Why Libya? Why not Iran?
Posted by Ercille Christmas at 3/22/2011 10:24 AM 
Categories: Political
Tags: Libya Gaddafi Obama Operation Odyssey Dawn Putin Iran Michael Moore
Categories: Political
Tags: Libya Gaddafi Obama Operation Odyssey Dawn Putin Iran Michael Moore
As I heard the reports of "bombs bursting in air" – over Libya, I wondered why over Libya – and almost two years ago, not over Iran? The Western nations, including the US, dropping bombs over Libya, have given as their rationale, the "protection of civilians," under a UN principle known as R2P? Apparently this means that the UN, that venerable body, has determined that the responsibility to, or should that be 2, protect, justifies bombing the heck out of Libya.
As I have stated repeatedly, I have an aversion or allergy to dictators, period. Therefore, this article is not in defense of the dictator of Tripoli. My admittedly naive wish is that all people can be free – as free as we are still, relatively speaking, in the US. The article is from the perspective of an American citizen, who has questions pouring out of her, regarding this sudden urge to protect civilians:
Where does the US Congress fit into all of this?
Does it even have a say?
Does it realize that it has been bypassed?
Where is American interest in this particular instance?
Why did this R2P not apply when Neda Agha-Soltan was being mowed down in Tehran?
Per the article – why was this same concern for civilians, not applied in Sudan and Rwanda?
Is this a case of "some animals (countries) are more equal than others"?
Yahoo News gave a report that US and British ships and submarines were first in line to hit Libya. The "globe- trotting" US president made the announcement in between a break from the Samba in Rio? I have to admire this president for his devotion to leisure time. Japan is on the verge of possible collapse. Libya is on the verge of being collapsed by firepower from Western nations. It does not matter. It is time to visit Brazil! President Obama sure gives a good lesson to the rest of us, in how to combat the stresses of life. Thank you, Mr. President. As soon as some funds magically appear in my wallet, I too will be off to Rio!
While the president was busy taking in the local sights, dodging demonstrations by canceling speeches, other leaders were busy giving their two cents worth on the Libya bombing. As an aside, the Brazilians who are demonstrating must not know that in fact, the US president has shown their country more largess than he has the US. Didn't he allocate billions of dollars for Brazil to drill for oil, while putting a freeze on US companies attempting to do the same thing? The African Union forcefully, sort of, called for an "immediate stop" to attacks by Western forces on Libya. The following sentence basically states much of what is needed to be known about this union:
The AU was born in the 1999 Sirte Declaration, named after a summit hosted by Kadhafi in his hometown on the Libyan coast.
So far the pro Libyan leader forces appear to be outnumbering the other side – at least in print. Prime Minister Putin, cagey negotiator, hit the Western anti-Libyan forces where he knew it would hurt – right in the emotional solar plexus. He pulled out the "crusades" card straight from medieval times. This man knows his history and his psychology. "Cagey negotiator" is also very apropos after his job with the latest START Treaty, where Russia practically had to beg the US to stop giving away the US store!
Some folks are of the opinion that he should have vetoed the UN Resolution to bomb Libya into surrender – or oblivion. They are missing the point. He has placed his country in a position of having its cake, while eating the lunch of the "allies." He probably got the idea of effectively voting "present" by abstaining from voting, from our very own president, who liberally employed that tactic as a senator. Why constrain oneself by taking a specific side and inhibiting one's ability to jump the fence to whichever side is the winning side?
Another man of sizeable influence, Mr. Michael Moore parted ways with the US president – "Michael Moore rips Obama over Libya." I don't think that the president wants to get into a fight with Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore would have him for lunch – metaphorically speaking, of course. We thought that Mr. Moore was forthright in his criticism? Mr. Louis Farrakhan invoked the name of Hades in warning his "brother" not to mess with Master K! "Who the hell do you think you are"? – Pretty plain speaking, I think.
The pundits also gave their opinions. Mr. Jim Geraghty provided an expiration warning label on the "Obama Product." Here I had been taking the word of the president, almost as "gospel," "the one," whom even the oceans obeyed? It is quite disillusioning to find out that he is not Moses, not even Jonah. At least this expiration date theory explains why Iran which has numbers of civilians who were killed around June 2009, did not merit the same intervention on humanitarian grounds. The expiration date on Iran was May 10, 2008, a little over a year before Neda expired on or around Kargar Avenue in Tehran, Iran.
Pajamas Media sums up the "Obama Product" in this paragraph:
Barack Obama rose to prominence as a ferocious opponent of the war in Iraq. With barely any objection from either the left or the right, he is now deploying American military power to support some of the very same forces — in all likelihood some of the very same fighters — who were just recently fighting and killing American troops in Iraq.
Should we be "afraid, be very afraid"?
The constitutionality or lack thereof of the war on Libya, this Operation Odyssey Dawn, is taken up by Accuracy in Media:
What the media are missing is the fact that Obama's war on Libya has no basis in law or the U.S. Constitution. He has decided to wage this war on his own with the authorization of the United Nations, not the U.S. Congress.
Could "Operation Odyssey Dawn" turn out to be the dawning of the twilight of the US Empire? No? Maybe? It could be – if we keep electing slogans.
A light bulb just went on. We citizens of the US, are here relaxing, thinking that we have the US Constitution to protect us when in fact, we are being governed by foreign powers? I have begun to feel that the Mexican president acts as if he is co-presidente of the US. He travels to the US. He berates US citizens for US immigration policy, supposed sales of guns from the US to Mexican drug cartels, and US "demand" for illegal drugs. The US president and Congress, many of the members, applaud his every word, and bow down. Now the UN is running US foreign policy? What next, Russia? Actually, that START Treaty could be a bona fide example of Russian domination of the US.
Even the leader of Libya is addressing our president as "son"? What the heck does "your picture will not be changed" means? Does it mean that "dad," Muammar Gadhafi/Gaddafi will be taking up residence in the People's House, if all of the palaces in Libya are turned into dust? Before he moves in, the various spellings of his name should be verified, in order to prevent another recurrence of folks questioning the legitimacy of occupants of that House.
This "pundit's" take on all of this is that once again, the Western "powers" are getting caught up in a game for which they are ill-equipped, despite the military firepower at their disposal. They still do not get the mind games, the treachery, the cunning, played against them. Some members of the Arab League, the same League that requested Western intervention in Libya, are reported to be changing their minds – they were for it before they were against it. They must be related to a certain US politician. If the Western powers were more skilled in the art of Middle Eastern negotiations, the Arab League should have led off the dance.
There is one final question. Friends sent an e-mail asking who is going to be paying for the Libyan "adventure." I am going to respond that they/we should look in the mirror.
As I have stated repeatedly, I have an aversion or allergy to dictators, period. Therefore, this article is not in defense of the dictator of Tripoli. My admittedly naive wish is that all people can be free – as free as we are still, relatively speaking, in the US. The article is from the perspective of an American citizen, who has questions pouring out of her, regarding this sudden urge to protect civilians:
Where does the US Congress fit into all of this?
Does it even have a say?
Does it realize that it has been bypassed?
Where is American interest in this particular instance?
Why did this R2P not apply when Neda Agha-Soltan was being mowed down in Tehran?
Per the article – why was this same concern for civilians, not applied in Sudan and Rwanda?
Is this a case of "some animals (countries) are more equal than others"?
Yahoo News gave a report that US and British ships and submarines were first in line to hit Libya. The "globe- trotting" US president made the announcement in between a break from the Samba in Rio? I have to admire this president for his devotion to leisure time. Japan is on the verge of possible collapse. Libya is on the verge of being collapsed by firepower from Western nations. It does not matter. It is time to visit Brazil! President Obama sure gives a good lesson to the rest of us, in how to combat the stresses of life. Thank you, Mr. President. As soon as some funds magically appear in my wallet, I too will be off to Rio!
While the president was busy taking in the local sights, dodging demonstrations by canceling speeches, other leaders were busy giving their two cents worth on the Libya bombing. As an aside, the Brazilians who are demonstrating must not know that in fact, the US president has shown their country more largess than he has the US. Didn't he allocate billions of dollars for Brazil to drill for oil, while putting a freeze on US companies attempting to do the same thing? The African Union forcefully, sort of, called for an "immediate stop" to attacks by Western forces on Libya. The following sentence basically states much of what is needed to be known about this union:
The AU was born in the 1999 Sirte Declaration, named after a summit hosted by Kadhafi in his hometown on the Libyan coast.
So far the pro Libyan leader forces appear to be outnumbering the other side – at least in print. Prime Minister Putin, cagey negotiator, hit the Western anti-Libyan forces where he knew it would hurt – right in the emotional solar plexus. He pulled out the "crusades" card straight from medieval times. This man knows his history and his psychology. "Cagey negotiator" is also very apropos after his job with the latest START Treaty, where Russia practically had to beg the US to stop giving away the US store!
Some folks are of the opinion that he should have vetoed the UN Resolution to bomb Libya into surrender – or oblivion. They are missing the point. He has placed his country in a position of having its cake, while eating the lunch of the "allies." He probably got the idea of effectively voting "present" by abstaining from voting, from our very own president, who liberally employed that tactic as a senator. Why constrain oneself by taking a specific side and inhibiting one's ability to jump the fence to whichever side is the winning side?
Another man of sizeable influence, Mr. Michael Moore parted ways with the US president – "Michael Moore rips Obama over Libya." I don't think that the president wants to get into a fight with Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore would have him for lunch – metaphorically speaking, of course. We thought that Mr. Moore was forthright in his criticism? Mr. Louis Farrakhan invoked the name of Hades in warning his "brother" not to mess with Master K! "Who the hell do you think you are"? – Pretty plain speaking, I think.
The pundits also gave their opinions. Mr. Jim Geraghty provided an expiration warning label on the "Obama Product." Here I had been taking the word of the president, almost as "gospel," "the one," whom even the oceans obeyed? It is quite disillusioning to find out that he is not Moses, not even Jonah. At least this expiration date theory explains why Iran which has numbers of civilians who were killed around June 2009, did not merit the same intervention on humanitarian grounds. The expiration date on Iran was May 10, 2008, a little over a year before Neda expired on or around Kargar Avenue in Tehran, Iran.
Pajamas Media sums up the "Obama Product" in this paragraph:
Barack Obama rose to prominence as a ferocious opponent of the war in Iraq. With barely any objection from either the left or the right, he is now deploying American military power to support some of the very same forces — in all likelihood some of the very same fighters — who were just recently fighting and killing American troops in Iraq.
Should we be "afraid, be very afraid"?
The constitutionality or lack thereof of the war on Libya, this Operation Odyssey Dawn, is taken up by Accuracy in Media:
What the media are missing is the fact that Obama's war on Libya has no basis in law or the U.S. Constitution. He has decided to wage this war on his own with the authorization of the United Nations, not the U.S. Congress.
Could "Operation Odyssey Dawn" turn out to be the dawning of the twilight of the US Empire? No? Maybe? It could be – if we keep electing slogans.
A light bulb just went on. We citizens of the US, are here relaxing, thinking that we have the US Constitution to protect us when in fact, we are being governed by foreign powers? I have begun to feel that the Mexican president acts as if he is co-presidente of the US. He travels to the US. He berates US citizens for US immigration policy, supposed sales of guns from the US to Mexican drug cartels, and US "demand" for illegal drugs. The US president and Congress, many of the members, applaud his every word, and bow down. Now the UN is running US foreign policy? What next, Russia? Actually, that START Treaty could be a bona fide example of Russian domination of the US.
Even the leader of Libya is addressing our president as "son"? What the heck does "your picture will not be changed" means? Does it mean that "dad," Muammar Gadhafi/Gaddafi will be taking up residence in the People's House, if all of the palaces in Libya are turned into dust? Before he moves in, the various spellings of his name should be verified, in order to prevent another recurrence of folks questioning the legitimacy of occupants of that House.
This "pundit's" take on all of this is that once again, the Western "powers" are getting caught up in a game for which they are ill-equipped, despite the military firepower at their disposal. They still do not get the mind games, the treachery, the cunning, played against them. Some members of the Arab League, the same League that requested Western intervention in Libya, are reported to be changing their minds – they were for it before they were against it. They must be related to a certain US politician. If the Western powers were more skilled in the art of Middle Eastern negotiations, the Arab League should have led off the dance.
There is one final question. Friends sent an e-mail asking who is going to be paying for the Libyan "adventure." I am going to respond that they/we should look in the mirror.
Comments