Gaddafi Dead, But What Will Be The Blowback?

He Will Not Be Missed - But His Missiles May

I was stationed in Germany at the time of the Pan Am 103 downing over Lockerbie, Scotland.  When my own family flew back to the US a couple weeks ahead of me just a year later, it was on the flight that had replaced it.  It could just as well have been my family on that plane.  I am satisfied that the thug is gone, and my only sorrow in the matter is that it has taken so long to rid the world of him, but with the Obama having made a mess of Libya, what will we say when the blow-back arrives?  For those of you who haven’t noticed, there’s something seriously wrong with a foreign policy that precipitates a coup d’etats in another country without considering first what would happen to weapons of value to terrorists when a number of the ostensible rebels have been linked to al-Qaeda.

I want you to consider with our porous southern border what would happen if these terrorists were able to smuggle a dozen of these missiles into the US.  Imagine them smuggling them into position around our airports and knocking down airliners for sport and terror.  Imagine them taking up position in Israel to attack their airliners.  Imagine any of these scenarios, and realize that this one failure on the part of the Obama administration could lead to the premature deaths of thousands of Americans, or Israelis, or frankly anybody else, and you begin to understand that while it may be good for the world that Gaddafi is gone, and none of us will shed a tear over his final exit, the absurdity and irresponsibility of this operation cannot be over-estimated in its potential costs in lives and the security of the American people, and indeed, peace-loving people everywhere.

While we can all be thankful that this thug has been eliminated from the face of the Earth, we should nevertheless worry what will now happen as a result of the Obama administration’s bungling.  Remember, the Obama crowd helped facilitate this entire coup d’etats on the basis of Samantha Power’s theory of Right To Protect(R2P.)  More, Obama is carrying out something much more important on behalf of the Muslim brotherhood, and indeed all the most militant Islamists in the region:  He is getting rid of the “un-pure” thugs like Gaddafi and Mubarak, and even bin Laden.  The most radical Islamists never liked any of these militaristic dictators either, as they view them as oppressors of Muslims who are operating from a secular basis.  They were all happy to see Saddam go, for instance, and they’ll be happy to get rid of the House of Saud in the Kingdom of Arabia, just as they will ultimately be happy to rid themselves of the Emirs  elsewhere on the Arabian Peninsula, or the King in Jordan.

None of these are/were religious leaders or strict adherents of Islam although all of them talked it up.  They are using US military might(the vast part of NATO) to clean out the dictators in advance of the rebirth of their caliphate.  This calls into question all of Obama’s motives, but more importantly, it leaves open the very serious question about the thinking that went into our assistance in precipitating the Libyan coup d’etats in the first place.  When those shoulder-fired missiles begin to show up in concert with the downing of airliners, they will probably tell us it hadn’t been due to missiles, despite thousands of witnesses to the contrary.  They’ll blame it on faulty wiring in a fuel tank or some such nonsense.  I think we’ve been here before.

Ladies and gentlemen, as I’ve already said, we can be happy Gaddafi is gone.  What we should worry about is the way in which this entire operation has been handled, and the fact that we now have no idea where dangerous weapons have gone in the midst of all the turmoil.  You can bet they went somewhere, and you can imagine the kinds of people who would want such weapons, and for what they might use them.  As Barack Obama continues his campaign of making the Islamic world safe for the rebirth of a grand Caliphate, we are right to ask the questions as to his motives, but also with respect to his gross negligence in not seeing to it that these weapons didn’t fall into the wrong hands.  Or was it negligence at all?  One can only wonder.

Like Be the first one who likes this post!
  • SeanStLouis

    Perhaps if we, and other powers-that-be, would simply stop our financial and military support of these regimes we wouldn't have to worry about potential blowback.

    What a novel idea.

    By the way, Mark, I wonder if you'd like to comment on Sarah Palin's comment last night regarding Ron Paul's non-interventional stance on foreign policy:

    “You’ve got to give it to Ron Paul. Whether you agree with everything he says or not, at least he is one there in Congress trying to make our President stick to the law and understand that Congress does have a role to play in these foreign policy decisions that are made and Ron Paul, I think hit the nail on the head, when he came out and said Obama had better be careful when he interjects himself and our country in other nations’ business.”