Posts Tagged ‘Libya’

Americans Died, Obama Lied

Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012

Would I Lie to You? Next Question...

On Tuesday evening, Greta Van Susteren reported the astonishing but predictable news: The Obama administration knew within hours or even minutes who had perpetrated the attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya, ultimately killing Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.  The cover story about an anti-Islamic video was merely a scapegoat of convenience that had absolutely nothing to do with the attack on our consulate, but the sickening fact is that President Obama’s administration, including the State Department, and high level national security officials were well aware of the truth even as they continued to try to sell its cover story to the American people.  The reason is simple:  The Benghazi attack was the first successful strike on American soil by organized radical Islamic supremacists since September 11th, 2001, on its 11th anniversary.  Fourteen days after this attack, Barack Obama was still telling the American people it was about a video, desperately hoping to disconnect the events from the obvious failures in his leadership and foreign policy.  Barack Obama has deceived the American people.  For seven hours, in full possession of the facts, as the attack raged and Americans were slaughtered, this President and his administration did nothing except to concoct a cover story.

Perhaps the most galling meme put forward by the Obama administration in the wake of this dismal failure was the attempt to accuse Mitt Romney of politicizing the event.  The facts speak for themselves: The Obama administration commenced the politicization of this attack by lying to the American people on the basis of politically motivated calculations about the impact the truth would have on the upcoming election.  Barack Obama and his administration clearly have no shame, but while they have sought to hide the truth, on Tuesday evening, emails were disclosed that should put an end to the obfuscation.  From FoxNews:

The emails obtained by Fox News were sent by the State Department to a variety of national security platforms, whose addresses have been redacted, including the White House Situation Room, the Pentagon, the FBI and the Director of National Intelligence.

Fox News was told that an estimated 300 to 400 national security figures received these emails in real time almost as the raid was playing out and concluding. People who received these emails work directly under the nation’s top national security, military and diplomatic officials, Fox News was told.

That Candy Crowley would give Obama cover on the cover-up during the second Presidential debate is bad enough, but to now discover that the whole administration was quite well aware of the source of the attack means that we not only have a President willing to lie to the American people, but that he has surrounded himself with a cadre of bureaucratic henchmen who share his contempt for Americans.  The Obama administration may be amateurish with respect to its handling of foreign policy, but they are first-rate professionals when it comes to lying to the nation.  The mainstream media continues to cover and hide the lengths to which this administration has gone in its disinformation campaign against the American people.

Joe Wilson was right when he yelled at Obama during a State of the Union address: “You lie!” Worse, however, President Obama isn’t a man who once told a lie and got away with it: He is a reprobate.  He is a liar by trade, and nothing he says may be trusted.  Cataloging the lies of his debate appearance on Monday night would take many pages, but suffice it to say that even some in the mainstream media are having a difficult time covering his tracks.

What readers need to know about Barack Obama is this: There is no lie he won’t tell, and no American whose life and memory he will not sacrifice to his political desires.  This President yammers about the politicization of a tragedy as a pre-emptive strike against the shocking truth that political calculations were and remain the motive for the cover-up of the events in Libya.  Obama hopes the American people will be fooled again, and that when he says he has “kept us safe,” they will forget the deadly attack on our consulate, and the Fort Hood shooting, among other acts of terrorism he refuses to acknowledge as such.  That’s all this really is, and all it’s intended to do.  His entire administration is convicted of a lie, and he’s betting the American people will be too.

Terrorism?  What terrorism?


Obama Administration Had 48 Hour Warning – Did Nothing

Thursday, September 13th, 2012

Arabs Spring a Trap

The UK Independent is reporting that there had been a high level security leak that provided the militants al-Qaeda the information necessary to carry out the attacks in Benghazi, including timing about Amb. Steven’s visit, and information about the safe-house location that ultimately came under mortar fire.  Worse, the White House knew about the threat but did nothing to pass the information along to personnel on the ground in Libya, waiting until after the disaster to send a special Marine anti-terror team into Libya.  No warnings were issued to personnel that would have permitted them to call off the Benghazi trip or otherwise augment security.  It was a set-up.  It had nothing to do with any film, except perhaps as a cover.  With this new information, it should be clear that Barack Obama is incompetent to lead this nation, and his lack of leadership is now a security threat all its own.

The entire attack was orchestrated, and it is now becoming clear that somebody who had extremely sensitive inside information about the movements of the Ambassador and other Embassy and Consular personnel must have provided that information to the attackers.   Muslim Brotherhood links to the White House must be examined, as must all Libyans, or other personnel working in and around the Department of State both in Washington and on the ground in Libya.   This crisis evinces the most stunning foreign policy and intelligence failures since the “Bay of Pigs” in 1962, and it appears to be worsening.

Given past threats on or around the 9/11 anniversary, one would think there would have been at least general warnings sent out to Embassies and Consulates worldwide, but neither the State Department under the leadership mismanagement of Secretary Hillary Clinton nor anybody in the Executive branch answering to the President seems to have been the least bit concerned.  More, we ought to suspect there are insiders in either the State Department or in the Executive branch feeding information to al Qaeda and its affiliates.

Not only do we have amateurs in the White House and in the State Department, but we must have somebody playing for the other team in close proximity to sensitive information.   Barack Obama has left us financially broken, militarily naked, and isolated from our only reliable ally in the region, Israel.  He has no time for Benjamin Netanyahu, no time for security or intelligence briefings, and no time to lead this nation.  Meanwhile, the lapdog media in the US continues to pretend none of this is happening, while  none of our reporters will even attempt to ask President Obama a question.  We had 48 hours or more of warning, and President Obama didn’t bolster security? Nobody in the lame-stream media is even slightly curious?

This is a dereliction of duty that shouldn’t be forgiven or forgotten.  I don’t want to hear any excuses about him having a blind spot with respect to Islam because of his acculturation.  No way.  This is the President who bowed his way through the Middle East, and apologizes repeatedly to Islam.  This is a wreck, and he made it.

Barack Obama’s Despicable Conduct of US Foreign Policy

Thursday, September 13th, 2012

Hoisting al Qaeda's Colors

We’ve known for some time that US foreign policy has become the instrument by which America has been ceding its interests around the globe, but what the response of President Obama and his State Department to attacks on US personnel in Libya reveals is a sickness that pervades this administration from top to bottom.   We have seen administrations in the past that have failed to put America’s interests first in our global relations, but it is clear from the record that Obama’s foreign policy consists of a single maxim: “America Last.”  This nightmarish projection of the dreams of Obama’s father onto American foreign policy is not merely wrong-headed, or ill-conceived, but instead plainly and virulently anti-American.  At every turn, Obama and his minions place the interests, the safety, and the security of the American people dead last, and the media scurries to cover it up.  Examining what’s happened in Libya and around the Middle East, it is impossible to conclude that the results were accidental.  The events we’re witnessing are the direct result of a policy that puts America last, at home, and around the world, and Barack Obama is that policy’s author.

On September 11th, 2012, American consulates and embassies came under attack by radical, militant Islamists.  In Benghazi, our ambassador to the nation of Libya, Chris Stevens was murdered, his life poached by murderous thugs who were bent on attacking Americans on the eleventh anniversary of the attacks of 9/11/2001.  Outside the consulate, the chant  “Take a picture, Obama, we are all Osama,” could be heard, and while Americans were under attack, the first assumption the State Department made about the motives of the attackers was that it had been a backlash against an anti-Islamic film aimed at exposing the crimes of Islam against the Coptic Christians of Egypt.

This is not merely naive, but foolish.  In what is clearly a coordinated effort to attack US possessions and personnel, our ambassador was beaten and killed, dying of “severe asphyxia.”  Meanwhile, Barack Obama does nothing, but as bad as that is, I am astonished by Hillary Clinton’s naive remarks in a statement released in the aftermath of the attacks:

“How could this happen in a country we helped liberate, in a city we helped save from destruction? This question reflects just how complicated and, at times, how confounding the world can be.”

These are the words of the Secretary of State of the United States of America?   A few things come immediately to mind:  When many responsible Americans, myself among them, warned that the so-called “Arab Spring” was a farce, we were mocked as “reactionary” and “conspiracy theorists.”  When we looked on in horror as Senator McCain(R-AZ) went to Libya, and actively supported the imposition of a no fly zone in Libya, many were horrified because all the signs were present that we had climbed into bed with al Qaeda and affiliate organizations.  Secretary Clinton’s advancement of the “Arab Spring” and “Democracy Movement” notions of the Obama administration are simply deplorable, and this question posed as a rhetorical device by Clinton simply serve to demonstrate the point that she should resign in disgrace.

Naturally, in her long and rambling statement, she expressed appropriate grief at out losses in Libya, but then she began the excuse-making on behalf of Libya:

“But we must be clear-eyed, even in our grief. This was an attack by a small and savage group – not the people or Government of Libya. Everywhere Chris and his team went in Libya, in a country scarred by war and tyranny, they were hailed as friends and partners. And when the attack came yesterday, Libyans stood and fought to defend our post.”

This is disgraceful.  It is true that Libyan security teams moved our consular staff, but what Mrs. Clinton doesn’t state here is that it was these very Libyans who told the militants where they had moved our people, essentially giving them up.   Meanwhile, as of this writing, there are al Qaeda flags flying over at least two US facilities in the Middle East, and other facilities are now under attack, including Yemen, and al-Jazeera is propagandizing as flags are burned in Tunisia.  The consulate in Berlin has been evacuated because of a suspicious package.  Iraqi militants are threatening, and new attacks have been launched on US facilities in Cairo, Egypt.  The Examiner is now reporting that Ambassador Stevens was raped before he was murdered.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama is too busy to attend security and intelligence briefings, since he can’t miss a fund-raiser anywhere.  I find it simply mind-numbing that our consular staff in Libya  is left to issue a statement or that Hillary Clinton is issuing statements, while Barack Obama appears long enough to say a few words, takes no questions, and walks away.  “The buck stops here” apparently doesn’t apply to President Obama, but I have some questions:

  • Why wasn’t a coordinated attack of some sort on the 11th of September anticipated by the Obama administration?
  • Why wasn’t security augmented before the attacks?
  • When Ayman al-Zawahiri issued a statement a urging Muslims to rise up and attack Americans around the world, why didn’t this administration react to the danger?
  • Why hasn’t President Obama attended all the security and intelligence briefings?
  • Why is this President still playing patty-cakes with the Muslim Brotherhood in the West Wing of the White House?

Rather than seeking answers to these questions, the American press has largely gone into a protective mode, giving aid and comfort to President Obama, instead going after Mitt Romney by pretending there had been some gaffe by virtue of his statements on this matter.  The truth of the matter is that these had been some of the finest moments of what has been a mostly lackluster campaign by Team Romney.

Ladies and gentlemen, the United States is once again under attack, and as the acts of war against us accumulate at consulates and embassies around the globe, we need a President who is willing to take on the threats arrayed against us.  Governor Sarah Palin made a strong statement on Wednesday, rebuking the intolerably useless under-reaction of the Obama administration.  It’s clear that Barack Obama isn’t going to stand up for America, her interests, or even her citizens serving abroad.  There’s something fundamentally broken with Barack Obama’s worldview that would permit him to continue on his current course in light of all that has happened.  We have a man in the White House who is seeking to damage the country, and through his inaction in the face of mayhem and murder is abetting the enemies of America.  Barack Obama should heed now his own advice to Hosni Mubarak. Speaking of Egypt, Obama said: “[the transition] must be meaningful, it must be peaceful and it must begin now.”

Amen.  Go home, Mr. Obama…and take Mrs. Clinton with you.


Al-Qaeda Flag Flies Over Libya

Tuesday, November 1st, 2011

Over Libya

As I reported over the weekend on what was published in a story on The National Patriot by Craig Andersen, there was an al-Qaeda flag hoisted into the air over the courthouse in Benghazi, where Libya’s revolution – its contribution to so-called “Arab Spring” – was launched.  Now, the Daily Mail Online has picked up the story, complete with more photographs, but none of this was was unexpected.  We have known since early this year that al-Qaeda was present in Libya, and allied with the revolution.  With the disappearance of many shoulder-fired air-to-air missiles from Libyan depots, this raised more warning flags as it became clear that we were again siding with people who will ultimately oppose us.  It has prompted the question about Obama’s incompetence or complicity in aiding our enemies.

We shouldn’t be surprised to now discover the flag of al-Qaeda flying over Libya as that “liberated” nation slides under the control of Sharia, trading one tyrant for another form of despotism.  This has been the trouble with the entire “Arab Spring” all along:  It’s not going to improve conditions for anyone in the region except terrorists and Islamists.   This has been the general trend of our foreign policy under Barack Obama, and it seems that his Middle-eastern apology tour that started with his speech in Cairo in 2009 is now culminating in a foreign policy disaster the ultimate consequences of which may not be known for some time.

This is why a man of Obama’s mysterious past should never be permitted to occupy the White House.  His ascension from back-bencher in the state Senate of Illinois to the US Senate to the presidency is a study in meteoric rises, considering this man was a professional rabble-rouser just a few years ago.  His foreign policy with respect to the Islamic world has been comprised largely of surrender, despite his go-ahead of the killing of bin Laden, and what we now know is that he seems to have an affinity for the Islamic world that is almost unseemly in this time of war against so many Islamic nations where terrorism has prevailed.  To see the al-Qaeda flag flying over any part of Libya merely punctuates his incapacity for dealing honestly with the problems of the Muslim world.

If it were only Obama, one could dismiss all of this, but the State Department, headed by another Soros flunky, Hillary Clinton, was part of this mess too.  The whole US Department of State has taken on the appearance of a political operation that is trying to walk a fine line between the geopolitical objectives of George Soros, and the expediencies of US domestic politics.  To most Americans, this is a frightening situation, and with good reason:  We have a country treading economic water, while abroad, our enemies are gaining strength and being propped up by our own foreign policy, and at our considerable expense.  When you permit thousands of shoulder-fire missiles to get into the hands of terrorists, you must be called to account.  The Obama administration is conducting our foreign policy as if it were itself a foreign agent, and the dangers it poses are going to manifest eventually.  It’s time we prepare ourselves for those coming disasters.

Guess Who’s Flag is Flying in Libya?

Saturday, October 29th, 2011

They're Celebrating - Should You?

I’d urge you to click over to The National Patriot and read this story by Craig Andersen.  As was discussed here on this site about the potential blow-back in the wake of Gaddafi’s ouster and death, it’s now becoming clear that it’s going to be ugly.  Andersen has put together many of the same facts you’ve read here, but he’s added another dimension: With his article is a picture of a flag waving over the courthouse that serves as the headquarters for the rebels who now control Libya.  I take no satisfaction in having been right about this, but it is another sign that Barack Obama is indeed helping to build a global caliphate.  Was it by sheer incompetence or by design and intention? Read Andersen’s article, and judge for yourself.

Update: Caliphate a’Coming; None Dare Call It Treason

Sunday, October 23rd, 2011


Further evidence has begun to mount on Sunday that the “Arab Spring” is merely the prologue to a Sharia Winter. In Tunisia, where all of this really got started earlier this year, Islamists are poised to sweep the elections. It gets better, as in Libya, their new transitional leader says Sharia will rule the country.  If that’s not enough, over in Iran, there are now Occupy Wall Street protests.  As I told you yesterday, this entire movement has the look and feel of an Obama/Soros operation.  Considering the systematic destruction of our national economy, our global influence, military readiness, and the complete breakdown of our society that is unfolding under Obama, we must  wonder what we shall do if these people succeed.

To win, they needed to take down America, and they’re well on their way, and at the top of it all, Barack Obama stands with George Soros’ hand up his backside. In what could only be considered a more modern iteration of the book None Dare Call it Treason, this country is being wiped out, and I think it’s time we say so.

What has been the purpose of all of this coordination between the leftists groups from America participating in the Gaza Flotilla, or in the Tahrir Square revolution?  What could be the meaning of poking Israel in the eye with the entire September threat of a move by Palestineans for Statehood?  I realize that even three years ago, this kind of talk would have gotten somebody branded a conspiracist, but let’s be honest shall we?  I believe coincidences exist, and that correlation isn’t necessarily causation, but this is frankly too much to accept on that basis.  We have all known for a long time, those who paid any attention, that America was the last best hope for freedom anywhere on Earth.  We are now watching it wrecked.  It’s not accidental. There’s a reason the Dodd-Frank financial reform act permits certain facts to be kept secret from the American people.

Ordinary people like me are now turning to me and asking “what shall we do?”  As one of my loyal readers comments, it’s like from the movie 300:  “What can we do?”  I have heard a fair number of oaths muttered under the breath of those who have their own solemn answer to the question, but I suppose I have always wondered at what point the American people simply say: “Enough!”  What recourse remains?  Your President and his party have spit on this country fearlessly for three years.  They’re supporting our enemies both at home and abroad.  Will you call Congress and demand he be impeached?  What will that accomplish?  Would the Senate act? Even if it did, what then?  Biden?  Do you think that useful idiot would do any better or different?

No, I think you’d better prepare to live as slaves.  Your masters will be the Occu-Pests, and your children will struggle the length of their stunted lives in support of them and their Marxist agenda.  This way, you risk nothing.  Let me be brutally honest with you: Some of you haven’t had the intestinal fortitude to face up to friends and family and congregation and neighbor and even state what it is that is transpiring, for fear of ridicule.  I know, because I get the e-mails.  I have writers telling me: “I don’t even bother with the kids, they are so busy living their lives and watching garbage on TV that they think Jon Stewart is news.”  I have grown people who should be the object of respect and reverence in their communities telling me: “Well, you can’t say that in public because somebody will think you’re nuts.”  What courage will we have when it comes down to it if now, when we could speak, we instead cower and say nothing?

On the other side of this, I get e-mails from people who tell me how somebody who loved them re-directed them in their thinking as a result of long, heartfelt and frank discussions about what we now face. One young lady wrote to tell me:

“My dad was always pestering me to follow the news. I have a five-month-old baby and a toddler, and I just don’t have the time.  My husband works two jobs, and right now, daycare costs more than any job I could get, so I just stay home with my kids.  He sent me a link to your story about “Downgraded America” and I read it.  I was really bothered by it, but I didn’t know what to think. My dad, you know, he’s always sending me this scary political stuff. Then I went back and read some of your other stories. I talked with my husband about one because he’s interested in some of this stuff, but he doesn’t have time.  He looked at me and said “Yea, that’s what’s happening.” The look on his face was like he was letting me in on a secret that I should have known. I am going to learn more about this, and I’m going to talk with some of my friends. None of them are very political. Neither was I, but I have my babies to think about, and I can’t afford not to know what’s going on….”

Ladies and gentlemen, if we’re to stand any chance at all, we can’t have any more secrets, and we can’t fear to state what is.  It’s Sunday. It’s a day to repair for the week ahead.  It’s a moment of pause before we re-enter the storm.  Use it to good purpose.  Prepare the ones you love.

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.

Sarah Palin on Libya

Friday, August 26th, 2011

Premature Celebration?

Thursday evening, Sarah Palin published a column On the Future of Libya that sets forth a foreign policy position that neither retreats to the isolationism of some libertarians, nor advances an interventionist foreign policy favored by so-called “neo-cons” preferred by the establishment wing of the GOP.  Her foreign policy prescription would best be described as fiercely American, seeking to protect the interests of our country, while lending sympathy to people seeking freedom, yet mindful that not all revolutions are created equal.  Palin advises caution, and avoiding a rush to premature notions of victory.

Mrs. Palin embraces a reasonable foreign policy that neither rushes to war, nor shrinks from it when no other rational alternative remains when the US comes under direct threat.  One could presume, were she President, that we would not rush into war on the basis of every half-baked notion of what is in the vital US interests, but to war we would go, nevertheless, but with prudence and only when we could ensure victory.

Palin advises caution with respect to the nature of those who seem poised to rule Libya, wary of people with decidedly questionable motives who have ties to terrorists and radical islamists.

“Second, we must be very concerned about the future government that will emerge to take Gaddafi’s place. History teaches that those with the guns usually prevail when a coalition overthrows a tyrant. We must remember that military power ultimately resides with the rebel commanders. This should be a source of some concern. The armed opposition to Gaddafi is an outgrowth of a group called Islamic Libya Fighting Group, and some rebel commanders admit that they have Al Qaeda links. The rebel fighters are from different tribes, and they have a variety of political views. Some are Islamists, some appear to favor some sort of western democracy. We should work through diplomatic means to help those who want democracy to come out on top.”

One thing that can be gathered from this is that she’s studied the players and is quite familiar with the problems inherent in the entire intervention by NATO in Libya.  This means she’s taking foreign policy seriously, despite the tendency of some to focus almost entirely on domestic economic issues.  This makes her position as a potential candidate all the more viable, signaling a well-rounded grasp of issues that is critical to leading a country long considered the world’s leading light, until recently.  Palin also mentions the idea of “nation-building” that has been a general failure for the last half century.  She argues that US troops should never be used in Libya for these purposes:

“That said, we should not commit U.S. troops or military assets to serve as peacekeepers or perform humanitarian missions or nation-building in Libya. Our military is already over-committed and strained, and a vaguely designed mission can be the first step toward a quagmire. The internal situation does not seem stable enough for U.S. forces to operate in a purely humanitarian manner without the possibility of coming under attack. Troop deployment to Libya would mean placing America’s finest in a potentially hostile zone that is not in our vital national security interest.”

This statement is certain to be popular among our country’s reluctant warriors, who will dutifully follow orders, but do not volunteer to serve with a mind to being used for frivolous, or otherwise purely political ends.  For troops who’ve been stretched too far, this promises some relief in the form of a Palin presidency.  It clearly figures into her thinking that American sons’ and daughters’ lives should not be risked for so little.

Clearly, Palin sees a potential quagmire in Libya, and it’s this discernment that separates her foreign policy agenda from those on the interventionist edge who seem willing to engage almost anywhere, or those on the libertarian side who wouldn’t engage in any place until the US comes under direct attack at home.  Either extreme position is unsuitable for a country such as ours, that has trade interests around the world, citizens working in virtually every nation on the globe, and is usually relied upon to lead the world.  If we wish to be the leading light for freedom, we ought to take care to lead.  It’s clear that Governor Palin realizes this, but also refuses to be led or pushed into battles where the security interests of  the United States are not really at risk.

Barack Obama’s approach has been to turn over leadership to European powers in the Libyan engagement, but I think it’s perfectly clear that we should take Palin’s wise counsel to heart, and withdraw from the operation and avoid becoming embroiled in some sort of occupying or peace-keeping force.  This is the policy statement of a politician prepared to lead from the front, and that’s something our fighting men and women around the world most assuredly deserve.