Sign in to follow this  
Shootist Jeff

All things Libya

Recommended Posts

I'll make a stab at it:

 

We have a limited goal - protection of the civilians. We'd like to see the crazy dude removed - but that's not our explicit goal.

 

I gave our goal to the military - and they told me how they would need to implement to ensure force protection. Remember when Bill Gates said we'd have to hit them hard to put in place a NFZ? Well - I trust him to do what is necessary, and they have.

 

Who's gotta problem with that?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I still don't think we should be there, but since we are, gotta do it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll make a stab at it:

 

We have a limited goal - protection of the civilians. We'd like to see the crazy dude removed - but that's not our explicit goal.

 

I gave our goal to the military - and they told me how they would need to implement to ensure force protection. Remember when Bill Gates said we'd have to hit them hard to put in place a NFZ? Well - I trust him to do what is necessary, and they have.

 

Who's gotta problem with that?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I still don't think we should be there, but since we are, gotta do it right.

 

Getting close. That's all about right. The tricky part is that if Obama comes out and says that removing Qadhafi is the goal, (and it most definitely is) then the French and the British can play the US public against him to fund the end-game. He has to see that happen or "fail", right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's official we handed off to NATO.

 

We're out..

So, the french are out now?

 

Maybe not. They got one - a training aircraft - just after it landed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think congress Is overjoyed they weren't consulted. They would have had to make a decision and pick a side. And they could have been wrong. Now...they all get to complain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's official we handed off to NATO.

 

We're out..

So, the french are out now?

 

Maybe not. They got one - a training aircraft - just after it landed.

 

 

NATO takes command of part of Libya operation

Associated Press, Brussels | Fri, 03/25/2011 8:52 AM | Headlines

 

NATO agreed late Thursday to take over part of the military operations against Libya - enforcement of the no-fly zone - after days of hard bargaining among its members. But the toughest and most controversial portion of the operation - attacks on the ground - will continue to be led by the U.S., which has been anxious to give up the lead role.

 

My link

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

NATO takes command of part of Libya operation

Associated Press, Brussels | Fri, 03/25/2011 8:52 AM | Headlines

 

NATO agreed late Thursday to take over part of the military operations against Libya - enforcement of the no-fly zone - after days of hard bargaining among its members. But the toughest and most controversial portion of the operation - attacks on the ground - will continue to be led by the U.S., which has been anxious to give up the lead role.

 

My link

And gaytor not only continues to be an ass-clown, but is continually wrong.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's official we handed off to NATO.

 

We're out..

So, the french are out now?

 

Maybe not. They got one - a training aircraft - just after it landed.

 

If somebody was doing touch and go's in there, it was the stupidest person on the face of the earth.

 

Chlorine for the gene pool, man. Good shootin'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's official we handed off to NATO.

 

We're out..

So, the french are out now?

 

Maybe not. They got one - a training aircraft - just after it landed.

Some training aircraft are outfitted for fighter and ground attack. The T38 comes to mind. In the USAF it only saw service as a trainer and adversary aircraft. Other nations bought it as the F5 Skoshi Tiger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20110325100004396.jpg

A Dutch F-16 aircraft preparing for landing at the Decimomannu airbase, in Sardinia, Italy, on Thursday. French fighter jets struck an air base deep inside Libya and destroyed one of Qaddafi's planes on Thursday, and other coalition bombers struck artillery, arms depots and parked helicopters. (AP Photo)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think congress Is overjoyed they weren't consulted. They would have had to make a decision and pick a side. And they could have been wrong. Now...they all get to complain.

 

Mike is right. As far as I can tell, there is only one person in Congress who actually thought their power had been usurped and they should respond forcefully: Kucinich, who suggested impeachment. He was/is right, but being right is not necessarily right if you are the only one.

 

The fact is, Congress does not want their power back. That's why everyone just acted like Kucinich was weird for suggesting it, not because he was wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think congress Is overjoyed they weren't consulted. They would have had to make a decision and pick a side. And they could have been wrong. Now...they all get to complain.

 

Mike is right. As far as I can tell, there is only one person in Congress who actually thought their power had been usurped and they should respond forcefully: Kucinich, who suggested impeachment. He was/is right, but being right is not necessarily right if you are the only one.

 

The fact is, Congress does not want their power back. That's why everyone just acted like Kucinich was weird for suggesting it, not because he was wrong.

 

Exactly... And, that's why when all this is said and done, we will see no serious effort by Congress to push for any real clarification of this issue, or the War Powers Act, etc...

 

They've all learned the lesson of Hillary Clinton well... Her single vote in favor of Iraq was the one that came back to haunt her, may very well have cost her the Presidency...

 

So much more convenient for them to be able to take the vote after the fact, when they've had time to assess which way the winds of war are likely to blow...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it a dereliction of duty and constitutional for the president to delegate the command of US forces to a NATO committee?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

Probably. I would be very surprised if they were not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it a dereliction of duty and constitutional for the president to delegate the command of US forces to a NATO committee?

 

Stupid question! An American General is currently the Supreme Commander of NATO.

 

This is a brilliant move that removes our men and women from harms way. It refreshing to see the French boldly take the lead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

Oh, well, that must absolutely be the truth then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

Oh, well, that must absolutely be the truth then.

 

So who is painting the targets for the fly boys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll make a stab at it:

 

We have a limited goal - protection of the civilians. We'd like to see the crazy dude removed - but that's not our explicit goal.

 

I gave our goal to the military - and they told me how they would need to implement to ensure force protection. Remember when Bill Gates said we'd have to hit them hard to put in place a NFZ? Well - I trust him to do what is necessary, and they have.

 

Who's gotta problem with that?

 

I still don't think we should be there, but since we are, gotta do it right.

 

Getting close. That's all about right. The tricky part is that if Obama comes out and says that removing Qadhafi is the goal, (and it most definitely is) then the French and the British can play the US public against him to fund the end-game. He has to see that happen or "fail", right?

 

 

"Muammar Gaddafi has lost legitimacy to lead, and he must leave."

Obama - March 3.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

 

Really? Obama specifically addressed whether we have special forces on the ground? Cite please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

 

Really? Obama specifically addressed whether we have special forces on the ground? Cite please.

 

This is highly classified stuff, here. If he told you, he'd have to kill you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it a dereliction of duty and constitutional for the president to delegate the command of US forces to a NATO committee?

 

Stupid question! An American General is currently the Supreme Commander of NATO.

 

This is a brilliant move that removes our men and women from harms way. It refreshing to see the French boldly take the lead.

I swear I never would have thought it possible, but you've actually come back MORE STUPID after your time out. I have a feeling that instead of doing P90x you were most likely doing 420 and X.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

 

Really? Obama specifically addressed whether we have special forces on the ground? Cite please.

 

This is highly classified stuff, here. If he told you, he'd have to kill you.

Like I said earlier, he's pulling his information out of his ass. Since his ass is an "open source", especially to St Pete trannies and prison inmates, there is nothing classified about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

 

Really? Obama specifically addressed whether we have special forces on the ground? Cite please.

 

This is highly classified stuff, here. If he told you, he'd have to kill you.

Like I said earlier, he's pulling his information out of his ass. Since his ass is an "open source", especially to St Pete trannies and prison inmates, there is nothing classified about it.

 

Thanks Jeff. Funny stuff, that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US general in charge of the operation, General Carter Ham, said coalition forces imposing the no-fly zone "cannot be sure" there have been no civilian deaths, but are trying to be "very precise".

 

My link

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

Oh, well, that must absolutely be the truth then.

 

So who is painting the targets for the fly boys?

 

I know almost nothing on this topic, so someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that if I were ordering a plane like the B2 to strike a hostile target, I'd like to make sure that our guys pick up the pieces, if there are pieces to pick up. We hope there are not, of course, but you never know. I don't think I would want anyone else picking up those pieces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

Oh, well, that must absolutely be the truth then.

 

So who is painting the targets for the fly boys?

 

British special forces and French Foreign Legion..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know almost nothing on this topic, so someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that if I were ordering a plane like the B2 to strike a hostile target, I'd like to make sure that our guys pick up the pieces, if there are pieces to pick up. We hope there are not, of course, but you never know. I don't think I would want anyone else picking up those pieces.

 

Pick up what pieces?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

Oh, well, that must absolutely be the truth then.

 

So who is painting the targets for the fly boys?

 

British special forces and French Foreign Legion..

 

Gaytor, do you EVER stop fucking talking out of your ass? I'm not saying they aren't there, but targets do not have to be "painted" by anyone to effectively engage them. The fighters are perfectly capable of doing that themselves. Or they might have one fighter orbiting overhead before the other show up working to ID the targets and then they can "paint" them for the newcomers.

 

And you're seriously delusional if you don't think there are US SFs there on the ground. But then again, that comes as no shock.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know almost nothing on this topic, so someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that if I were ordering a plane like the B2 to strike a hostile target, I'd like to make sure that our guys pick up the pieces, if there are pieces to pick up. We hope there are not, of course, but you never know. I don't think I would want anyone else picking up those pieces.

 

Pick up what pieces?

 

B2 pieces, should one get shot down. Do we just leave something like that sitting there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know almost nothing on this topic, so someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that if I were ordering a plane like the B2 to strike a hostile target, I'd like to make sure that our guys pick up the pieces, if there are pieces to pick up. We hope there are not, of course, but you never know. I don't think I would want anyone else picking up those pieces.

 

Pick up what pieces?

 

B2 pieces, should one get shot down. Do we just leave something like that sitting there?

 

Oh, I thought you meant pieces of the bomb fragments. Yes, we would most likely do everything possible to quickly recover the wreckage of something that sensitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know almost nothing on this topic, so someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that if I were ordering a plane like the B2 to strike a hostile target, I'd like to make sure that our guys pick up the pieces, if there are pieces to pick up. We hope there are not, of course, but you never know. I don't think I would want anyone else picking up those pieces.

 

Pick up what pieces?

 

B2 pieces, should one get shot down. Do we just leave something like that sitting there?

 

 

Apparently (if history is any guide) yes. The USAF is pretty careless with it's equpment - they've lost several nules and even left behind a F117 stealth fighter for the Chinese to pick up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it a dereliction of duty and constitutional for the president to delegate the command of US forces to a NATO committee?

 

Stupid question! An American General is currently the Supreme Commander of NATO.

 

This is a brilliant move that removes our men and women from harms way. It refreshing to see the French boldly take the lead.

Under Article 2 Section 2 Obama is the ultimate commander of US forces. Outsourcing command functions to NATO places US forces in a chain of command that he does not oversee or control. Clearly unconstitutional and I suspect a deliberate to distance himself from his constitutional responsibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it a dereliction of duty and constitutional for the president to delegate the command of US forces to a NATO committee?

 

Stupid question! An American General is currently the Supreme Commander of NATO.

 

This is a brilliant move that removes our men and women from harms way. It refreshing to see the French boldly take the lead.

Under Article 2 Section 2 Obama is the ultimate commander of US forces. Outsourcing command functions to NATO places US forces in a chain of command that he does not oversee or control. Clearly unconstitutional and I suspect a deliberate to distance himself from his constitutional responsibilities.

 

 

No reasonable person agrees with your silly assertion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dog, can forces from other NATO countries fall under US command?

 

Pretty worthless allies if not, I'd say, and sauce for the goose, you know...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that US Forces have never been under the direct command of any Foreign Government/ Military - That would be a serious change of our long held policy. Not that anything Obama does these days doesn't have me shaking my head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the US have special forces on the ground in Libya?

 

 

No Obama explicitly addressed this issue.

 

We are out...

Oh, well, that must absolutely be the truth then.

 

So who is painting the targets for the fly boys?

 

I know almost nothing on this topic, so someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that if I were ordering a plane like the B2 to strike a hostile target, I'd like to make sure that our guys pick up the pieces, if there are pieces to pick up. We hope there are not, of course, but you never know. I don't think I would want anyone else picking up those pieces.

Picking up the pieces is not a good idea. First of all, you would need people who knew which pieces were worth picking up. Secondly, they would be at risk going in and out and, on the way out, would have pulled out the prime pieces that we don't want falling into enemy hands.

 

The better idea would be to make even more and smaller pieces through a series of really big booms. Preferably while the other guys are trying to find the good pieces if not, just more dispersion and damage will generally do the trick. Especially if you finish off with napalm, WP, or some other good burny thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that US Forces have never been under the direct command of any Foreign Government/ Military - That would be a serious change of our long held policy. Not that anything Obama does these days doesn't have me shaking my head.

Nope, even during WW II US forces fell under british command on several occasions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that US Forces have never been under the direct command of any Foreign Government/ Military - That would be a serious change of our long held policy. Not that anything Obama does these days doesn't have me shaking my head.

Nope, even during WW II US forces fell under british command on several occasions.

Care to provide a cite? Because I understood that direct orders were still being given by US officers in the field from US Generals from joint command.

 

That may very well be the case that will happen under the new structure in Libya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that US Forces have never been under the direct command of any Foreign Government/ Military - That would be a serious change of our long held policy. Not that anything Obama does these days doesn't have me shaking my head.

Nope, even during WW II US forces fell under british command on several occasions.

 

I don't believe there is any doctrinal rule that says US forces cannot be under the command of a non-US coalition command structure. But I do know that as a rule of thumb, the US has ardently avoided doing so for a variety of reasons. In the vast majority, if not all, of the cases I can think of where there has been a coalition involved in actual battle - there have been two pretty distinct chains of command: US and everyone else. Even down to the point of different ROE for the US and the coalition, based on political constraints. Even then, there has always been a "Joint Force Commander" and that typically is ALWAYS a US guy.

 

NATO is a bit of a special case however, since we are a member of an established military command structure by treaty. I think we very well could fall under the NATO command strucure without much problem. Other than Allied Force, there has never been an actual NATO led conflict. I'll have to do some digging to see how that command structure was set up and how the US wiring diagram vs the NATO wiring diagram worked.

 

No matter what though, while we might be "subordinate" to NATO on paper for this op for TACON - we always retain OPCON of our forces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that US Forces have never been under the direct command of any Foreign Government/ Military - That would be a serious change of our long held policy. Not that anything Obama does these days doesn't have me shaking my head.

Nope, even during WW II US forces fell under british command on several occasions.

 

I don't believe there is any doctrinal rule that says US forces cannot be under the command of a non-US coalition command structure. But I do know that as a rule of thumb, the US has ardently avoided doing so for a variety of reasons. In the vast majority, if not all, of the cases I can think of where there has been a coalition involved in actual battle - there have been two pretty distinct chains of command: US and everyone else. Even down to the point of different ROE for the US and the coalition, based on political constraints. Even then, there has always been a "Joint Force Commander" and that typically is ALWAYS a US guy.

 

NATO is a bit of a special case however, since we are a member of an established military command structure by treaty. I think we very well could fall under the NATO command strucure without much problem. Other than Allied Force, there has never been an actual NATO led conflict. I'll have to do some digging to see how that command structure was set up and how the US wiring diagram vs the NATO wiring diagram worked.

 

No matter what though, while we might be "subordinate" to NATO on paper for this op for TACON - we always retain OPCON of our forces.

Thanks Jeff That is how I thought things were set up. It may still fall under that same structure in Libya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that US Forces have never been under the direct command of any Foreign Government/ Military - That would be a serious change of our long held policy. Not that anything Obama does these days doesn't have me shaking my head.

Nope, even during WW II US forces fell under british command on several occasions.

Care to provide a cite? Because I understood that direct orders were still being given by US officers in the field from US Generals from joint command.

 

That may very well be the case that will happen under the new structure in Libya.

 

Here's one list of all the times, http://theglitteringeye.com/?p=1622

 

We have frequently been under foreign command, but one must differentiate that from operational control. Homey don't play dat.

 

Edit: Nevermind, Jeff beat me to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that US Forces have never been under the direct command of any Foreign Government/ Military - That would be a serious change of our long held policy. Not that anything Obama does these days doesn't have me shaking my head.

Nope, even during WW II US forces fell under british command on several occasions.

Care to provide a cite? Because I understood that direct orders were still being given by US officers in the field from US Generals from joint command.

 

That may very well be the case that will happen under the new structure in Libya.

 

Here's one list of all the times, http://theglitteringeye.com/?p=1622

 

We have frequently been under foreign command, but one must differentiate that from operational control. Homey don't play dat.

 

Edit: Nevermind, Jeff beat me to it.

Thanks Mark good read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that US Forces have never been under the direct command of any Foreign Government/ Military - That would be a serious change of our long held policy. Not that anything Obama does these days doesn't have me shaking my head.

Nope, even during WW II US forces fell under british command on several occasions.

 

I don't believe there is any doctrinal rule that says US forces cannot be under the command of a non-US coalition command structure. But I do know that as a rule of thumb, the US has ardently avoided doing so for a variety of reasons. In the vast majority, if not all, of the cases I can think of where there has been a coalition involved in actual battle - there have been two pretty distinct chains of command: US and everyone else. Even down to the point of different ROE for the US and the coalition, based on political constraints. Even then, there has always been a "Joint Force Commander" and that typically is ALWAYS a US guy.

 

NATO is a bit of a special case however, since we are a member of an established military command structure by treaty. I think we very well could fall under the NATO command strucure without much problem. Other than Allied Force, there has never been an actual NATO led conflict. I'll have to do some digging to see how that command structure was set up and how the US wiring diagram vs the NATO wiring diagram worked.

 

No matter what though, while we might be "subordinate" to NATO on paper for this op for TACON - we always retain OPCON of our forces.

Were US forces not under Wes Clark's command at some point? Is he not a democRAT? So having our forces under unAmerican command is not entirely without precedent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that US Forces have never been under the direct command of any Foreign Government/ Military - That would be a serious change of our long held policy. Not that anything Obama does these days doesn't have me shaking my head.

Nope, even during WW II US forces fell under british command on several occasions.

 

I don't believe there is any doctrinal rule that says US forces cannot be under the command of a non-US coalition command structure. But I do know that as a rule of thumb, the US has ardently avoided doing so for a variety of reasons. In the vast majority, if not all, of the cases I can think of where there has been a coalition involved in actual battle - there have been two pretty distinct chains of command: US and everyone else. Even down to the point of different ROE for the US and the coalition, based on political constraints. Even then, there has always been a "Joint Force Commander" and that typically is ALWAYS a US guy.

 

NATO is a bit of a special case however, since we are a member of an established military command structure by treaty. I think we very well could fall under the NATO command strucure without much problem. Other than Allied Force, there has never been an actual NATO led conflict. I'll have to do some digging to see how that command structure was set up and how the US wiring diagram vs the NATO wiring diagram worked.

 

No matter what though, while we might be "subordinate" to NATO on paper for this op for TACON - we always retain OPCON of our forces.

Were US forces not under Wes Clark's command at some point? Is he not a democRAT? So having our forces under unAmerican command is not entirely without precedent.

No, Wes Clark was ok. He wore a uniform, so it balanced out his johnny come lately un-American-ess. You would have to be a community organizer and born in a foreign country to be truly un-american.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rebels thank France but want 'outside forces' to quit Libya

 

My link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/26/libya.war/index.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

 

You assume that McCain would have gotten involved in the first place.

 

BTW - Violent protests in London. Perhaps Obama can establish a no fly zone to protect civilians against their oppressive government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/26/libya.war/index.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

I think it's pure fantasy to imagine that any Administration could possibly "have a handle on" the events that have transpired recently in the Middle East...

 

As for McCain, you're aware that he remains outspoken in his belief that we should be supplying arms to these "rebels" in Libya, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

Do you think its possible to restrain yourself from calling the president a boy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

Do you think its possible to restrain yourself from calling the president a boy?

Spare me...How about you go over to the "who do you want" thread and deal with some real demeaning shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

Do you think its possible to restrain yourself from calling the president a boy?

Spare me...How about you go over to the "who do you want" thread and deal with some real demeaning shit.

 

Nah, I'll stick around here and harass the dog faced boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

Do you think its possible to restrain yourself from calling the president a boy?

Spare me...How about you go over to the "who do you want" thread and deal with some real demeaning shit.

 

Nah, I'll stick around here and harass the dog faced boy.

You're so defensive about Obama maybe you should have a word with these guys.

15zl2qh.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for McCain, you're aware that he remains outspoken in his belief that we should be supplying arms to these "rebels" in Libya, right?

 

You noticed that they're pretty much the same too, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/26/libya.war/index.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

I think it's pure fantasy to imagine that any Administration could possibly "have a handle on" the events that have transpired recently in the Middle East...

 

As for McCain, you're aware that he remains outspoken in his belief that we should be supplying arms to these "rebels" in Libya, right?

 

I'm ok with supplying some arms to the rebels.... AK-47s, ammo, RPGs, maybe some arty and armor, stuff like that. There would be no reason to give them Stingers because the Libya AF isn't flying. They are NOT going to dislodge MQ without some help. Besides, as the rebels get closer and closer to Tripoli - I think you'll see much less of the so-called "pro-gov't" support from the civilians. Most of the MSM news reports from inside Tripoli say that citizens want Q gone, they just won't say it out loud for fear of taking a bullet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most of the MSM news reports from inside Tripoli say that citizens want Q gone, they just won't say it out loud for fear of taking a bullet.

 

Strikes me as propaganda that is likely false. When it's really over in that sense for a regime, they tend to go away quickly and without much fight, because they have no allies left. He has some kind of power base or he would be gone already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

Do you think its possible to restrain yourself from calling the president a boy?

 

Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most of the MSM news reports from inside Tripoli say that citizens want Q gone, they just won't say it out loud for fear of taking a bullet.

 

Strikes me as propaganda that is likely false. When it's really over in that sense for a regime, they tend to go away quickly and without much fight, because they have no allies left. He has some kind of power base or he would be gone already.

Propaganda???? YGBSM. The people in tripoli are singing Mo Q's praises when the cameras and mics are on and the security forces are watching, but as soon as the cameras are off and a reporter can talk to some of these people away from the watchful eyes of the secret police minders..... They say they want Mo gone and are scared shitless to speak out.

 

and of course MO Q has a power base..... It's called the secret police, his army and mercenaries. All of whom have shown zero hesitation to gun down civilians who step out of line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

Do you think its possible to restrain yourself from calling the president a boy?

 

Why?

 

Are you serious Grumps?

Three Fifths.

 

Bad juju.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

and of course MO Q has a power base..... It's called the secret police, his army and mercenaries. All of whom have shown zero hesitation to gun down civilians who step out of line.

 

Those are exactly the people who would betray him if they could. If he did not have a larger power base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

and of course MO Q has a power base..... It's called the secret police, his army and mercenaries. All of whom have shown zero hesitation to gun down civilians who step out of line.

 

Those are exactly the people who would betray him if they could. If he did not have a larger power base.

 

He has, of course, the Qadhafa tribe, and quite a few Tareg tribes support him. You can't assume betrayal.

 

The German Army stuck with Hitler long past the point where it was obvious he was insane, and that he had to go or Germany would be destroyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

Do you think its possible to restrain yourself from calling the president a boy?

 

Why?

 

 

You friggin bigot :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The German Army stuck with Hitler long past the point where it was obvious he was insane, and that he had to go or Germany would be destroyed.

 

That's true, but the USSR was just suddenly over one day. I think the German case anomalous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

Do you think its possible to restrain yourself from calling the president a boy?

 

Why?

 

You friggin bigot :angry:

 

Only in America can you twist the normal differentuation between the sexes as politacally incorrect. You got a problem bloke.

 

To the rest of the world (and there is a lot of it out there) Obama is a male - man - boy - bloke. He's got a penis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

Do you think its possible to restrain yourself from calling the president a boy?

 

Why?

 

You friggin bigot :angry:

 

Only in America can you twist the normal differentuation between the sexes as politacally incorrect. You got a problem bloke.

 

To the rest of the world (and there is a lot of it out there) Obama is a male - man - boy - bloke. He's got a penis.

It became absurd way back but they still persist. Bunch of hyper sensitive pussies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

 

Do you think its possible to restrain yourself from calling the president a boy?

 

Why?

 

 

You friggin bigot :angry:

 

Straight to name calling? Who's the bigot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I'm not the one who called a black american man "boy". If you're emrbarassed about who you are it's time to let the love of Jesus in your heart. It will help you overcome your hate. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A new low...congratulations guys.

 

 

It became absurd way back but they still persist. Bunch of hyper sensitive pussies.

 

Word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The German Army stuck with Hitler long past the point where it was obvious he was insane, and that he had to go or Germany would be destroyed.

 

That's true, but the USSR was just suddenly over one day. I think the German case anomalous.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/opinion/25brooks.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

 

"Jeane Kirkpatrick was right years ago to make the distinction between authoritarian dictatorships and totalitarian ones. The totalitarian ones are both sicker and harder to dislodge."

 

A lot of truth in that, see North Korea. Nobody dares breath a word in those places, other than in praise.

 

The key to these revolutions is that the "fear barrier" is breached. It is much higher in the totalitarian ones, and the closer to the core, the higher it gets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The German Army stuck with Hitler long past the point where it was obvious he was insane, and that he had to go or Germany would be destroyed.

 

That's true, but the USSR was just suddenly over one day. I think the German case anomalous.

 

http://www.nytimes.c...=rssnyt&emc=rss

 

"Jeane Kirkpatrick was right years ago to make the distinction between authoritarian dictatorships and totalitarian ones. The totalitarian ones are both sicker and harder to dislodge."

 

A lot of truth in that, see North Korea. Nobody dares breath a word in those places, other than in praise.

 

The key to these revolutions is that the "fear barrier" is breached. It is much higher in the totalitarian ones, and the closer to the core, the higher it gets.

 

That's a very good point. It seems to me that if Moammar is as crazy and unpopular as you say, that barrier would have been breached in more of his population, and among those close to him. Maybe he's just crazy enough to keep that fear up for a while more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The German Army stuck with Hitler long past the point where it was obvious he was insane, and that he had to go or Germany would be destroyed.

 

That's true, but the USSR was just suddenly over one day. I think the German case anomalous.

 

http://www.nytimes.c...=rssnyt&emc=rss

 

"Jeane Kirkpatrick was right years ago to make the distinction between authoritarian dictatorships and totalitarian ones. The totalitarian ones are both sicker and harder to dislodge."

 

A lot of truth in that, see North Korea. Nobody dares breath a word in those places, other than in praise.

 

The key to these revolutions is that the "fear barrier" is breached. It is much higher in the totalitarian ones, and the closer to the core, the higher it gets.

 

That's a very good point. It seems to me that if Moammar is as crazy and unpopular as you say, that barrier would have been breached in more of his population, and among those close to him. Maybe he's just crazy enough to keep that fear up for a while more.

 

George Orwell explained how it works in "1984".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I'm not the one who called a black american man "boy". If you're emrbarassed about who you are it's time to let the love of Jesus in your heart. It will help you overcome your hate. :(

What's happens if you're an atheist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I'm not the one who called a black american man "boy". If you're emrbarassed about who you are it's time to let the love of Jesus in your heart. It will help you overcome your hate. :(

What's happens if you're an atheist?

You'll have to take it on faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I'm not the one who called a black american man "boy". If you're emrbarassed about who you are it's time to let the love of Jesus in your heart. It will help you overcome your hate. :(

What's happens if you're an atheist?

You'll have to take it on faith.

sounds like a credit agreement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I'm not the one who called a black american man "boy". If you're emrbarassed about who you are it's time to let the love of Jesus in your heart. It will help you overcome your hate. :(

What's happens if you're an atheist?

You'll have to take it on faith.

sounds like a credit agreement?

You'llneed to talk tikipete about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/26/libya.war/index.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

What is your take on this?

 

_52311571_011812923-1.jpg

 

What's up with this, Dog? Is he showing how to catch bin Laden?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/26/libya.war/index.html?hpt=T1

As the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt and a rebel leader in Libia admits to ties to Al Queda. I hope you're boy has a handle on this thing.

What is your take on this?

 

_52311571_011812923-1.jpg

 

What's up with this, Dog? Is he showing how to catch bin Laden?

 

 

Holy Crap!! Seems like Dog's boy is palling around with Al Queda

 

Troubling :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

 

You assume that McCain would have gotten involved in the first place.

 

BTW - Violent protests in London. Perhaps Obama can establish a no fly zone to protect civilians against their oppressive government.

Now that McCain has visited with the rebels and called for more support for them, is it safe to say that he would have gotten us involved? More importantly, does that mean that McCain is essentially backing Al Qaeda in Libya?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

 

You assume that McCain would have gotten involved in the first place.

 

BTW - Violent protests in London. Perhaps Obama can establish a no fly zone to protect civilians against their oppressive government.

Now that McCain has visited with the rebels and called for more support for them, is it safe to say that he would have gotten us involved? More importantly, does that mean that McCain is essentially backing Al Qaeda in Libya?

 

No. If he were a Democrat, then he would be essentially backing Al Qaeda. But he's a Republican, so he is not.

 

This ain't that tough, Sol. Just ask Happy Jack. Or Booby.

 

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French have Libyian govt on the run.

 

Onama stratgy is working well - tremendous job walking the tightrope in first Egypt and now Libya.

 

Can you imagine how bad McSame would have fucked this up???

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...dex.html?hpt=T1

 

You assume that McCain would have gotten involved in the first place.

 

BTW - Violent protests in London. Perhaps Obama can establish a no fly zone to protect civilians against their oppressive government.

Now that McCain has visited with the rebels and called for more support for them, is it safe to say that he would have gotten us involved? More importantly, does that mean that McCain is essentially backing Al Qaeda in Libya?

 

I disagree with McCain on this one. However, he's been pretty consistent with the concept that If you commit the US, do it right and get it done from a military perspective. I don't know if he was a supporter in the beginning, but if he was, I'm at odds with him.

 

We'll watch this play out in the election. I'm sure a lot of people will be changing positions from support to opposition, like most of the Dems did with Iraq -- the difference being that back then politicians were actually on the record with their votes pro and con. I'd love to see Congress take an official position here, but I guess that's not going to happen.

 

I still have the greatest respect and admiration for my boy McCain. I just refuse to suck his or any other politicians cock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites