Wednesday, April 06, 2011

Obama's War - WHY?

The treachery of President Obama is becoming clearer each day as the so-called Libyan “protesters” and NATO, now supposedly without the “combative” help of the U.S., duke it out in the sand with Qaddafi. For no apparent reason under the well-known sun, Obama simply declared his own personal war on Libyan strongman Qaddafi, sent his minions to the UN to somehow gain the Security Council’s imprimatur for his action, and then set about bombing the bejesus out of Libyans, military and otherwise, letting the blood flow freely.

The president’s military establishment advised against the action for reasons that any John Doe can understand but that were apparently beyond the president’s pay-grade…or were they, i.e., do military considerations per se have anything to do with the president’s agenda? With absolutely no military experience at all, he proceeded to overrule people who understand quite well the ramifications of war.

Nor did the president go to Congress, even though he had a month to do so. The “protesting” in Libya started on 15 February and the UN vote was taken on 17 March. With over a month to appear before Congress to lay out his plan, which involved making war just as in the case of Afghanistan and Iraq, the president took a pass, never mind the seriousness of the issue. Why? Because he knew the Congress would not approve.

So…after sitting on his hands for a month, Obama recognized that all of a sudden there was an emergency with no time to waste and sent the gals off to the UN to push the Security Council panic-button, with enough states not voting to deliver an edict by the barest margin…and the bombs and missiles started raining down on the Libyans, a sort of genocide with Obama instead of Qaddafi killing Libyans, military and otherwise. After all, bombs and missiles are not choosy about whose body parts get spread here and there.

The “no-fly zone” was a red herring for the obvious reason that Qaddafi would put no planes in the air and every responsible person knew that to be the case. The Libyan plane destroyed by the French was a trainer and it was on the ground. The other part of the UN resolution having to do with “protecting Libyan citizens” meant that the action could be what anyone said it was.

So…that second part became the operative strategy and the “protection” amounted to taking the side of the “protesters” in an actual military operation against the government, notwithstanding that no one knew exactly who the protesters were, what entity(ies) was supporting them, or who their leader was, assuming they had one. The Frenchies recognized some entity as perhaps a government-in-waiting, but that was worth nothing. Obama announced his action in far-off Brazil and didn’t make it home to conduct the war for some five or so days.

No head-of-state in his right mind would undertake a hazy operation such as this, especially just on the say-so of some totally non-military advisers – in this case, apparently, State Secretary Clinton, UN Ambassador Rice, and Obama insider Power – who claimed that Qaddafi was ABOUT to commit genocide on his people. He hadn’t done it but they said Qaddafi would – on the basis of something he said – which most folks would have questioned as simply propaganda.

There had been no mass murders though Qaddafi obviously planned to put down what he considered a rebellion, just as did Lincoln in 1861. The ladies provided the perfect excuse for attacking Qaddafi…to save lives, even though lives had been lost for months in Cote d-Ivoire, with Obama doing nothing, despite the ease of intervening in that African coastal nation.

None of this makes sense, especially since the lives of American GIs were involved and Libya posed absolutely no threat to this country, so the obvious question becomes…why? The population of Libya is 6.3 million, two million less than that of New York City. Part of the answer can be seen in the constant spiking of gasoline prices. Obama had to know this would happen when he invaded an oil-producing country, if only by air. He also had to know that Qaddafi, if pushed to the wall, would probably destroy the oil facilities, thus keeping gas prices on the rise.

This makes one remember Obama’s claim during his campaign that he would make electricity prices skyrocket, largely by penalizing the coal industry and thus shutting down much of manufacturing as well as depleting personal incomes. The Libyan thing is a sort of godsend, allowing him to make war to further destroy small entrepreneurs’ ability to stay in business by pricing gas/oil out of their budgets and further eroding Americans’ earnings by robbing them at the gas-pump. Conclusion: Socialism!

Too big a stretch? Too tough on the president? Already fighting two wars for which there had always been a reason, why would he get into another for absolutely no reason and then get right out, which he did? All that was needed was the dustup and oil prices would “skyrocket.” By getting out and leaving NATO holding the bag, he removed potential criticism for the possible loss of American lives, such as could have happened if the American airmen in that jet that crashed had wound up in Qaddafi’s hands instead of those of the insurgents.

One hopes that such is not the case. One wonders, also, if Libya will be Obama’s “Bay of Pigs” - attack the enemy and then desert the ally!

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

1 comment:

Butler1776 said...

Well said. I couldn't agree more with this bizarre hypocrisy that President Obama is displaying.