a wide coalition among developed nations.In fact,the coalition did finance a large part of our cost of the first Iraq war
I will say that you are pretty well-reasoned. When did Qadaffi actually bother invading and occupying our allies? When did Qadaffi bother using nerve gas on massive civilian populations? Since when was Qadaffi not open about his possessing WMDs? Funny thing is, all those questions would have been a yes for Saddam Hussein, and a no for Qadaffi. I do agree very well that Qadaffi hasn’t really been much of an aggressor to other nations. As far as I am concerned, radicalism got a defibrilator applied to it through what is going on in Libya right now. All I can surmise is that our president is either stubborn or a pawn of his Secretary of State, which, in case you didn’t notice, his plays resemble Slick Willie Clinton’s a great deal (rudeness to foreign national leaders, bombing nations without “feet on the ground”, picking various conflicts to take a role in, etc.)
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.