printWhen Obama goes to war illegally and without the necessary, albeit meaningless, formality of the congressional process, they call it a developing “doctrine.” (See the meandering of the CSM, here.) No doubt, Chris Matthews will experience one of his daytime nocturnal emissions over America’s intervention in Libya. You know how indecently aroused Matthews gets every time Obama shows “fortitude.” As allied air forces went into action over Libya, today, Saturday, the media, neocon and neoliberal alike, were aflutter. Yippee: lights, camera, and shock-‘n-awe action. Again. Recall, during the invasion of Iraq, most liberals opposed the unilateral nature of Genghis Bush’s actions. Now that “112 Tomahawk cruise missiles have struck over 20 targets inside Libya,” in what liberals consider a multilateral, “limited” action (here), all’s good.
According to MSNBC.com (here), “American ships and aircraft stationed in and around the Mediterranean Sea did not participate in initial French air missions, but the U.S. was preparing to a launch a missile attack on Libyan air defenses, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the unfolding intervention. One official said the U.S. intended to limit its involvement — at least in the initial stages — to helping protect French and other air missions by taking out Libyan air defenses.” [My emphasis]
COL. JACK JACOBS disagrees with the “assumption … that the margin of difference is air power, and that were it not for Qaddafi’s attack aircraft the rebels would win.” He predicts that “the rebels’ other weaknesses will not be addressed merely by slowing or even stopping the government’s pressure on them,” and that ‘confined to a relatively small area, they may become something of a rump Eastern Libya under UN protection, but it now seems unlikely that they will prevail in the near term.”
Jacobs’ prognosis is for those neocons and neoliberals who entertain the folly that this intervention is not as futile and unconstitutional as those that went before. Then again, most of what the Federal Frankenstein does is either unconstitutional, immoral, illegal, or all of the above.
Jacobs has also confirmed what we all know: The “liberated” Egyptians have a very capable air force. Ditto Saudi Arabia. But are the Arabs doing anything in the cause of a military operation the Arab League instigated? Of course not.
UPDATE I (March 20): Murder by majority approval—unilateral, multilateral; UN or USA—is still murder.
UPDATE II: Behold: A total of four Qatari war planes are moving into position over Libya, reports Al Arabiya. The United Arab Emirates is also scheming on some participation. Slowly.
UPDATE III: An interesting take on the Tripoli offensive from Nebojsa Malic:
“Colonel Gadhafi has maintained that the rebellion was actually orchestrated from the West, and that he was fighting both the Empire and al-Qaeda. … A hint of confirmation could be found in a fawning portrait of rebel fighters in the March 13 Washington Post. One exemplary rebel interviewed by reporter Laila Fadel turns out to be a veteran of the Iraqi insurgency. One of his brothers blew himself up to kill U.S. Marines. Another is an al-Qaeda commander in Afghanistan. But ‘Abu Sultan’ says he disapproves of his brother’s al-Qaeda ways, wants a ‘civilian government with justice, freedom, and a constitution,’ and though he considers this ‘a Libyan fight’ would very much like a no-fly zone and foreign intervention. Make of that what you will.”
The whole adventure in Libya is politically as uninteresting as it is familiar.
UPDATE IV: BHO’S TRIUMVIRATE OF TROLLS. Justin Raimondo on the “triumvirate of women”—or trolls in pantsuits—in BHO’s administration that has pushed for a humanitarian war.
UPDATE V (March 21): I really have very little to say. I despair. This country, I’ve concluded, is home to some of the stupidest people on earth. Even the Arabs are smart enough to look after their own interests, and steer clear of interfering in Libya. The neocons are faulting BHO’s adventure in Libya (for its lateness), while defending the overthrow of Saddam. The liberal nation-builders are behind BHO, but are having a hard time distinguishing themselves from the hated neoconservatives. And for good reason. All media seem to believe that repeating the word “rebel” time and again will transform the shady ragtag factions we are fighting for as a princess’s kiss does a toad.
I see that after an initial verbal orgy in support of the rioting Egyptians, fewer libertarians are celebrating the beauty of Egyptian democracy. Just in time: In Egypt, “Mohamed ElBaradei, an Egyptian presidential candidate and Nobel laureate,” was mauled by a mob on his way to vote in a referendum.
At the National Journal they estimate that,
… the United States’ part in the operation could ultimately hit several billion dollars — and require the Pentagon to request emergency funding from Congress to pay for it. The first day of Operation Odyssey Dawn had a price tag that was well over $100 million for the U.S. in missiles alone. And the U.S. military, which remains in the lead now in its third day, has pumped millions more into air- and sea-launched strikes targeting air-defense sites and ground-force positions along Libya’s coastline.
The ultimate total that the United States spends will hinge on the length and scope of the strikes as well as on the contributions of its coalition allies. But Todd Harrison, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, said on Monday that the U.S. costs could “easily pass the $1 billion mark on this operation, regardless of how well things go.”
Obama’s goal his entire life has been to unite the Arab world against the west. This is just another step in that direction. Watch for the chaos to grow in Iraq, and ultimately for SA to turn against us. AND, once it is clear this is what has happened then Isreal will lash out in some manner… can’t wait!
Here we go again folks. The political leaders in the USA will never learn. Michael Medved believes that if we do not lead this mission that the Middle East could erupt into WW III.
The hypocrisy of US foreign policy defies description. If the stated objectives were honestly held, we’d have half a dozen no-fly zones going on around the world. Maybe more.
Here’s my take on when the American government decides to unleash its military:
1. Is the opponent militarily helpless? If yes, go to Step 2. If not, got to Step 11.
2. Does the opponent have oil or other natural resources to exploit and also pose a threat to Israel? If yes, go to Step 3. If not, go to Step 12.
3. Does the government of the country in question do America’s bidding? If no, go to Step 4. If yes, go to Step 13.
4. Demonize the opponent through media propaganda, line up reluctant allies to present a unified façade, and bombs away! Got to Step 5.
5. Attempt to figure out what to do after innocent people are killed and infrastructure is ruined. Go to Step 6.
6. When air power inevitably fails to achieve the stated objectives, send in the Marines to “liberate” the locals. Go to Step 7.
7. When the locals fail to appreciate Uncle Sam’s beneficence, escalate the violence to quell the resistance. Go to Step 8.
8. When the “free war” turns out to be expensive, don’t directly tax the American people, as this might cause the zombies to question why we’re bombing and occupying foreign countries that are Third World hellholes that pose no danger to US national security. Instead, pass a never-ending series of supplemental funding bills and have the Fed crank up the printing press to monetize the operation. Go to Step 9.
9. Never, ever, admit that the war was a terrible, horrible strategic blunder that killed thousands, displaced millions, and squandered resources. Instead, double down and hope things turn around before the next election. Go to Step 10.
10. When all else fails, declare victory, then high-tail it out of there. Go to Step 14.
11. Talk tough, make idle threats, but do nothing substantive. Go to Step 14.
12. Who cares? Go to Step 14.
13. The dictator may be an SOB, but he’s OUR SOB. Send him billions stolen from American taxpayers to keep him quiet, sell him lots of military gear to placate Boeing and Lockheed, and ignore the corruption and civil liberties violations. Go to Step 14.
14. Go to Step 1.
Chris Matthews consistently confuses blind rage and uncoordinated drunken actions for “fortitude” – at least where B.O. is concerned.
What’s with the “civilian” buzzword we keep hearing from B.O. and the media? This is a war between two belligerents: Qaddaffi and allies vs. civilians-turned-guerillas. In a civil war like this very few people could truly be called “civilians”.
This UN “resolution” amounts to protecting one side in a war while trying to label it as a neutral humanitarian mission of peace. By taking this step they’re permanently making themselves a third belligerent, and are consigning to an escalation that will be nothing short of another perpetual war like we have in Iraq.
Why don’t we hear how these hypothetical “civilians” need to be protected from the rebel forces?
Qaddaffi is an evil moron, just like all other governments. My guess is that the rebels are no better. Lara Logan could testify to the fact that Muslim rebels are not of the high moral caliber that the founding fathers were. (Even if she was strutting around Egypt like Betty Boop)
It’s good to see revolutionaries as long as their only goal is freedom from the persecutor.
Two excellent essays on the practical aspects:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261793/no-intervention-libya-andrew-c-mccarthy
http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/1716/-Libya-Hawks.aspx
Sadly, one would like to think that Constitutional issues and general principles of self-defense vs. blind power-projecting interventionism would prevail. Mc Cain, the alternative to Global Warmonger Obama, would have been even worse so I can only be extremely sad that most Americans are completely apathetic over what Obama does with the taxpayer-deficit funded personal Praetorian Guard of the Kommandant-in-Chief. And most of those who are not completely apathetic actually are supporting him and egging him on. Having opened up his yap, Obama will now have to “prove his credibility” and not “back down”, regardless over how inept or lunatic these “rebels” are.
We now have Rebels Without A Cause!
Meanwhile, if this intervention encourages more rebellion in Bahrain, Yemen, and even that panacea of Liberty, Saudi Arabia – this interventionism will really be haunting us more. And if the odious Assad II gets replaced by a disorganized Warlordized Damascus with 101 mini-Hezbollahs duking it out Somali style, that may be no improvement whatsoever.
In the remote chance that this intervention “goes well” – having set a precedent for intervention in impromptu rebellions, “America” will be attempting it everywhere for decades.
Hillary reminded me a lot of Condoleeza in the tape they played over and over again. Both were pretty good at telling the agreed upon lies correctly. I like the way they speak very slowly and carefully to make sure they don’t accidentally flub and speak a word of truth.
Oh, and I forgot about Obama’s other long-term goal… weaken the U.S. military. Now we’ll be stretched even thinner AND we’ll be vilified for the collatoral damage. Can’t wait until we take out a missle site that’s located in a school playground or on top of a hospital. Yeah…
I don’t know much but I do know that the longer one messes around in the middle east the more muddled everything becomes. Even the natives of that part of the world, except Israel, can’t keep it straight. If we drilled our own oil we’d never have to fool around over there. By the way, in Libya I don’t know who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. You sure can’t tell by the actions of the American government.
So, what we are really looking at is that almost if not all of the Middle East is about to go up in flames, setting the stage for World War Three sometime in the near future. The old lady with the torch is going to become a Valkyrie in the end.
I find it interesting that the President Obama, aka the Bamster, allowed the press to frame the story that he essentially followed the women in his administration to war. Clearly, our Commander in Chief doesn’t want to take full responsibility for this decision to go into Libya. He doesn’t appear to take responsibility for much of anything.
I also find it interesting that Hillary Clinton came out and said she would not serve a second term in the Bamster’s White House at about the same time she was pushing for action in Libya. I find it interesting that the State Department was pushing for war while the Military and the Secretary of Defense was advising against it. I guess Hillary, the flower child of the 60’s, wants to see Momar and his minions pushing up daises. Oh, the irony of it all!
At least Reagan’s response to Moumar’s adventures into terrorism was quick and to the point. Reagan seemed to be able to make decisions, agree or disagree with them. This White House appears to fear even the appearance of having made a decision.
Note: I’ve not tried to wax elegant about the constitutional issues here as they have been covered adequately by you and others.
I regrettably wasted a (paired) vote for that Affirmative Action Warmonger against Psycho McCain because Presidents do their most damage in foreign policy only to see Obama turn into Benjamin Disraeli to Queen Victoria Hillary Clinton.
The people of the 50 states are held in captivity sacrificing money and lives (cheap mercenaries like “the troops” and expensive mercenaries like Blackwater) to the Washington-New York-London “UN-NATO” Empire. This Empire makes war at will on numerous “bad” corrupt and dictatorial Ragheads in the a name of “good” corrupt and dictactorial Ragheads. The good ones like the Saudis, Karzai, Diem, the Shah, and the recently retired Mubarak were the ones that sucked up to the Empire.
What connection does this PERPETUAL WARMONGERING have with the lives, liberties, and properties of the inhabitants who live between Canada and Mexico – an inverse one (since the wars keep state power alive and taxes/debts to oppress us at home).
Here’s more good reading on the Death of our Constitution:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w201.html
And here are the coming attractions: next stop on the War Train – YEMEN!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/rival-tanks-deploy-in-streets-of-yemens-capital-after-powerful-general-defects-to-opposition/2011/03/21/ABWX9Q5_story.html?hpid=z4
Thanks for the quote, Ilana. I’m still trying to figure out the “why” angle here, though it might be nothing beyond the very obvious desire for a “short, victorious war” to boost Obama’s numbers.
Mr. Hogan, your post begs to be made into a flow chart. I wish I had the savvy to make one.
I honestly haven’t decided how I feel about this one yet. Over the last 20 years the US has been quite effective at limited military interventions when we’re providing air & naval support for popular uprisings. We screw things up when we get into the occupation & exploitation business.
Another major reservation is that there really doesn’t seem to be much good information on the source of the Libyan revolution or who exactly is leading it.
The first day of Operation Odyssey Dawn had a price tag that was well over $100 million for the U.S. in missiles alone
Add another $50 million for the lost F-15E.
I am one of those simpletons that Ilana refers to – at least I used to be until I saw history repeat itself in a very bad way in Kosovo – I was on the Serb’s side [which puts you outside the “simpleton” majority], but still saw no reason for our intervention – this was a civil war with the Muslims against the Christians, and my country stupidly sided with the Muslims/Al Qaida. I am 100% against continued presence in Afghanistan and intervention into any of these other “popular uprisings” in the Middle East. My dilemma has always been with the conflict of supporting our troops when they have been sent into “dumb wars.” I don’t support any of these missions, so what about support for our troops – I guess I don’t any more. This will bring about the draft quicker than anything with the white men now leaving the ranks in droves.
Niall Ferguson, speaking to the airhead Mika Brezinski, explains to her why the Obama administration was utterly inept in its dealing with Egypt. The administration has now apparently redoubled its efforts to appear clueless in its dealings with Libya. The Libyan affair is a civil (actually, tribal) war, and the U.S. should have nothing whatsoever to do with it. If the Brits and the French want to do something, let them do as they please. It is truly none of our business at all.
The idiots in this administration amaze me.
Having said that, it is possible that the Libyan military action, blessed only by the horrible UN, may be used as precedent if Samantha Power convinces Obama to invade Israel, a position which she has advocated in the past.
The oft-quoted Ferguson clip amuses me, because Niall is actually a bona fide imperialist and interventionist otherwise. But even he grasps that the U.S. doesn’t have the stomach (or purse) for the actual business of Empire.
However, I wouldn’t despair. If “whom gods would destroy, they first make mad” is true, then everything seems to be going just swimmingly…
I am reminded of something my son’s late godmother said. Judith was an Englishwoman, the widow of a KGB agent from SMERSH who defected after WWII – and that’s not even the most interesting thing about her…
Judith said once, “In the end I think the British Empire was a bad idea, because we lost so many fine young men trying to civilize people who cannot be civilized!”
Just another step in Obama’s liberal socialist plan to keep forcing the U.S. ever deeper into debt. The quicker and deeper he can pile on the debt, the quicker and more completely the USA will collapse. The man should be impeached.
To Fred Mueller: the deficit was caused not only by “liberal socialists” like Obama but also by the borrow and spend Reaganomics of the great “conservative” himself. See
http://reason.com/archives/2011/03/21/the-triumph-of-politics-over-e
which has a very revealing interview with Reagan’s budget director David Stockman. Interestingly, today is the 28th Anniversary of the notorious Star Wars speech (written one day after I finished writing an article on why American cannot escape from Mutual Assured Destruction!). From that, this country spent over $250 Billion on shoddy pseudoscience.
Obama certainly DESERVES IMPEACHMENT but who (besides Ron Paul) gets to cast the first stone? — McCain, Gingrich, Kristol, Palin, Clinton, Biden, Cheney, Bush – all warmongers. How many remember the buildup to the Iraq War when Bush kept citing all the UN resolutions that Saddam Hussein was defying?? And how many Americans have enthusiastically endorsed every idiotic undeclared war at the beginning before they and the media grow tired of the endless quagmires?
So when will the US attack that “sh*tty little country”, the racist (Zionist) entity who has been denounced by more UN resolutions than the rest of the world put together. And when the UN orders global gun confiscation – do we make war on ourselves?
I watched a funny video on this earlier.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/82962.html Jon Stewart at his best.