Or (3), to quote a fifty year old joke from Kenneth Williams, a British comedian no-one will have heard of, as a CIA agent ‘Except when it’s expedient’.
Yemen leader under pressure as generals and officials quit
*"Three top generals in Yemen declared their support for anti-government protests Monday as a wave of officials, including the deputy speaker of parliament, announced their resignations.
One of the generals who broke ranks will order his troops to protect civilians demonstrating against the country’s longtime president, he said in Yemen."*
Or should I say, what goes around, comes around?
Couldn’t have spelled said it better.
I have to remember to nominate this for the most disingenuous SDMB post of the year award.
Remember Lockerbie.
ITT:
Former pro-war keyboard warriors with a wicked blood lust and a penchant for propaganda turning into granola munching hippies concerned with the lives of foreigners, and vice versa.
In fairness, I’m catching flak from the left as well.
A poll I saw on (CNN?) said that 83% of Americans support this action. There’s no doubt that my view is a minority one.
In both cases that’s not true for me. I did not support Iraq only in that there was blatant lying, our resources were stretched too thin militarily, and it was executed poorly. Since none of the three are true for Libya so far, I support it as well.
I’ll remind you that Bush also had an authorization from the U.N.
Are you intentionally misreading my posts?
Care to elaborate on what authorization you are talking about?
I hope Daffy gets flushed out of a hiding place somewhere with a well-aimed laser guided bomb, loses all his bodyguards in a running battle with rebels and gets taken prisoner and dealt with by the locals.
That would be great. 
Because of course, it’s none of our business. Major headaches and bureaucratic bungling involved if the French find him and have try him at the Hague and all that nonsense. Could take years and he’ll just end up in prison.
Yes, better to let the rebels deal with Daffy, methinks.
- with all the help we get away with giving them. Long as it’s you know, “legal” and all. :dubious:
Balderdash, sir! Tommyrot!
Bush got a preliminary approval that didn’t come anywhere near approving Dick and George’s Excellent Military Adventure. If you will recall, he was laboring mightily to get that second resolution, arms were twisted, promises were made.
Then came a moment of low comedy, you may remember. On Friday, IIRC, he said he was going to bring it to a vote, he was going to get everybody’s cards on the table, no more ducking and prevaricating, if you were with us, you vote for the second resolution, if not, well, that’s your look-out, isn’t it?
At some time over the weekend, he decided that he didn’t need that second resolution, that the first resolution was a ringing endorsement for American attack, and the previous statements were inoperative, and no questions regarding non-existent positions were answerable. Poof! gone. Skeptical minds were unanimous in the opinion that he had done a quick head count, realized he would lose, and opted for the Pee-Wee Herman Gambit: “I meant to do that!”
Those of us with the good sense that God gave a goose realized that if the first resolution were sufficient, he would not have tried so hard for a second and definitive authorization for war. That he brushed his failure to obtain it aside as if it were nothing reveals that he had no real concern for UN legitimacy to begin with. If he could drape the mantle of UN authorization over his pre-determined course, he was happy to do so, but it didn’t really matter.
NO, I AM NOT. I see no qualitative difference between then and now. None. Both are unwarranted interferences in the affairs of a sovereign nation for no better reason than that we don’t care for its leader. I don’t care how many nations are standing around cheering it on. I opposed the attack on Iraq. I oppose the attack on Libya.
That said, John Mace and elucidator are quite correct in challenging my post. My post was, indeed, balderdash, and I withdraw it. The authorization the U.N. gave Bush was not a warrant to invade.
I note that the Libyan government’s army has been brought to a screeching halt by the attacks, that the rebels are chortling and planning the counter-offensive, and I eagerly await the enforcement of the current resolution as the rebels kill civilians that support Qaddaffi.
Yes, that’s something I was thinking, too. This is going to get real bloody real soon. What do we do then?
And who are these rebels? I hope the Libyans end up with a decent government, but unless we get troops in there to ensure there is some sort of order, we just gave al Qaeda a new playground.
Though I’ve tried giving myself somewhat of a break after the Iraq debacle – and the ongoing one in Afghanistan – I can’t help to be amazed at the way so-called World Leaders from the most powerful nations on earth have gone about “handling” this crisis. On the one hand you have Kadafi, everyone’s till now favorite tyrant and on the other you have what are supposed to be the elite of the elite when it comes to foreign policy. And what’s the result of these meetings of the mind? Hopefully I am as wrong as I wish I had been about Iraq, but it STM no one knows their head from their ass.
For one, who the fuck are we supporting here? Who are these so-called ‘rebels’ and what are they after? For all I know – and read – they are basically a number of tribes with no real agenda other than coming to power. Yeah well, which ones and with what ideas? Not like I see any sort of monolithic policy driving these folks. Beyond which, the so-called ‘coalition’ – which I agree with others, it’s much more in UN order of Afghanistan than Iraq initially – is already starting to show signs of cracking, which only leads to believe that things are going to get a hell of a lot worse before they get any better.
Beginning to feel that – read Putin’s ill-advised comments today – there’s a real power vacuum/lack of vision in today’s so-called leaders.
And yeah, Bush was surely an A-hole. But at least there was no two ways about it. Now there are more…
Even after the massive international bombing campaign, might Libya’s longtime leader, Col. Moammar Gadhafi, still refuse to give up power?
The U. S. general leading the forces in Libya says, in a word, yes.
*
At today’s Pentagon briefing U.S. General Carter Ham was asked, “We’ve heard repeatedly from Pentagon officials and military commanders that Gadhafi is not a target. Can you see a situation where he remains in power? Are you worried that – that it will end in a stalemate? Does that concern you?*
“ I do see a situation where that – that could be the case, “ Ham said, “I have – again, it’s perhaps easier for me to address that than it is for others, because I have a very discrete military mission. And so I could see accomplishing the military mission, which has been – which has been assigned to me, and the current leader would – would remain the current leader.
“Is that ideal? I don’t think anyone would say that that is ideal. But I could envision that as a – as a possible situation, at least for the current mission that I have.”
ABC News
Of course, it may not come to that: the best way of prediction would be to analyse the characters involved, Gaddafi, Obama and the assorted nutters in charge of Britain, France and whatever other European powers are in charge [ so far the International Coalition seems to be Britain and France and America, with Italy and Canada as makeweights ], and determine
a/ Who is the best survivor ?
b/ Who has the most rat-like cunning ?
c/ Who can afford to take the most casualties ?
d/ Who is cleverer ?
To our son, the honorable Barack Hussein Obama,
As I have said before, even if, God forbid, there were a war between Libya and America, you would remain my son and I would still love you. I do not want to change the image I have of you. All of the Libyan people are with me, ready to die, even the women and children. We are fighting nothing other than al-Qaida in what they call the Islamic Maghreb. It’s an armed group that is fighting from Libya to Mauritania and through Algeria and Mali. … If you had found them taking over American cities by the force of arms, tell me what you would do?"
AP
I’d like to note here that I am happy to see (in rare exception to Pit threads) that most of we non-lunatics (no matter how much we may be snarling at each other) are mostly ignoring the wingbats.
Makes for a nice argument.
Don’t think I’ve ever seen a wingless bat.
[Taps shoulder] Stop looking in the sky.
I learned long ago not to look in the sky when creatures are aflight.
(Or falling from the sky if I’m in Cincinnati.)