Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Mission Creepy

A time-limited, scope-limited, kinetic military regime change.

Posted by IOZ at 1:42 PM | email »
Labels: ,

27 comments:

D-one said...

"We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I will say: It is to wage war, by sea, land, and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be". Or put another way: "Lather, Rinse, Repeat"

2:19 PM
anne said...

,..to anyone here that saw mansour o el kikhia on jon liebowitz's daily last night .. ...of what he had to say about .. redirecting the traffic and a few other things ..any comments?

3:33 PM
rob payne said...

If you exchange Israel for Qaddafi you get…

“Israel is using snipers to shoot people down and let them bleed to death in the street,” he said. “He’s cut off food, water and electricity to starve people into submission. And he is harassing humanitarian ships trying to get into the port to do what they can to relieve their suffering.”

3:36 PM
John said...

Gonna need a few million more homeless to get anything off the ground in the Good Ol' USA.. The 70-80% that still have jobs don't give a shit. They have to turn all that yuppie protesting into real work stoppages and slowdowns. There are many effective means going unused, bank withdraws, zeroing out the plastic. So many ways..

3:56 PM
Inkberrow said...

Rob Payne---

Your dubious conflation aside, rest assured that Obama's Universe will soon turn its attention to Israel under the same auspices. Arab League allies on Libya wouldn't have it any other way.

4:53 PM
rob payne said...

Well I liked it.

6:58 PM
Paul Alexander said...

I think the US/NATO track record is a testament to their ability to achieve their limited and clearly delineated goals. I mean 10 years in Afghanistan and 8 years in Iraq with only millions of refugees and hundreds of thousands dead for what has been achieved makes me feel very confident that the US should be out of Libya in no time flat. And by no time, I mean 20 years.

7:54 PM
John said...

10 years.. pfft... They still haven't achieved their goals in Germany or Japan, and it's been what now..? In fact, when are the Brits gonna pull out of North America?

8:14 PM
Clothing said...

Thanks for crafting this post with care and affection. It really shines through.,look forward to reading more in the future.

9:41 PM
rob payne said...

Clothing,

You come 'merca, eat cheezebooger, street lined with golden pickle relish.

11:35 PM
anne said...

,.. clothing... is using my pebble drop comma wave.. . hmmm,. ..i would never use the word future .. . .

11:56 PM
rob payne said...

words change with what comes before and after them.

1:29 AM
Enron said...

“It’s never too early to start planning coordinated action to support peace in Libya over the longer term.”
Peace Is Our Profession

2:06 AM
davidly said...

Inky, forgive me for lacking the smart gene, but by "Obama's Universe will soon turn its attention to Israel under the same auspices" do you mean that someone in the Bo Rama Division is gonna push for NATO involvement in the bombing of Gaza or that he'll soon demand the resignation of a cabinet underling who dares to call Netanyeehaw an asshole?

3:38 AM
anne said...

,.. . a very short film worth noting ... glenn gould chair ,

9:43 AM
G.B. Shaw said...

I had the Englishman pegged years ago...

10:11 AM
fish said...

kinetic military

Well I find the use of XBox Kinect for this war to be quite innovative.

Call of Duty: Qaddafi. So real you can feel it.

10:40 AM
davidly said...

anne:
Watched it. He certainly made the case why he would be thankful under the circumstances. I wish Stewpots would have asked him how he's feel if his family had been swift collateral damage. Not to mention who should be the traffic cops.

10:56 AM
anne said...

davidly,(lovely name by the way ..,) ..you didn't put the time of that comment by me that you are responding to.. . such laughter as i whirl about near glenn gould's chair ..

11:30 AM
Inkberrow said...

Davidly---

No "smart gene" here either, but I think it's likely Obama envisions a fundamental change in the U.S./Middle East dynamic, with this U.N./NATO/Arab League cooperative as the precedent-setting means. If for instance a subsequent "democratic" ruling denounces Israeli treatment of the Palestinians, Obama may be obliged to respect these findings from the World Community. Bombing Israel, of course not (not us, anyway). Withdrawing or curtailing existing aid, suppport, and allegiances, certainly possible. The AIPAC As Bogeyman contingent will be tested.

11:58 AM
fish said...

If for instance a subsequent "democratic" ruling denounces Israeli treatment of the Palestinians, Obama may be obliged to respect these findings from the World Community.


LOL

12:47 PM
davidly said...

anne 11:30 AM: (Thanks. My mom gave it to me.)

To save a bit of time stamping: I was referring to your first comment on the thread.

2:51 PM
davidly said...

Inkberrow:
Wow (no, not "just wow"). it is intriguing, but likely? I dunno. I put the likelihood of your stated scenario at about 2 percent.

3:03 PM
Inkberrow said...

Davidly---

During his first term, anyway...

5:23 PM
anne said...

,.. morning.. ... .. she walks the hall .. . looks about in the larger room .. . .. . then back to here .. .. . .. . is the snake still in the smoking lounge ?

9:13 AM
Leonard said...

Inky, sorry buddy, but you're wrong on this one. Obama will not touch the Israelis. Even second term, he still has many reasons to keep American Israeli supporters sweet. If he opposes Israel in any serious way, he loses many of his friends and much of his administration. (Who wouldn't resign, mind you; that would be rather too principled. But they would happily oppose him from within.) He loses the Democratic party. And he loses the NYT. If he loses them, he loses much of his power, and spends the balance of his term on defense, attempting not to go down in the history books as worse than Carter.

Eventually, yah, the progressives will let the Palestinians destroy the Israelis. But the model is not Libya, it is South Africa. It will be done demographically and then democratically, all on the up and up. And that is very, very slow. An Arab Israel may be the future, but right now Muslims are still only 20% of the population.

11:04 AM
Inkberrow said...

Leonard---

I want you to be correct. But the Democratic Party (and its mainstream media agents) has never been so anti-Israel as it is presently, and in terms of legacy-building it's hard to imagine anything more titanic in foreign policy than fundamentally changing the U.S.-Israel template. Obama tops Carter merely by winning reelection.

3:41 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)