Posts Tagged ‘Gaddafi’

Hillary Inconsistency: Need Syrian Consent for Troops – Why Different From Libya?

Tuesday, February 14th, 2012

Different Thug, Different Policy?

I must admit that I don’t quite understand this one yet, because while we entered the fray in Libya on the basis of the Samantha Power argument of a “Responsibility to Protect,” the idea that nations had a duty to protect a people from a tyrannical regime, this same theory doesn’t apparently apply in Syria.  Instead, after a meeting with the Turkish Foreign Minister, Hillary Clinton said in a joint press conference with Foreign Minister Ahment Davutoglu that there would be no troops sent to Syria without the consent of the Syrian government.  Why is one brutal thug’s regime exempt, while the other was not?  While leftist protesters marched under the banner of “no blood for oil” in successive wars initiated by Republican presidents, there’s no similar outrage now that it has become patently obvious that this is the only justification for the differential in policy: Syria has no oil. Libya has plenty.  It’s either that, or something more nefarious.

This is another example of the apparent contradictions in Obama’s foreign policy.  When the people of Iran were rising up, Obama said nothing, and did nothing.  In Syria, we’re getting some words from the State Department, but nothing of substance, and it seems there’s no intention on the part of this administration to have a consistent policy.  We surely didn’t wait for Gaddafi’s consent before bombing in Libya.  We were trying to bomb him!  Meanwhile, Assad is every bit as monstrous as Gaddafi, and perhaps worse, yet there we are wearing kid gloves.  This doesn’t make any sense at all unless one begins to account for the differences between the two countries, or leaders.

Is there some reason the Obama administration favors Syria’s Assad?  If one applies the principles of the idea called “Responsibility to Protect(R2P,) one must wonder as thousands of civilians in Syria have been murdered in the streets over the last few months.  If Gaddafi was a rabid dog who needed to be removed for the safety of his country’s people, why not Assad?  Why is he exempt from a similar fate?

Don’t misunderstand: I am not advocating an attack by NATO on Syria, but I find it curious that the same people who less than one year ago could not wait to pound Gaddafi into submission before he was slaughtered at the hands of a mob(as he deserved) are now reluctant about treating Bashar al-Assad in similar fashion.  This discontinuity in policy means something, just as the reluctance to criticize Ahmedinejad in Iran meant something, but it’s not yet clear what the meaning is.  Cynical folk would point to the Libyan oil, but even if that is a factor, I don’t think it’s the only one.  Something else must account for this differential in policy.  Could it be that Assad has something else Obama wants?  Could it be related to the proximity of Syria to Israel?

Time will tell, but when one sees such distinct and different actions by lefties in similar circumstances, one knows there’s something more to the story.  Leftists are simply too stuck in their ideological ruts to act this way without ulterior motives.

The Last Moments of Gadhafi’s Miserable Life

Sunday, October 23rd, 2011

No longer Threatening

Isn’t it strange?  Even in death, we’re still trying to figure out how to spell this guy’s name.  I’ve seen so many spellings of it over the years that I have basically given up trying to figure out which had been correct. Can you imagine being a brutal dictator notorious around the globe, and yet nobody can settle on the spelling of your name in media? Thirty years in the news, and still nobody seems to know for sure.  You’d be miserable too.  Of course, that wasn’t nearly all that made this man miserable, but whether you choose to spell his name Gadhafi, Gaddafi, Qaddafi, Kadhafi, or any of the dozens of other spellings, it doesn’t change the picture: He’s now dead, and he’s in a meat locker.

One of the questions that has arisen in the aftermath of his death is the manner in which he was killed.  As you can imagine, various human rights groups are pointing to the alleged tragedy of the way in which he was killed. Certainly, it was a brutal undertaking, and while none have found video of the moment he was shot to death, there is this disturbing video of the moments leading up to it.  The video is disturbingly graphic, but I think it demonstrates the point of human rights groups:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wknw5UwClFI]

As you can see from this video, the former dictator was summarily executed and brutalized.  I realize that nobody is going to shed any tears over him, but I think this does rightly cause one to wonder about what form of government the mob depicted in this video will be able to form.  I know that Gaddafi probably had a hand in or directed the deaths of some of their comrades, their relatives, and their neighbors, and it would seem to offer an excuse, but the truth is that the don’t have much patience for our protracted system of justice in the West, with our endless appeals, our temporary stay orders, and our expensive system of capital punishment, so instead, they finished him right then, right there.   Do we in the West have cause to complain?

It makes me wonder what would happen if the thugs down at Occupy Wall Street were able to put their hands on some of those millionaires and billionaires for whom they express vociferous hatred.  Would the outcome be much different?  Isn’t this the implied threat of their mobs?  What all of this makes plain to me, as it should to you, is that our “civilized society” is only ever a hair’s breadth from anarchy and chaos.  All you need to see to know that this is true is a bit of video from the early morning door opening at a major retailer on “Black Friday” as they rush in to grab whatever they can.  Primitive behaviors come much more easily to people than most of us wish to acknowledge.

This is why when news of his death first came out, my posting on the matter focused not on his death, his history, or all of the despicable acts of his life, but instead on the potential blow-back we will now face as a result of the manner of his removal.  We can become wild, thuggish brutes, or we can choose to think.  I believe it is in the latter that our humanity lies.  I believe that’s what separates us from the rest.  Otherwise, we’re not much better than a feeding frenzy in a shark tank.  I don’t feel any sympathy for Gadhafi, but I worry for the country, the people of which think nothing of street justice handed down brutally, and I fear for a nation that stands on brink of similar chaos.

Gaddafi Dead, But What Will Be The Blowback?

Friday, October 21st, 2011

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.