Obama Telegraph: Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like Douglas MacArthur

chiefsnorth · 02-24-2011, 07:18 AM

The Obama Administration’s spineless response to Colonel Gaddafi's reign of terror
By Nile Gardiner*
February 23rd, 2011

What is the White House’s strategy on the Libyan crisis? Quite simply there isn’t one. As Alex Spillius noted in his post yesterday, the US government has been remarkably meek on Libya. Like the EU, the Obama administration is stuck in classic deer in the headlights mode, offering little more than mealy-mouthed statements condemning the state-sponsored violence against anti-government protesters on the streets of Tripoli, Benghazi, Tobruk and other key Libyan cities, which has already claimed at least 1,000 lives.

Both Barack Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s remarks today on Libya were distinctly underwhelming and non-confrontational, offering little beyond a carefully worded expression of outrage, except for a pledge to hold yet more meetings with the international community to discuss the Libyan situation. And both failed to even mention the man behind the reign of terror sweeping the country – “Mad Dog” Gaddafi, a ruthless dictator with Libyan, American and British blood on his hands.

This is an historic moment. One of the most brutal, evil and anti-American tyrants of our time is facing a massive popular revolt that is threatening to finally remove him from power after more than four decades as absolute ruler of his country. It is not a time for fence-sitting or navel-gazing from the world’s only superpower. President Obama should be openly calling for Muammar Gaddafi to step aside immediately, and if he doesn’t, face complete international isolation – including comprehensive sanctions, travel bans, the freezing of bank accounts, and a halt to Western investment and trade.

The Libyan people don’t need lofty neutrality from Washington. They do however need the president of the most powerful nation on earth to actively back their aspirations for freedom and democracy. And they certainly aren’t waiting for toothless statements from a divided UN Security Council or a morally bankrupt Human Rights Council.

President Obama is already being outflanked by Nicolas Sarkozy, who has taken a far tougher line on Libya than his US counterpart. It is hugely embarrassing when even the French are doing more to confront a murderous dictator than the traditional leader of the free world. Frankly, President Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like General MacArthur by comparison. The US administration needs to wake up from its slumber and start showing some real leadership on the world stage in place of its existing milquetoast foreign policy.

chiefsnorth · 02-24-2011, 07:24 AM

He sure has increased our standing in the world, hasn't he?

blaise · 02-24-2011, 07:24 AM

I'm no Middle East expert, but I don't know what we're really supposed to do about it. I was under the impression that we had softened some of the sanctions against Lybia over the last 7 years or so, so why would we now make them more strict, because of an uprising? If that's what we wanted why did we soften sanctions to begin with?
Not that I'm a fan of Gadhafi, but the situation seems to be fluid, so I don't know exactly what stance we would want.
I don't keep up to date on Lybia, really. I could be totally off.

chiefsnorth · 02-24-2011, 07:33 AM

The point is, he's bombing and firing on civilians, threatening to set oil wells alight, and "we" can't muster anything besides mealymouthed contrivances about calling some meetings. It's beyond their spine's consistency to say a man slaughtering civilians should get out.

The writer used the "milquetoast" adjective and that is who Obama is on foreign policy... Mr Gaddafi, um, excuse us for the interruption, um, we sort of... Maybe have some reservations about your methods.. Terribly sorry if we have offended you.. Could you maybe, I'd it's not too much trouble just cool it a bit? If you want, I mean.. No pressure of course.

If he were in comic books Obamas mutant power would be an uncanny ability to look like a pussy in any situation.

**dirk digler** · 02-24-2011, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise

I'm no Middle East expert, but I don't know what we're really supposed to do about it. I was under the impression that we had softened some of the sanctions against Lybia over the last 7 years or so, so why would we now make them more strict, because of an uprising? If that's what we wanted why did we soften sanctions to begin with?
Not that I'm a fan of Gadhafi, but the situation seems to be fluid, so I don't know exactly what stance we would want.
I don't keep up to date on Lybia, really. I could be totally off.

You make an interesting point and I was thinking about starting a thread asking this question.

What is the point of coming out and making statements about events like this? Is it just supposed to make us all feel better or something? I don't get it. If they are working behind the scenes which they are then why do I care what they say in public.

jettio · 02-24-2011, 07:36 AM

The article is basically crticizing Obama for not grandstanding.

Why would grandstanding be better than taking the right position using diplomatic channels?

In a situation where it looks like Qadaffi is losing internal support in his military, seems like there are some benefits in not making it look like the takeover depended on the United States backing it.

Seems like a frivilous criticism, it is not as if the Libyans rebellng against Qadaffi are depending on pep talks from Obama or Hillary Clinton, so just because this guy is calling for Obama to be a blowhard with public statements does not mean that being a blowhard is a good idea.

chiefsnorth · 02-24-2011, 07:49 AM

I remember when police arrested a guy who appeared to be breaking in to what turned out to be his own house, Obama had no problem putting on his cape and leaping into action, remember, immediately he was strongly covicted that the cops "acted stupidly" and that he should allude that it was racially motivated.

But we cant bring ourselves to and firm conviction on Gaddafi... Maybe he willget together over a beer and patch things up.

LaDairis · 02-24-2011, 07:59 AM

This is absolutely amazing...

Once again a Murdoch owned "news" entity suggests that it is the US' duty to police the entire Middle East, that whenever Israel gets nervous, the US should trot out the US military and do whatever Israel wants...

Truth be told, Obama did a very good job with Egypt, despite Murdoch/Israel/GOP saying that Mubarack should stay... (and then folks wonder why 98% of Egyptians don't like the US, since 98% of Egyptians don't like Mubarack... never mind the US armed and funded Israel to steal Gaza from Egypt, and continues to block the UN from "fixing" that...)

While Qadaffi (spelling version #4) is a terrorist and a brutal dictator who has killed Americans as a terrorist, somehow the US should intervene while Qadaffi's own people are busy chucking him out of power, and even the dreaded Muslim Brotherhood (defined by all Murdoch/Israel/GOP entities as "terrorists" themselves, despite never participating in terror against the US) has called for Qadaffi to be offed... at least that is now the official Israeli position...

Indeed, the Murdoch/Telegraph position since 2001 has been as follows:

1. making OBL not a priority = good
2. sending way too few after OBL = good
3. flipping off those at war with OBL and AQ = good
4. lying to sell out US troops in Iraq for precisely no US national interest = good
5. US not invading Iran as W promised AIPAC in 2000 = not good
6. Mubarack = good
7. anyone opposed to Mubarack = bad
8. Muslim Brotherhood = bad
9. now Qadaffi = bad...
10. manipulating the US into the current Libyan mess without UN support = good
11. lies about WMD in Iraq = good
12. outing the lies about WMD in Iraq = bad
13. lying to claim Saddam and Osama were chummy (like MB and Qadaffi cough cough) = good
14. outing the lies tying Saddam to Osama = bad
15. noticing Israel's role in all of this = bad

The US should stay out of Libya. The UN might wish to do something, but the US should not. If the US sent in armed forces to Libya, the US would be accused of trying to take Libya for Libya's oil...

**dirk digler** · 02-24-2011, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefsnorth

I remember when police arrested a guy who appeared to be breaking in to what turned out to be his own house, Obama had no problem putting on his cape and leaping into action, remember, immediately he was strongly covicted that the cops "acted stupidly" and that he should allude that it was racially motivated.

But we cant bring ourselves to and firm conviction on Gaddafi... Maybe he willget together over a beer and patch things up.

That is a fair point but I think that was due more to his inexperience than anything. If that were to happen today I imagine they wouldn't say a peep about it.

I am just curious why you think it is important to for any POTUS to speak out events like this.

I am not saying there is a right or wrong way I am just generally interested in your opinion.

**Iowanian** · 02-24-2011, 08:03 AM

Wait.....

I thought the United States was supposed to stay out of the affairs of others and let other nations do as they will and not try to impose ours?

I'm no fan of Obama, far from it, but if the world wants us to look the other way when the sun is shining, they can't say anything when we do it when it rains.

I've said for years, in life and on this site that if the world wants us to stay out of their business fine....don't call us for bandaids, food, or anything else if you're not firmly in the corner of the United States.

That means tolerating some inhumane things from afar.

LaDairis · 02-24-2011, 08:10 AM

"It is hugely embarrassing when even the French are doing more to confront a murderous dictator than the traditional leader of the free world. "

No, Mr. Murdoch, it is hugely embarrassing that the US is the one and only one country still preventing the UN from packing your country back where it belongs...

The French gave the US

1. help in the Revolutionary War
2. help in the War of 1812
3. the Statue of Liberty

Israel has given the US

absolutely nothing...

**mlyonsd** · 02-24-2011, 08:30 AM

I'll hold my judgement to see what he does after all the Americans are out. I can understand not jeopardizing their lives.

FishingRod · 02-24-2011, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaDairis

"It is hugely embarrassing when even the French are doing more to confront a murderous dictator than the traditional leader of the free world. "

No, Mr. Murdoch, it is hugely embarrassing that the US is the one and only one country still preventing the UN from packing your country back where it belongs...

The French gave the US

1. help in the Revolutionary War
2. help in the War of 1812
3. the Statue of Liberty

Israel has given the US

absolutely nothing...

Actually it could easily be argued that by being our test bed for weapons systems the Israelis have saved thousands, possibly millions of American lives. If one takes into account their thumping of the Arabs armed and trained by the soviets using Western weapons and their modification of Weston military doctrine. The Soviets might well have thought they could take Western Europe had their proxy States in Egypt, and Syria not consistently had their heads handed to them by the vastly outnumbered Israelis. They also handed over captured complete SAM systems, Migs and Soviet Tanks to the US for Study on how they best could be countered should the two super powers ever come to blows and putting our people in a much better position in both Gulf wars. Just a little food for thought.

Now Regarding the topic,

FWIW

I believe nothing short of military intervention on our part will make much of a difference. I don’t think we have received much appreciation in the past when we have attempted to solve the problems for other countries and don’t have much interest in having our troops trying to run a 3rd Arab country. This would be one of those infrequent occasions that I agree with the POUS and think a strongly worded letter of complaint is about all the effort we should make.

chiefsnorth · 02-24-2011, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaDairis

"It is hugely embarrassing when even the French are doing more to confront a murderous dictator than the traditional leader of the free world. "

No, Mr. Murdoch, it is hugely embarrassing that the US is the one and only one country still preventing the UN from packing your country back where it belongs...

The French gave the US

1. help in the Revolutionary War
2. help in the War of 1812
3. the Statue of Liberty

Israel has given the US

absolutely nothing...

Murdoch is a Zionist infidel, I forgot.

I am sure he personally ordered this piece to be written.

AndChiefs · 02-24-2011, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefsnorth

Murdoch is a Zionist infidel, I forgot.

I am sure he personally ordered this piece to be written.

Kind of...Israel ordered him to order it.

02-24-2011, 07:18 AM
chiefsnorth Veteran Join Date: Apr 2010 Casino cash: $15815	Telegraph: Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like Douglas MacArthur The Obama Administration’s spineless response to Colonel Gaddafi's reign of terror By Nile Gardiner* February 23rd, 2011 What is the White House’s strategy on the Libyan crisis? Quite simply there isn’t one. As Alex Spillius noted in his post yesterday, the US government has been remarkably meek on Libya. Like the EU, the Obama administration is stuck in classic deer in the headlights mode, offering little more than mealy-mouthed statements condemning the state-sponsored violence against anti-government protesters on the streets of Tripoli, Benghazi, Tobruk and other key Libyan cities, which has already claimed at least 1,000 lives. Both Barack Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s remarks today on Libya were distinctly underwhelming and non-confrontational, offering little beyond a carefully worded expression of outrage, except for a pledge to hold yet more meetings with the international community to discuss the Libyan situation. And both failed to even mention the man behind the reign of terror sweeping the country – “Mad Dog” Gaddafi, a ruthless dictator with Libyan, American and British blood on his hands. This is an historic moment. One of the most brutal, evil and anti-American tyrants of our time is facing a massive popular revolt that is threatening to finally remove him from power after more than four decades as absolute ruler of his country. It is not a time for fence-sitting or navel-gazing from the world’s only superpower. President Obama should be openly calling for Muammar Gaddafi to step aside immediately, and if he doesn’t, face complete international isolation – including comprehensive sanctions, travel bans, the freezing of bank accounts, and a halt to Western investment and trade. The Libyan people don’t need lofty neutrality from Washington. They do however need the president of the most powerful nation on earth to actively back their aspirations for freedom and democracy. And they certainly aren’t waiting for toothless statements from a divided UN Security Council or a morally bankrupt Human Rights Council. President Obama is already being outflanked by Nicolas Sarkozy, who has taken a far tougher line on Libya than his US counterpart. It is hugely embarrassing when even the French are doing more to confront a murderous dictator than the traditional leader of the free world. Frankly, President Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like General MacArthur by comparison. The US administration needs to wake up from its slumber and start showing some real leadership on the world stage in place of its existing milquetoast foreign policy.
Posts: 1,808

02-24-2011, 07:24 AM	#2
chiefsnorth Veteran Join Date: Apr 2010 Casino cash: $15815	He sure has increased our standing in the world, hasn't he?
Posts: 1,808

02-24-2011, 07:24 AM	#3
blaise MVP Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Plano, TX Casino cash: $477	I'm no Middle East expert, but I don't know what we're really supposed to do about it. I was under the impression that we had softened some of the sanctions against Lybia over the last 7 years or so, so why would we now make them more strict, because of an uprising? If that's what we wanted why did we soften sanctions to begin with? Not that I'm a fan of Gadhafi, but the situation seems to be fluid, so I don't know exactly what stance we would want. I don't keep up to date on Lybia, really. I could be totally off.
Posts: 16,658

02-24-2011, 07:36 AM	#6
jettio MVP Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Kansas City Casino cash: $20173	The article is basically crticizing Obama for not grandstanding. Why would grandstanding be better than taking the right position using diplomatic channels? In a situation where it looks like Qadaffi is losing internal support in his military, seems like there are some benefits in not making it look like the takeover depended on the United States backing it. Seems like a frivilous criticism, it is not as if the Libyans rebellng against Qadaffi are depending on pep talks from Obama or Hillary Clinton, so just because this guy is calling for Obama to be a blowhard with public statements does not mean that being a blowhard is a good idea. __________________ Where Ignorance is Bliss, 'Tis Folly to be Wise. __
Posts: 6,546

02-24-2011, 07:49 AM	#7
chiefsnorth Veteran Join Date: Apr 2010 Casino cash: $15815	I remember when police arrested a guy who appeared to be breaking in to what turned out to be his own house, Obama had no problem putting on his cape and leaping into action, remember, immediately he was strongly covicted that the cops "acted stupidly" and that he should allude that it was racially motivated. But we cant bring ourselves to and firm conviction on Gaddafi... Maybe he willget together over a beer and patch things up.
Posts: 1,808

02-24-2011, 07:33 AM	#4
chiefsnorth Veteran Join Date: Apr 2010 Casino cash: $15815	The point is, he's bombing and firing on civilians, threatening to set oil wells alight, and "we" can't muster anything besides mealymouthed contrivances about calling some meetings. It's beyond their spine's consistency to say a man slaughtering civilians should get out. The writer used the "milquetoast" adjective and that is who Obama is on foreign policy... Mr Gaddafi, um, excuse us for the interruption, um, we sort of... Maybe have some reservations about your methods.. Terribly sorry if we have offended you.. Could you maybe, I'd it's not too much trouble just cool it a bit? If you want, I mean.. No pressure of course. If he were in comic books Obamas mutant power would be an uncanny ability to look like a pussy in any situation.
Posts: 1,808

02-24-2011, 07:59 AM	#8
LaDairis Banned Join Date: Feb 2011 Casino cash: $6340	This is absolutely amazing... Once again a Murdoch owned "news" entity suggests that it is the US' duty to police the entire Middle East, that whenever Israel gets nervous, the US should trot out the US military and do whatever Israel wants... Truth be told, Obama did a very good job with Egypt, despite Murdoch/Israel/GOP saying that Mubarack should stay... (and then folks wonder why 98% of Egyptians don't like the US, since 98% of Egyptians don't like Mubarack... never mind the US armed and funded Israel to steal Gaza from Egypt, and continues to block the UN from "fixing" that...) While Qadaffi (spelling version #4) is a terrorist and a brutal dictator who has killed Americans as a terrorist, somehow the US should intervene while Qadaffi's own people are busy chucking him out of power, and even the dreaded Muslim Brotherhood (defined by all Murdoch/Israel/GOP entities as "terrorists" themselves, despite never participating in terror against the US) has called for Qadaffi to be offed... at least that is now the official Israeli position... Indeed, the Murdoch/Telegraph position since 2001 has been as follows: 1. making OBL not a priority = good 2. sending way too few after OBL = good 3. flipping off those at war with OBL and AQ = good 4. lying to sell out US troops in Iraq for precisely no US national interest = good 5. US not invading Iran as W promised AIPAC in 2000 = not good 6. Mubarack = good 7. anyone opposed to Mubarack = bad 8. Muslim Brotherhood = bad 9. now Qadaffi = bad... 10. manipulating the US into the current Libyan mess without UN support = good 11. lies about WMD in Iraq = good 12. outing the lies about WMD in Iraq = bad 13. lying to claim Saddam and Osama were chummy (like MB and Qadaffi cough cough) = good 14. outing the lies tying Saddam to Osama = bad 15. noticing Israel's role in all of this = bad The US should stay out of Libya. The UN might wish to do something, but the US should not. If the US sent in armed forces to Libya, the US would be accused of trying to take Libya for Libya's oil...
Posts: 1,056

02-24-2011, 08:03 AM	#10
Iowanian Hey Jack! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: The Jolly Barnyard Casino cash: $417168	Wait..... I thought the United States was supposed to stay out of the affairs of others and let other nations do as they will and not try to impose ours? I'm no fan of Obama, far from it, but if the world wants us to look the other way when the sun is shining, they can't say anything when we do it when it rains. I've said for years, in life and on this site that if the world wants us to stay out of their business fine....don't call us for bandaids, food, or anything else if you're not firmly in the corner of the United States. That means tolerating some inhumane things from afar. __________________ "Silence is Golden. Duct Tape is silver"
Posts: 48,114

02-24-2011, 08:10 AM	#11
LaDairis Banned Join Date: Feb 2011 Casino cash: $6340	"It is hugely embarrassing when even the French are doing more to confront a murderous dictator than the traditional leader of the free world. " No, Mr. Murdoch, it is hugely embarrassing that the US is the one and only one country still preventing the UN from packing your country back where it belongs... The French gave the US 1. help in the Revolutionary War 2. help in the War of 1812 3. the Statue of Liberty Israel has given the US absolutely nothing...
Posts: 1,056

02-24-2011, 08:30 AM	#12
mlyonsd Supporter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Spink, SD Casino cash: $28872	I'll hold my judgement to see what he does after all the Americans are out. I can understand not jeopardizing their lives.
Posts: 22,242

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode