This Is What Obama Did


The mission in Libya started out to contain Libya’s air superiority.  Obama told us that the mission would be a short one, measured in days, not weeks.

This is what Obama did:

Two miles west of Sirte, 15 pick-up trucks mounted with machine guns lay burned out, smashed and smoldering next to an electricity substation 20 meters from the main road.

They had clearly been hit by a force far beyond anything the motley army the former rebels has assembled during eight months of revolt to overthrow the once feared leader.

But there was no bomb crater, indicating the strike may have been carried out by a fighter jet.

Inside the trucks still in their seats sat the charred skeletal remains of drivers and passengers killed instantly by the strike. Other bodies lay mutilated and contorted strewn across the grass. Some 50 bodies in all.

“MY MASTER IS HERE”

Fighters on the ground said Gaddafi and a handful of his men appeared to have run through a stand of trees and taken refuge in the two drainage pipes.

“At first we fired at them with anti-aircraft guns, but it was no use,” said Salem Bakeer, while being feted by his comrades near the road. “Then we went in on foot.

“One of Gaddafi’s men came out waving his rifle in the air and shouting surrender, but as soon as he saw my face he started shooting at me,” he told Reuters.

“Then I think Gaddafi must have told them to stop. ‘My master is here, my master is here’, he said, ‘Muammar Gaddafi is here and he is wounded’,” said Bakeer.

“We went in and brought Gaddafi out. He was saying ‘what’s wrong? What’s wrong? What’s going on?’. Then we took him and put him in the car,” Bakeer said.

At the time of his capture, Gaddafi was already wounded with gunshots to his leg and to his back, Bakeer said.

I want to be very clear.  I’m a “bad guy” hawk.  I’m all for using technology to get bad guys.  And the guys helping bad guys.  But Obama isn’t.  At least he said he wasn’t.  And the people that elected him aren’t.  They SAY they are against actions like this.  And against the cleric.  And against the killing of terror suspects like Bin Laden.

I’m not one of them.

But why are they not crying out calling for justice?  Why aren’t they calling for Obama to be impeached?

They are tribal.  And because they are hypocrites.

Advertisements
10 comments
  1. Firing on a human being with an anti-aircraft weapon is technically against the Geneva convention. One of my friend’s West Point professors was actually being investigated for using one against a barracks in Panama in the late 80s.

    Not to worry. Al Qaeda is now in charge of Libya.

    • pino said:

      Firing on a human being with an anti-aircraft weapon is technically against the Geneva convention.

      And given that Gaddafi is a member of a uniformed military, I agree that the Convention applies. But I still target him.

      Not to worry. Al Qaeda is now in charge of Libya.

      #ThisIsWhatObamaDid

      • Don’t be silly, al qaeda isn’t in charge of Libya, al qaeda is on a losing curve. Welcome this change, Gaddafi was a ruthless tyrant, as bad as Saddam. It’s inevitable that this kind of change come to the Mideast, we can’t support tyranny just out of fear of al qaeda. That would be self-defeating. Celebrate this!

      • A member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group is on Libya’s governing council. The LIFG was the second largest foreign contingent of jihadist forces in Iraq. These folks have actually killed American soldiers in the last several years.

        There is more here: http://reflectionsofarationalrepublican.com/2011/09/03/al-qaeda-to-be-part-of-new-libyan-government/

        I don’t think Qaddafi is a great guy either, which is why I thought the U.S. should have never gotten involved. It is true though that the United States accomplished its mission. It’s whether the mission was worthwhile in the first place that I draw the line.

  2. On the contrary, the hard core left has become anti-Obama. That doesn’t describe most Democrats though, most are supportive of getting rid of dictators if it doesn’t cost American lives and prestige. Face it, this is a win for Obama.

    • pino said:

      That doesn’t describe most Democrats though, most are supportive of getting rid of dictators if it doesn’t cost American lives and prestige.

      This is tough to answer.

      I would believe that most Democrats are reasonable people when it comes to bad-guy killing. Most would support the killing of bad-guy foreign heads of state. HOWEVER, they are most CERTAINLY not supporters of Republican Presidents who do this.

      Not on time during all the anti-war speeches did I hear “It’s okay and we support the United States removal of Saddam Hussein. We just wish you would assassinate him.”

      No. We heard the war was an immoral war. Immoral because we entered into it for wrong reasons. The debate was never about the “how”. It was always about the “Ought”.

      Face it, this is a win for Obama.

      I can’t say it anymore clearly. I support what Obama is doing with regard to bad-guy killing. Of course this is a win for him. But it’s a win for him in the minds of his opponents.

      The Left should be outraged. And, of course, they’re not. Which, in reflection, isn’t surprising.

      • Actually in both Iraq wars US support was quite high — so most Democrats supported the Iraq war early on. Most people on the left wanted Saddam gone. Most would have been very supportive if the attempt at a surgical strike on March 19, 2003 would have been successful. What turned both Democrats and a large number of independents and Republicans against the war in Iraq was that it was so costly and went so much differently than the Administration promised at the start. As with LBJ in Vietnam, people felt they’d been lied to.

        The hard anti-war left is very outraged, they don’t like Obama — they felt betrayed by Obama when he didn’t leave Iraq and Afghanistan right away. Believe me, I know some of these folk who are the anti-war protesters, and they’ve been done on Obama for two years now. The people you’re talking about are outraged.

      • pino said:

        The hard anti-war left is very outraged, they don’t like Obama — they felt betrayed by Obama when he didn’t leave Iraq and Afghanistan right away. Believe me, I know some of these folk who are the anti-war protesters, and they’ve been done on Obama for two years now. The people you’re talking about are outraged.

        I’ll take you at your word, Scott. You have an insight into that portion of America that, quite frankly, I don’t. I would like to see more protests, more websites, more anger and vitriol from the far Left however. I want “Baby Killer” signs around pictures of Obama. I want visible outrage.

        With out that, I’m left with the impression, while upset, it’s different if it’s their guy.

  3. nickgb said:

    I had some issues with the OBL operation. I had many issues with the Al-Awlaki operation. I have lots of issues with how we’re handling prisoners. I think the president makes lots of mistakes, and I disagree with a lot of what he does. But impeach? Why the hell would I call for impeachment? I’m never going to agree with any President 100%, but he’s also done a lot of things right. But we criticize the hell out of him. We do it privately, we do it publicly. Those OWS people aren’t loving Obama, they’re protesting govt as much as Wall Street. We are absolutely not tribal.

    But now the bigger error here, how the hell are you pinning these violations on Obama? The closest you can get is that NATO says it may have been a predator drone that hit the convoy. Maybe. There’s very few details yet. I know that may not matter to someone so dedicated to criticizing the left even when he thinks they’re right, but jumping up and down screaming “Impeachment” would be a little premature when we have zero details.

    • pino said:

      I had some issues with the OBL operation. I had many issues with the Al-Awlaki operation. I have lots of issues with how we’re handling prisoners.

      I bumped into you guys long after Bush had left office, so I have no idea how you handled your objection to Iraq, Afghanistan and Dubya. My lines of questioning are, well, questioning whether you reacted to his actions in the same way you are reacting to Obama’s.

      In general, I am claiming that the Left as a whole most certainly has not.

      But impeach? Why the hell would I call for impeachment? I’m never going to agree with any President 100%

      No reasonable person would. Again, I am pointing out the hypocrisy of those who called for Dubya to be thrown out of office.

      But now the bigger error here, how the hell are you pinning these violations on Obama?

      He made the decision to get involved in Libya. The consequences are his. He supported overthrowing a foreign head of state. Again, the consequences are his.

      someone so dedicated to criticizing the left even when he thinks they’re right

      To be clear, I am criticizing the Left “body politic” here, not Obama. I actually think Obama’s strongest suit is his hawkish personality when it comes to bad-guys.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: