Is Libya a victory for Obama?

[Hot Mega]

(Title pulled from news article....)

"We got" Gadhafi? I'll pose the same question when I was awakened by some ex gf bellowing about saying 'we got' Saddam....

My question, what did he do (to US)?

Anywho...

What's next in Libya key to US politics, economy

WASHINGTON (AP) — The dramatic advance of Libyan rebels over the forces of longtime strongman Moammar Gadhafi offers vindication, at least for now, for President Barack Obama's decision to refrain from using U.S. troops on Libyan soil and to let NATO take the lead. But confusion Tuesday over the extent of rebel progress illustrated the uncertain path to stability and the hazards that still face the White House.

How Libya moves away from the current turmoil will present the next challenge for Obama and could determine how the public views not only his foreign policy, but in some measure the U.S. economy as well.

http://news.yahoo.com/whats-next-libya-key-us-politics-economy-070156502.html

 

[titsrock]

No, it's only a victory over the clowns who thought we outta launch F-16s and bomb Libya.

I don't think we should or will have a hand in Libya's transition. Gadhafi was a villain back in the 80s, but he has been a harmless despot for the past 15 years...:dunno:

I think the collapse of Bank of America could actually harm Obama more....fwiw

 

[emceeemcee]

good guys help topple evil dictator is an easy story to sell to a gullible public so I don't see how it won't be another freedom feather in his cap, even though there might be some rumblings about the cost.


It's obviously one of the most useful things to have in your pocket as an American politician. Anybody who questions your motives is pro-Gaddafi, pro-Terrorist, pro-dictator, anti-Freedom blah blah etc.


Obviously it was a tremendously stupid thing to do given that Gaddafi served US interests quite well with his willingness to persue AQ in one of the most islamic countries in the region, but he muttered the N word so he had to go.......

 

[busenbust]

no. neither was bin Laden. the economy -- stupid.

...in fact, i see Libya as even more trouble brewing -- just like Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan.


yep, the economy -- stupid .

 

[sallyfields]

No as now the country will split up in to three regions again be totally tribal like it use to be and names like Somalia will spring to mind, there will be a blood bath.

So If you think that's a victory bearing in mind he said after 90 days the 90 day rule did not apply as us troops were not involved in combat ops, hows that any kind of victory, victory of what, not getting involved and wasting money and help set up a state were only blood will follow was such a shame when the king died and his asshole nephew took over so in 69 funny enough august Gadhafi on second try took over the country a totally bloodless affair but sure you it wont be now. PS I was born in Libya in 67 to American parents. so no not a Victory

 

[ragincaucasian]

1 out of 6 ain't bad i guess
(iraq, afghanistan, pakistan, yemen, libya, somalia......at least the other guy only gave us two unsustainable unwinnable wars)

but then you're not going to get a pro-west regime when Khadafi is replaced, anyway

 

[busenbust]

1 out of 6 ain't bad i guess
(iraq, afghanistan, pakistan, yemen, libya, somalia......at least the other guy only gave us two unsustainable unwinnable wars)

but then you're not going to get a pro-west regime when Khadafi is replaced, anyway

:goodpost: yep ! one big fucking awful mess.

 

[tartanterrier]

Nope because he had sweet fuck all to do with it

 

[ragincaucasian]

if you are more than just a cheerleader....


http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/08/22/libya/index.html

 

[Hot Mega]

no. neither was bin Laden. the economy -- stupid.

...in fact, i see Libya as even more trouble brewing -- just like Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan.


yep, the economy -- stupid .

Do you think we would be 'greeted as liberators' now in Libya? Not that I ever agreed with this incursion but at least Obama can lay claim to the fact that his incursion took a fraction of the time Bush's took and we barely broke a fingernail doing it.:dunno:

 

[busenbust]

Do you think we would be 'greeted as liberators' now in Libya? Not that I ever agreed with this incursion but at least Obama can lay claim to the fact that his took a fraction of the time Bush's took and we barely broke a fingernail doing it.:dunno:

perhaps momentarily yes -- but thereafter, no. we have seen this movie before : Iraq . :my2cents: :2 cents:

 

[emceeemcee]

Do you think we would be 'greeted as liberators' now in Libya?

No, at least not in the East:

As NATO and its backers contemplate their End Game they may want to consider some excerpts from the Libyan Tribal Council’s manifesto issued on July 26. Speaking for Libya’s 2000 tribes, the Council issued a Proclamation signed by scores of tribal leaders from eastern Libya.

“By this letter to the extraordinary African Summit, convening in Addis Ababa, the notables of the Eastern tribes of the Great Jamahiriya confirm their complete rejection of what is called the Transitional Council in Benghazi which hasn't been nominated nor elected by Tribal representatives but rather imposed by NATO.”

"What is called the Transitional Council in Benghazi was imposed by NATO on us and we completely reject it. Is it democracy to impose people with armed power on the people of Benghazi, many of whose leaders are not even Libyan or from Libyan tribes but come from Tunisia and other countries.”

…

“The Trial Council assures its continuing cooperation with the African Union in its suggestions aimed at helping to prevent the aggression on the Libyan people”.…

“The Tribal Council condemns the crusader aggression on the Great Jamahiriya executed by the NATO and the Arabic regressive forces which is a grave threat to Libyan civilians as it continues to kill them as NATO bombs civilian targets.”…

“We do not and will not accept any authority other than the authority that we chose with our free will which is the People’s Congress and Peoples Committees, and the popular social leadership, and will oppose with all available means, the NATO rebels and their slaughter, violence and maiming of cadavers. We intend to oppose with all the means available to us the NATO crusader aggressors and their appointed lackeys”.

According to one representative of the Libyan Supreme Tribal Council, “The tribes of Libya have until today not fully joined in repelling the NATO aggressors. As we do, we serve notice to NATO that we shall not desist until they have left our country and we will ensure that they never return.”

http://www.counterpunch.org/lamb08022011.html

 

[Hot Mega]

perhaps momentarily yes -- but thereafter, no. we have seen this movie before : Iraq . :my2cents: :2 cents:

My :2 cents: says the difference is the WEst aren't in there for them to play target practice againt US.

Do you think that will make a difference?:o

No, at least not in the East:

That's fine...uh, but who are they going to be fighting. We have no fighting, ground forces there.:dunno:

 

[busenbust]

My :2 cents: says the difference is the WEst aren't in there for them to play target practice againt US.

Do you think that will make a difference?:o

multiple outcomes there --- but in the long run I expect this to attract even more fanatics/terrorists. don't like to say it - but it's true.

 

[Hot Mega]

multiple outcomes there --- but in the long run I expect this to attract even more fanatics/terrorists. don't like to say it - but it's true.

To fight against whom in Libya? If a ragtag bunch wants to go into Libya and fight the team that just took out the g'ment's team there...I only have one thing to say...good luck and it's not our prob..

 

[Hot Mega]

Interesting pic...if it the text in the picture says what it looks to say...'..I have a dream'? facepalm: Where is U when you need him...)

 

[ragincaucasian]

economy's in the shitter
one Trident missle cost? $66,000,000

how many of those did the US lob at Libya over the summer?
what was the return on our investment?

 

[emceeemcee]

That's fine...uh, but who are they going to be fighting. We have no fighting, ground forces there.:dunno:

The air support, weapons, equipment and cash wasn't free. Price: one shiny new base to add to the empire.



There has been US/Euro troops on the ground since this thing kicked off.

 

[lurkingdirk]

Not really a victory for Obama, per se, but certainly not a bad thing. Fox (stupid) News says that Obama's going to make this his "mission accomplished" moment. President Obama isn't doing that (thankfully).

I think there will be a payoff overall from this. The region will be more stable, to begin with.

 

[Hot Mega]

economy's in the shitter
one Trident missle cost? $66,000,000

how many of those did the US lob at Libya over the summer?
what was the return on our investment?

Again, don't get me wrong I didn't support this as I felt it was unnecessary and unwarranted.

But the cost of any armament has already been paid for. You know R/C, it's not like we are at the cash register paying for these as we use them.

What we can take issue with is the real money this costs that we were otherwise not spending.

I'm still trying to see what distinction Obama sees between this and the action that GWB took against Saddam. I can see the explanations he could offer but they would really amount to nuances IMO.

The fact of the matter is Obama initiated an attack on a sovereign nation to effect regime change.

I know he'll say he was just supporting a democratic reform but the determination of a country should be left to them and the only support we should be giving to effect demo reform if any, should be in the way of $$ not BBBs IMO.