August 22, 2011

"An ocean divides us, but we are joined in the basic human longing for freedom, for justice and for dignity."

"Your revolution is your own, and your sacrifices have been extraordinary.  Now, the Libya that you deserve is within your reach."

63 comments:

Beta Rube said...

This from the same group of clowns that "fully understand" our Chinese creditors one child policy.

What they know about human rights would fit on a postage stamp.

SteveR said...

one form of oppression goes out, another comes in

Hope and Change

JAL said...

What happened to the freedom fighters in Iran?

Syria?

Is Barack Obama going to liberate the Middle East and build all these fledgling democracies.

Based on sharia law?

Just wondering.

Maguro said...

The Libya they deserve, eh? Wonder what that'll look like.

traditionalguy said...

What joins Obama and the Rebels is the coveting of oil wealth.

The long delay in putting Libyan oil back on line is not over yet.

Let's see what Obama does to delay it further to assist his sugar daddy's investments in Brazilian off shore oil.

bagoh20 said...

The administration says we're leading from behind, because we don't need to to take credit for the successes.

1) When has anyone gotten "credit" for going to war lately?

2) It sure seems like some people are trying to take credit even before there is anything to take credit for.

3) If this goes bad, we will see the real reason for leading from behind. Didn't it used to be called cowardice?

Quaestor said...

From General Provisions Article (1), Libya Draft Constitutional Charpter for the Transitional Stage:
Islam is the Religion of the State and the principal source pf legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia).

Meet the new boss.

The Crack Emcee said...

It ain't over 'til it's over, and when it's over I'll say what I always say:

Congratulations, President Bush.

pbAndjFellowRepublican said...

This sort of sentiment is why I love America.

Sure we can (and should) nitpick and question our government. But, that can't (shouldn't) be all-encompassing, imho.

Quaestor said...

Bluehost reports your site down or not available, CrackMC

Quaestor said...

Something tells me the post-Gadhafi celebration is somewhat premature.

Seven Machos said...

What's wrong with you people? This is a great incipient moment!

Trad, this comment...

What joins Obama and the Rebels is the coveting of oil wealth.

...is particularly galling. You sound absolutely for all the world like a nutball Democrat yelling "No blood for ooooiiiillll!"

Give it a rest. Is there a possibility for terrible problems as these revolutions in North Africa unfold? Yes. Is there also the possibility of tremendous progress in the pursuit of happiness? Definitely.

The tale will be told by the statecraft Libya does, we do, and others do. But don't denigrate Obama when something good in the world happens and he helped bring it about.

One of the world's worst strongmen and facilitators of terror is about to lose power. Rejoice!

Geoff Matthews said...

Does anyone really think that the fighting has ended?
It isn't over. If nothing else, the rebels will start fighting with each other.

Seven Machos said...

Geoff -- No one has reported that the fighting has ended.

traditionalguy said...

Seven...What do Libyans do in Libya?

Their Revolution's ideal has been for the respect that a Democracy gives to men, but the six month war has been financed and won by that wonderful Capitalist virtue of entrepreneurs seeking a cut of the profits from oil extraction.

So should we wait to rejoice until the next War Lord gets the Monopoly fully under his control and lets oil pumping resume?

It has been nice to see that Cynthia McKinney and Louis Farrakhan lose their sugar daddy. That took some guts for Obama to do.

But a payoff for help relocating in safety with his 1/4 trillion dollars may yet be spread around by Gadaffy.

Seven Machos said...

the six month war has been financed and won by that wonderful Capitalist virtue of entrepreneurs seeking a cut of the profits from oil extraction

So our billion dollars we have spent in Libya is for entrepreneurs? Really?

Look, dude, you have to be consistent. Did Bush (and, of course, Cheney) invade Iraq for oil? If so, fine, you can make this silly argument that we are spending all this money for Exxon. You are wrong, but at least you are wrong coherently.

However, it's beyond ridiculous to argue that Obama -- Obama! -- is behind some plan to get oil.

Moreover, what exactly makes you think that the new Libyan regime will participate? And if they do, it adds to the world's oil supply, which means that if we buy from Libya, other countries and other American producers will sell to other countries, thus lowering the market price for all. Oil is the most fungible good ever produced. All of this was taught in Economics 101. Maybe you missed that week.

pbAndjFellowRepublican said...

I agree w/ Seven.

I don't think it'd hurt your con-cred to say things are going well in Libya.

[And then, if/when things go to hell in Libya you can come back and say that BHO F-ed up what could have been a great opportunity. But, now's the time to be less dour, and more pro American values and exceptionalism and so on. It's a winning strategy. [not to mention that it's the right thing to do]]

A. Shmendrik said...

Yeah, don't fork it up!

Seven Machos said...

I agree with PBJ.

Look, people, I remember when Clinton was president, and the economy was great and the economy was on fire. I remember feeling like all that was somehow bad news because it made Clinton look good.

But I grew up. I had kids. I realized that Clinton was a pretty good president precisely because of those things, and I realized that it doesn't matter who brings good into the world. What matters is the good.

Leaving aside those arguments, think about how foolish you look to Joe Voter when you criticize Obama for doing something that looks good, and is good. Just acknowledge that Obama has potentially done some solid work here, with the help of the most kick-ass military apparatus ever, and pound his sorry, failing, flailing ass on all the actually awful things he has done and continues to do.

Carol_Herman said...

Well, Libya's a small country. It's all of ten miles deep until you reach the sand. Which is impassible.

There are no coffee shops in Libya. People don't congregate. And, the population is something like 40-million people. While Egypt would love to overrun the borders and hit the oil fields.

When did Tripoli's apartment buildings get built? Oh, they're just concrete buildings. Built by the Soviets. Back in the "old days." The central boulevards are used as trash bins. There's never been a building boom. Or a casino. Even though the whole coast line is "ocean front." Libya belonged to the lunatic Q-Daffy. And, the 19 tribes complied.

If there's a change? More than likely the tribes will kill each other, first and foremost.

While the press can't leave the hotel. All of them are in flak jackets. Well fed. But they can't leave the hotel! Basically, the way the foreign press operates anywhere. And, all over.

Oh, and another thing. If you're a Libyan. YOU KNOW EVERYBODY!

Unlike most places. Where, when you turn a corner, you're among strangers.

Assad in Syria also remains in control.

Nope, for Mubarak. Because he's going out like the Shah.

Nor do I bank on the Libyans looking for culture. Heck, they've never even built schools!

So don't go and get all your expectations raised up.

Seven Machos said...

There are no coffee shops in Libya.

This is grossly untrue.

People don't congregate.

Maybe not when there's a war on, but they certainly do in normal circumstances.

You're obviously out of your league here, Carol. Stick to ladies wear.

Palladian said...

What, dearest Seven, has Obama done for Libya? How does he deserve more than perfunctory thanks for semi-involving us in an as-yet unknown outcome?

I think a lot of people are grossed out by his pure-politics approach to what may be a dangerous regional conflict, and the fact that the media will soon be digging up John Philip Sousa and reanimating him so that he can compose the Obama Military Victor March just in time for the re-election campaign.

Seven Machos said...

How does he deserve more than perfunctory thanks for semi-involving us in an as-yet unknown outcome?

That's pretty much all I'm giving, dude. What I feel like I'm fighting against here is an urge to castigate Obama for what's going on, whcih is dumb.

As far as elections, who knows what the future holds? I have read strong arguments that all this unrest is being handled poorly in a long-term way. Moreover, except for a few fuck-ups, Obama's foreign policy has been identical to Bush's, so I really have few complaints.

I'm confident that Obama will win or lose based on the economy.

chickenlittle said...

However, it's beyond ridiculous to argue that Obama -- Obama! -- is behind some plan to get oil.

If Obama were behind this to get oil this would not square with (for example) his DoE chief Steven Chu's stated crusade against petroleum energy.

I am pro-oil. Libya's oil traditionally has gone no further than French and Italian refineries. The French and Italians tax the hell out of refined petroleum to support their socialist ways. I don't think it hypocritical to applaud the resumption of the flow of oil to Europe while regretting that this will replenish EU coffers.

All the grandstanding about freedoms aside, what's gonna happen next between Europe and Libya is really just a model of what POTUS wants to happen here: grand socialism financed by carbon taxes.

Palladian said...

"That's pretty much all I'm giving, dude."

Oh, well, that's alright then.

Roger J. said...

I think the events in Libya can be viewed (and forgive the use of the term "reframed") at several levels. Seems to me 7M is taking a position that says the elimination of G-man in Libya is a good thing--and I can agree with that.

Chickedlittle IMO is taking a realpolitik postion: It was the French that involved us and I suspect it was to assure they continued to get Libyan oil. The europeans dragged Mr Obama into this action; we hardly led it for reasons of American exceptionalism.

Lastly, this thing is hardly over--with any luck Q man is gone, but what happens in the aftermath of a revolution is always unpredictable; we really dont know a lot at this point. Removing the Shah of Iran it seems to me didnt not result in a very good outcome for example.

We will have to see how American foreign policy responds to the events--and I have little faith in American foreign policy as is currently practiced.

Canuck said...

"One of the world's worst strongmen and facilitators of terror is about to lose power. Rejoice!"

I agree.

Of course things can go badly. A cynic would say that is the safe bet.

It's not always wise to be a cynic.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Based on his record so far, things don't seem to get better after Obama gets involved, foreign or domestically. At this point it's too soon to say whether or not getting rid of Qaddafi was a good thing.

Nora said...

"Now, the Libya that you deserve is within your reach."

How perfectly machiavellian. I don't think that Obama read The Prince, though.

Revenant said...

My hope is that this turns out to be one of those rare circumstances where Obama isn't utterly wrong.

edutcher said...

Forget for the moment that the Benghazi area is a prime recruiting ground for Al Qaeda, the Libya they deserve is almost certainly going to have its oil options cornered by Dr Evil now that the carbon options scam has fallen through.

rhhardin said...

Kissinger long ago: "This isn't Africa's century."

It's probably true for the next.

If you're evolving from the 8th century, modern weapons don't help things.

rhhardin said...

Justice and dignity means redistribution of income.

Modern economic fantasies don't help things either, though they seem to afflict mostly the West.

Africa depends more on thugism than marxism.

Writ Small said...

Agree with Canuck (and others)

A little cautious hope is in order. We helped rid the world of a dictator with minimum cost in dollars and American life. Given vast wealth and weak institutions in Libya, it could continue to be a bloddy mess. Those facts are not Obama's fault. Credit where credit due.

Sam Hall said...

I don't see where you can either praise or blame Obama. Basically, we have loaned some military force to the EU; they are running the show.

I would suggest that he be careful in taking credit. By this time next year, there may not even be one Libya, but a East Libya and a West Libya.

damikesc said...

A good result --- which seems exceedingly unlikely given where this happened (Egypt certainly isn't turning out too well) --- does not mitigate illegal means. Our actions violated our laws pretty blatantly.

AllenS said...

What happened in Iran, will happen in Libya. Islam is on the march.

Jon said...

Gaddafi had abandoned his nuke program and WMD, paid restitution for Pan Am, and was an ally against AQ. So then we bomb him, while leaving Assad untouched, as he carries out the very massacres we were supposedly bombing Gaddafi to prevent. What lesson will dictators learn from that?

phx said...

But don't denigrate Obama when something good in the world happens and he helped bring it about.

All of us can be uncompromisingly partisan (it feels good), or we can have integrity. We can't have both.

Which priority is most important?

deborah said...

Exactly, Jon. And then the hero's welcome to the PanAm bomber. What a clueless move by Obama. Maybe his overlords desire Middle East instability.

Phil 3:14 said...

agree with 7 et al, I'm glad Gaddafi is gone. That doesn't mean I agree with the intervention;that doesn't mean I believe democracy and justice will reign.

and again agreeing with 7, some of the comments are echoes of the standard liberal talking points re: Bush & Iraq .

Obviously, tribalism is not just a problem in the Middle EAST.

Paul said...

Lebanon.. Lebanon.. Lebanon..

Yes the Lebanese Civil War is about to become The Libya Civil War.

There is a power vacuum, one that Bush would not have allowed, and the factions, including terrorist, will fight. Oil, land, power, terrorist training facilities, WMD, etc...


War will come. All thanks to a stupid president who wanted to distract us from his awful domestic performance.

Be happy... you voted for him.

Christopher in MA said...

"An ocean divides us, but we are joined in the basic human longing for freedom, for justice and for dignity."

Yeah, right, you SCOAMF. When Dubya spoke like that, we was slandered as a wooly-headed nitwit living in fairyland - "we can't impose American values on tribal societies!" the left shrieked. But when Little Black Jesus uses his teleprompter to utter something that could have come straight from the mouth of Bush, suddenly he's the second coming of Pericles.

Good for the Libyans. Good that Q-Daffy may be gone. But spare me any worship of the One. I'd bet you a thousand dollars he can't even define "freedom" "justice" or "dignity."

Tank said...

There's no "good" side here.

On one side the 40 year brutal dictator.

The other, probably Islam, Sharia, and terrorist training grounds.

I don't know what the people of Libya deserve, but they're not likely to get anything good. Probably a lot more war.

damikesc said...

Saying this was like Iraq is not really a defense. Iraq was a bad idea that Bush pursued legally. Libya was a bad idea that Obama pursued illegally. War Powers Act, which he claims to support, clearly indicates he broke the law.

AJ Lynch said...

OT but has this blog re-named any other commenter besides PB&J? Who has embraced his new blog-given name. And PB&J is a way better user name than his old one.

AJ Lynch said...

On topic, I hate the rest of the world and could give two frigs about Libya but I do agree Prez Obama should get some credit here.

AllenS said...

The problem, AJ, is this: if obama started bombing 15 other countries to try and bring about regime change, would it be in our best interest? Surely, there are a lot of other regimes that are just as nasty as the present one in Libya, but should we actively try and eliminate their leaderships?

franglo said...

Is the conservative consensus that people just shouldn't be allowed to be muslim? That lands who weren't part of the judeo-christian tradition of jurisprudence should be brought under Christianity in order to draw up their governing documents? That Christianity is the only basis for law?

That's the only conclusion I can draw. And that is why I could never, never be an American conservative: they are religious crusaders and Christian fundamentalists at the core.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... On topic, I hate the rest of the world and could give two frigs about Libya but I do agree Prez Obama should get some credit here..."

For what? Last time I checked attacking countries that pose no threat or havent attacked us was bad.

AllenS said...

franglo,
Who on earth thinks that Libya should be ruled by Christianity?

LouisAntoine said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
franglo said...

Allen-- what other conclusion can be drawn from the ominous references to Sharia which obsess the right in this country? I am just wondering what the alternative should be in Muslim countries that want to base their laws in Sharia, since our own laws are based in judeo-christian tradition.

AJ Lynch said...

Hoosier/ AllenS:

I agree Obama was a bigtime waffler here but sometimes the ends do justify the means. Q-daffy is soon to be toast I hope and yes I know we are now spinning the wheel and hoping the arrow will land at Democracy and not at extremist Muslim headchopper or plain old standard Israel hater?

Triangle Man said...

Obama, finishing what Reagan started.

AllenS said...

franglo, you can draw any conclusion that you want. Would you like to live under Sharia law? What do you think living under Sharia law would be like for homos, women, people of other denominations? Would you accept principles that they embrace? Name the countries that you think would be better off under Islamic rule. Yours?

phx said...

Even if democratic moderates are still standing in MENA countries after the dust settles, they will still be hostile to Israel.

If a more democratic MENA starts to take root and spread Israel will need to hire a new image consultant and learn some new tricks.

Calypso Facto said...

I think freedom, justice, and dignity for a country could be summed up as "sovereignty".

President Obama completely ignored this concept of self-determination when he chose to participate in the attack on Libya and then illegally maintain US support of the effort in violation of our own War Powers act.

To see the press now want to crown Obama with laurels for a war he claimed we weren't in is particularly galling. I'll be happy for the Libyans if the revolution we facilitated turns out to be a good thing for them, but I'm also leery that any success will set a bad example for justifying future US (and specifically, Congressionally unauthorized) meddling in global civil wars.

wv: sycrusi. The Syracuse School for Reading Disorders

Triangle Man said...

For what? Last time I checked attacking countries that pose no threat or havent attacked us was bad.

How droll.

damikesc said...

Saying sharia is bad doesn't mean let's let a Christian theocracy run loose. You don't seem to get there is a range from options aside from the worst possible option.

Does saying "driving drunk is bad" also mean that I want alcohol to be banned?

AllenS said...

damikesc said...
Saying sharia is bad doesn't mean let's let a Christian theocracy run loose. You don't seem to get there is a range from options aside from the worst possible option.

Seriously? Do you really think that a Christian theocracy will take over in Libya?

Christopher in MA said...

Allen, I think damikesc was responding to franglo's nonsense about Christian fundamentalists.

AllenS said...

Well, allrighty then.