Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Obama’s Libya Speech In One Sentence

    Obama’s Libya Speech In One Sentence


    “Did you say Iran, sorry I didn’t hear you, what was that, we can’t dictate the terms of change for others, except when we do, and did, but only with a coalition, My Fellow Americans, Bush bad in Iraq, me good in Libya, because I did not declare war in that country, Libya.”

    Related Posts:
    SOTU Speech In One Sentence
    Obama’s Post-Election Press Conference In One Sentence
    Obama’s Gulf Speech In One Sentence

    Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
    Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
    Bookmark and Share


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    "Obama's endless "sitzkrieg" (I believe Paterico coined that one)"

    You give him entirely too much credit. The "sitzkrieg" or "Phoney War" was the period between the Nazis declaring war on France and their actual invasion. It stretched long enough to cause political problems in England.

    The Wizard of O: Pay no attention to that man behind the teleprompter!!

    Mark Halperin: But he's a genius !!!

    Maggie, I particularly wanted to address your comments. It seems you are being swayed by a false premise that Gdaffy needed to be taken down at this particular time.

    You mention the Lockerbie bombing and the sniper incident as an excuse for a dictator that, outside of his own borders, was pretty well neutralized. We have allowed Gdaffy to reign for years, in spite of his terrorist activities of the past. So I have to ask; why now?

    You mentioned 8,000 killed. But from all the news reports I have seen, and read, there were only about 100 rebels killed by Qdaffy's troops as of Sunday, week ago. And approx. 200 injured. Yet, in spite of the fact that it has now come to light that the administration KNEW that the rebels were probably the same tribal Islamists that had sent jihadists to kill American soldiers in Iraq, we are supporting them, preventing Qdaffy from taking out those radicals on his own. Why? They will only turn on the U.S., and the western world, in the end.

    This is like Egypt, where Obama supported the rebels, only for us to now watch the Muslim Brotherhood, the only really organized policital group in Egypt, position themselves to take over political control of Egypt. Have you not noticed that Egypt is no longer a news item in the MSM? Why would that be? I can tell you; Egypt is not working out the way the administration thought it would. It will become Iran on The Nile is short order, and that will not be good for the U.S., and will definately be a problem for Israel.

    You know the name of Enam el-Obaidi, but do you know the name of Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet? Do you know about The Black Spring of Cuba, a nation much closer to us? Castro has ruled as long as Qdaffy, yet I see no action on the part of this president to halt the humanitarian disaster that is Cuba. Where is the NAACP while black Cubans are thrown in prisons never to be seen again for the crime of being black? Where is LaRaza and LULAC, as they organize protest marches for illegal immigrants while Hispanics in Cuba are being put to death for daring to speak out against the proverty and cruelty that is the Cuban regime?

    So again I ask you, why Libya now? And why did the U.N. violate its own charter to agree to let France initiate a military action against Qdaffy? The Libyan situation is basically a civil war. Yet, in 1981 the U.N. chartered the "Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention and Interference in the Internal Affairs of States" which said:

    "No State or group of States has the right to intervene or interfere in any form or for any reason whatsoever in the internal and external affiars of other States."

    I am not willing to have my nation's military controlled by a Samatha Powers policy of R2P (look it up). Secretary Gates honestly pointed out that we have no strategic interest in Libya, so we are sending American forces to protect the interst of France, who never met an enemy they were not willing to surrender to. We are now in a "war for oil", oil that is sold to France and Great Britain, not us.

    There is no game plan. In Iraq, our mission was clear; take out Saddam. In Afghanistan, our mission was clear: destroy the Taliban. What is our mission in Libya, if not to kill Qdaffy? And yet, our president says that the assassination of Qdaffy is not a goal. Does he really think that he is so charismatic that he can convince Qdaffy to step down just because Obama wants him to?

    Libya, like Egypt, will not end well. A POTUS, who could not even made good and logical decisions on tiny Honduras, has expanded the Middle East war, and it will be Americans who bear the cost and shed the blood. Not France, not Great Britain, not the Arab League nations. Us.

    If you support Obama re: Libya and humanitarian relief, I have but one word for you: Darfur.


    I suggest you do some research on Libya and what has taken place.

    I was startled during the Egyptian "revolution" by something that caught my eye regarding Libya. I knew before the outbreak of violence that something was up.

    I have my own questions about the timing of the Libyan protests. Are they tied to Egypt, Bahrain, Syria, Yemen, Morocco and all of the other M.E. countries where there have been protests? My own answer is probably yes, and that bothers me a lot.

    What also bothers me is the picture of Che Guevera that I saw inside a vehicle driven by one of the "rebels". That gives me the chills.

    However, your figures are definitely wrong with regard to how many have been killed. In Misrata alone in one week more than 100 have been killed by the Daffy goons. More than 1000 have been injured as well.

    I have not heard an update on the numbers of the fighters that have been killed. There have been many deaths on both sides.

    The issue that was addressed by the U.N. was the threat made by Daffy Duck that there would be "NO MERCY" in Benghazi.

    Another thing that bothers me is that Daffy arranged for the mercenaries to come into Libya prior to any uprising. Those mercenaries are from other African countries such as Malia. In other words Daffy was anticipating an uprising.

    What you overlook is that Daffy was emboldened because of the weakness of Ødumbo. We might have thought that he was neutralized but recently, just prior to the outbreak of the protests Daffy was making new noises.

    Daffy was a sponsor of terrorism in the M.E. and how do you know that he has not been a sponsor of trouble in several African nations?

    Also, consider this: Daffy promised to get rid of his WMDs, but he did not get rid of all of them. In other words he did not keep his word on the subject. He cannot be trusted.

    The history of uprisings in Libya prior to the present one helps put the whole into perspective. Like I said, it goes back to the 1990s when there was an attempted coup, but in reality it goes back before then, because Daffy was in the habit of hunting down dissidents and killing them. The people in places like Benghazi have not forgotten.

    The death of the policewoman, a crime that was never solved by the way, came to the surface again in the past few weeks because Sidoni, who had worked for Daffy by spying on the students in London, was captured.

    I do not support Øbama on Libya, but I do support Sarkozy and David Cameron, as well as my own government.

    Other than that I agree the inconsistency speaks volumes.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend