Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 03-29-2011, 07:07 AM   #151
striperman36
Old Guy
iTrader: (0)
 
striperman36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Mansfield, MA
Posts: 8,760
lots of rhetoric not alot of objective last night.

What do we the US citizen's get out of this?

Oil - no
Ally - no
Stature in the Region - no
Another Democratic being the world's police man - YES
More BS - YES
striperman36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 07:20 AM   #152
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by striperman36 View Post
lots of rhetoric not alot of objective last night.

What do we the US citizen's get out of this?

Oil - no
Ally - no
Stature in the Region - no
Another Democratic being the world's police man - YES
More BS - YES
Europe gets the oil, we do the heavy lifting. Obama saved 250k lives.
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 08:00 AM   #153
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
DAMASCUS, Syria – Syrian state-run television says the Cabinet has resigned as the country sees the worst unrest in decades.

President Bashar Assad accepted the Cabinet's resignation following a meeting Tuesday.

Dont forget Yemen....
I think this is WWIII in the making.

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 09:03 AM   #154
JohnnyD
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
JohnnyD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mansfield, MA
Posts: 5,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIJIMMY View Post
Dont forget Yemen....
I think this is WWIII in the making.
It's been only a matter of time before the Middle East and surrounding regions totally collapsed into themselves.

Most of these countries have neither the technical resources or skill to build this into a WW caliber situation.
JohnnyD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 09:09 AM   #155
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD View Post
It's been only a matter of time before the Middle East and surrounding regions totally collapsed into themselves.

Most of these countries have neither the technical resources or skill to build this into a WW caliber situation.
and Serbia did in 1914?

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 10:05 AM   #156
justplugit
Registered Grandpa
iTrader: (0)
 
justplugit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: east coast
Posts: 8,589
My questions still remain.

Who are these rebels and who will be in control IF this thing works out?

Who is going to be the JUDGE as to which countries we go into next to
support rebellion, Obama?

" Choose Life "
justplugit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 02:03 PM   #157
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
RAS LANOUF, Libya – Libyan government tanks and rockets pounded rebel forces into a panicked full retreat Tuesday after an hourslong, back-and-forth battle that highlighted the superior might of Moammar Gadhafi's forces, even hobbled by international airstrikes.

No such strikes were launched during the fighting in Bin Jawwad, where rebels attempting to march on Gadhafi's hometown of Sirte ended up turning around and fleeing east under overcast skies. Some fleeing rebels shouted, "Sarkozy, where are you?" — a reference to French President Nicolas Sarkozy, one of the strongest supporters of international airstrikes.

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 02:26 PM   #158
Bronko
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Bronko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: South of Boston
Posts: 2,605
This is about oil and oil only. I just want Obama to get out of this endless war he has started.


BWHAHAHAHAAA

The charm of fishing is that it is the pursuit of what is elusive but attainable, a perpetual series of occasions for hope. ~John Buchan
Bronko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 02:31 PM   #159
Bronko
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Bronko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: South of Boston
Posts: 2,605
Honestly, Libya and our brave forces aside, anyone know how his brackets are shaping up?

The charm of fishing is that it is the pursuit of what is elusive but attainable, a perpetual series of occasions for hope. ~John Buchan
Bronko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2011, 06:12 AM   #160
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by justplugit View Post
My questions still remain.

Who are these rebels and who will be in control IF this thing works out? former prisoners who are largely foreign mercenaries, al qaeda(the good al qaeda...kinda like the "good Taliban") members and the Muslim Brotherhood(the good Muslim Brotherhood, a well meaning offshoot of the bad Muslim Brotherhood)...the country should be in good hands
Who is going to be the JUDGE as to which countries we go into next to
support rebellion, Obama?
no...Hillary........ and the UN

Last edited by scottw; 03-30-2011 at 07:08 AM..
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2011, 08:47 AM   #161
Piscator
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Piscator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Marshfield, Ma
Posts: 2,150
Watching the news last night and this is EXACTLY what I heard:

Our Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says, “We really do not know who these rebels are just yet”

Five minutes later I hear our UN Ambassador Susan Rice say, “We need to arm these rebels”

Our people need to get on the same page here. On one hand we are saying we need to arm these people and on the other hand we are saying we don’t know who they are or what they stand for. They look foolish and need to at least get on the same page here.

I didn’t really get Obama’s speech the other night (maybe it's me). He says we are handing this cluster over to NATO. The supreme commander of NATO is a US Soldier. We are the number one country funding NATO. NATO is nothing without us. We are taking this from our right hand and moving it to our left hand and saying we handed it off. I don’t know if he is the one who is confused or if he is trying to confuse the American people. He needs to call a spade a spade. That is the least he can do.
Not sure what happens next. If this is a humanitarian effort, what happens when Gadafi’s troops dig in around Tripoli and it comes to a standstill? If the innocent killing stops, what happens next? What’s the plan? Obama’s speech sounded like a victory speech the other night and we still have 8 innings left to play………

"I know a taxidermy man back home. He gonna have a heart attack when he see what I brung him!"
Piscator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2011, 08:53 AM   #162
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
Here we go.
The libs loved comparing Iraq to Vietnam however there was little in common.
This on the other hand is VERY similar......

CNN) -- On a day when opposition forces in Libya suffered battlefield losses, President Barack Obama made clear in interviews Tuesday with the three major U.S. television networks that he was open to arming the rebel fighters.

"I'm not ruling it out, but I'm also not ruling it in," Obama told NBC in one of the separate interviews he gave the day after a nationally televised speech on the Libya situation.


and PS - I am not even going to comment on how incredibly funny this is - "I'm not ruling it out, but I'm also not ruling it in,"

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2011, 09:38 AM   #163
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 31,818
Blog Entries: 1
Libyan Army pulling back hundreds of klicks, rebels advance hundreds of klicks, both in just days. Rebels (with what constitution and command?) stretch well beyond what would pass for something akin to a supply line and get chewed up. Classic swaping space for extending the opposing force beyond their capabilities.

We're all doomed.

Warfare practiced by Poli-Sci majors? I hope O can pull this off but I remain unconvinced it will happen without the US holding the bag.

Ready. Fire. Aim.

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2011, 09:47 AM   #164
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
And lets not forget who we're fighting for!

LONDON (Reuters) – Al Qaeda's most influential English-language preacher said revolts sweeping the Arab world would help rather than harm its cause by giving Islamists freed from tyranny greater scope to speak out.

Western and Arab officials say the example set by young Arabs seeking peaceful political change is a counterweight to al-Qaeda's push for violent militancy and weakens its argument that democracy and Islam are incompatible.

But al Qaeda preacher Anwar al-Awlaki, in an article published online on Tuesday, said the removal of anti-Islamist autocrats meant Islamic fighters and scholars were now freer to discuss and organize.

"Our mujahideen brothers in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and the rest of the Muslim world will get a chance to breathe again after three decades of suffocation," he wrote, using a term that refers generally to Islamic guerrilla groups or holy warriors.

"For the scholars and activists of Egypt to be able to speak again freely, it would represent a great leap forward for the mujahideen," wrote Awlaki, an American of Yemeni origin who is believed to be hiding in southern Yemen.

He said it did not matter what sort of government succeeded Arab autocrats, as these were unlikely to be as repressive. Imagining that only a Taliban-style regime would benefit al Qaeda was "a too short term way" of looking at events.

"We do not know yet what the outcome would be (in any given country), and we do not have to. The outcome doesn't have to be an Islamic government for us to consider what is occurring to be a step in the right direction," he said.

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2011, 09:52 AM   #165
Piscator
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Piscator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Marshfield, Ma
Posts: 2,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIJIMMY View Post
And lets not forget who we're fighting for!

LONDON (Reuters) – Al Qaeda's most influential English-language preacher said revolts sweeping the Arab world would help rather than harm its cause by giving Islamists freed from tyranny greater scope to speak out.

Western and Arab officials say the example set by young Arabs seeking peaceful political change is a counterweight to al-Qaeda's push for violent militancy and weakens its argument that democracy and Islam are incompatible.

But al Qaeda preacher Anwar al-Awlaki, in an article published online on Tuesday, said the removal of anti-Islamist autocrats meant Islamic fighters and scholars were now freer to discuss and organize.

"Our mujahideen brothers in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and the rest of the Muslim world will get a chance to breathe again after three decades of suffocation," he wrote, using a term that refers generally to Islamic guerrilla groups or holy warriors.

"For the scholars and activists of Egypt to be able to speak again freely, it would represent a great leap forward for the mujahideen," wrote Awlaki, an American of Yemeni origin who is believed to be hiding in southern Yemen.

He said it did not matter what sort of government succeeded Arab autocrats, as these were unlikely to be as repressive. Imagining that only a Taliban-style regime would benefit al Qaeda was "a too short term way" of looking at events.

"We do not know yet what the outcome would be (in any given country), and we do not have to. The outcome doesn't have to be an Islamic government for us to consider what is occurring to be a step in the right direction," he said.
I think these clowns would have spun it either way. If the middle east truly were to move to a more democratic region , I think it would be harder on the Taliban. Personal opinion though and I think that is a very, very long way off.

"I know a taxidermy man back home. He gonna have a heart attack when he see what I brung him!"
Piscator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2011, 02:06 PM   #166
justplugit
Registered Grandpa
iTrader: (0)
 
justplugit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: east coast
Posts: 8,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piscator View Post



I didn’t really get Obama’s speech the other night (maybe it's me).


No, it's not you.
Like Joe Liberman said the other night,
"If your -NOT- confused, you don't understand the situation."

" Choose Life "
justplugit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2011, 03:40 PM   #167
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
By RYAN LUCAS, Associated Press Ryan Lucas, Associated Press – 1 min ago
AJDABIYA, Libya – Moammar Gadhafi's ground forces recaptured a strategic oil town Wednesday and moved within striking distance of another major eastern city, nearly reversing the gains rebels made since international airstrikes began. Rebels pleaded for more help, while a U.S. official said government forces are making themselves harder to target by using civilian "battle wagons" with makeshift armaments instead of tanks.

Hmmmm, We may need to step it up a tiny bit.
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2011, 03:46 PM   #168
Piscator
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Piscator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Marshfield, Ma
Posts: 2,150
At this point, who cares........just do it and get it over with. Say "We (I mean NATO) pressed the wrong button."
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	images.jpg
Views:	15
Size:	5.5 KB
ID:	45980  

"I know a taxidermy man back home. He gonna have a heart attack when he see what I brung him!"
Piscator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 07:55 AM   #169
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,686
brilliant stuff from VDH


March 31, 2011 12:00 A.M.

Obama’s Amazing Achievements
His military intervention prompted some stunning reversals.




By bombing Libya, President Obama has accomplished some things once thought absolutely impossible in America:

(a) War-mongering liberals: Liberals are now chest-thumping about military “progress” in Libya. Even liberal television and radio commentators cite ingenious reasons why an optional, preemptive American intervention in an oil-producing Arab country, without prior congressional approval or majority public support — and at a time of soaring deficits — is well worth supporting, in a sort of “my president, right or wrong,” fashion. Apparently, liberal foreign policy is returning to the pre-Vietnam days of the hawkish “best and brightest.”

(b) Europe first: Many Americans have long complained about the opportunistic, utopian Europeans. Under the protective U.S. defense shield, they often privately urged us to deal with dangerous foreign dictators — while staying above the fray to criticize America, at the same time seeking trade advantages and positive global PR. But now the wily Obama has outwaited even the French. He has managed to shame them into acting, with a new opossum-like U.S. strategy of playing dead until finally the Europeans were exasperated — almost as if the president were warning them, “We don’t mind the Qaddafi bloodletting if you, who are much closer to it, don’t mind.” The British Guardian and French Le Monde will be too knee-deep in the Libyan war, busy chalking up Anglo-French “wins” and worrying about European oil concessions, to charge America with the usual imperialism, colonialism, and militarism. We are almost back to the 1956 world of the Suez crisis.

(c) Iraq was just a prequel to Libya: Conservatives have complained that opposition — especially in the cases of then-senators Barack Obama and Joe Biden — to George W. Bush’s antiterrorism policies and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq was more partisan than principled. Obama ended that debate by showing that not only can he embrace — or, on occasion, expand — the Bush-Cheney tribunals, preventive detentions, renditions, Predator attacks, intercepts and wiretaps, and Guantanamo Bay, but he can now preemptively attack an Arab oil-exporting country without fear of Hollywood, congressional cutoffs, MoveOn.org “General Betray Us”–type ads, Cindy Sheehan on the evening news, or Checkpoint-like novels. In short, Obama has ensured that the antiwar movement will never be quite the same.

(d) Monster-in-recovery: The Qaddafi clan has been wooing Westerners through oil money and multicultural gobbledygook. In the last few years, the British released the Lockerbie bomber, a native of Libya; Saif Qaddafi, the would-be artist and scholar and the son of Col. Moammar Qaddafi, essentially bought a Ph.D. from the prestigious London School of Economics; the creepy Harvard-connected Monitor Group hired out cash-hungry “scholars” to write tributes to Qaddafi’s achievements; and Mariah Carey, 50 Cent, Beyoncé, and other entertainers earned a pile of petrodollars by crooning for the Qaddafis. Then, suddenly, Obama spoiled the fun and profits by turning Qaddafi from a rehabilitated monster back into Ronald Reagan’s old “Mad Dog of the Middle East.”

(e) Stuff happens: Many supporters of the Iraq War condemned Abu Ghraib as the poorly supervised, out-of-control prison it was. Lax American oversight resulted in the sexual humiliation of detained Iraqi insurgents. It was a deplorable episode, in which, nonetheless, no one was killed, and yet it took an enormous toll on the credibility of Bush-administration officials. But while the media were covering the Libyan bombing and the Middle East uprisings, a number of Afghan civilians allegedly were executed by a few rogue American soldiers. That was a far worse transgression than anything that happened at Abu Ghraib during Bush’s tenure — but it was apparently an incident that, in the new media climate, could legitimately be ignored. Obama made “stuff happens” an acceptable defense for those doing their best to run a war from Washington.

(f) War really is tiring: The media serially blamed a supposedly lazy Ronald Reagan for napping during military operations abroad. George W. Bush was criticized for cutting brush at his Texas ranch while soldiers fought and died in Iraq. Obama rendered all such presidential criticism mere nitpicking when he started aerial bombardment in the midst of golfing, handicapping the NCAA basketball tournament, and taking his family to Rio de Janeiro.

(g) The road to Damascus? After Bush’s interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, many war-weary Americans believed that we would never again get involved in a Middle East war. But now, with Obama’s preemptive bombing of Libya, giddy American interventionists are again eyeing Iran, Syria — and beyond!

In short, Obama turned America upside down when he bombed Libya — and in ways we could have scarcely imagined
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 09:03 AM   #170
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 31,818
Blog Entries: 1
Mr Hanson has a away of showing the hypocrisy, dunnhe.

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 04:47 PM   #171
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,004
a) Obama has been taking a lot of heat from the Left on Libya

b) I think Obama has shown some patience that like in Egypt might have paid off. To parlay this into playing dead is a bit o spin.

c) Where again has Obama expanded controversial Bush policies like rendition and GITMO?

d) Actually, if was Qadaffi who was ordering the bombing of civilians and not Maria Carey or Fiddy Cent.

e) Funny, I first read about this on MSNBC.COM !

f) Did RIJIMMY write this one?

g) Giddy American Interventionists have never taken an eye off of Iran.

-spence
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 06:54 PM   #172
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post

e) Funny, I first read about this on MSNBC.COM !

f-spence
You crack me up Spence
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 07:21 PM   #173
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 17,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post
You crack me up Spence
I'm serious.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 07:40 PM   #174
RIROCKHOUND
Also known as OAK
iTrader: (0)
 
RIROCKHOUND's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Westlery, RI
Posts: 9,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I'm serious.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Actually, this was broken in Rolling Stone, about a squadron from the army known as the 'kill team' which went as far as taking digits from executed kids as trophies. One of the stories was a soldier threw it in a pot during a poker game.

And it was all over MSNBC on Monday.

but of course, it's all liberal bias.

Bryan

Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
RIROCKHOUND is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 08:01 PM   #175
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,686
so it was on MSNBC and in Rolling Stone...wow, that's practically the same level of coverage as Abu G and about 4 people saw it, most of whom were smoking weed.....I apologize for VDH .... did Comedy Central or Saturday Night Live do a funny skit about it or anything?...just wondering

btw..Rolling Stone completely misrepresented the story according to an embedded reporter..combination of liberal bias and too much weed

Michael Yon
29 March 2011

Seldom do I waste time with rebutting articles, and especially not from publications like Rolling Stone. Today, numerous people sent links to the latest Rolling Stone tripe. The story is titled “THE KILL TEAM, THE FULL STORY.” It should be titled: “BULL#^&#^&#^&#^&, from Rolling Stone.”

The story—not really an “article”—covers Soldiers from 5/2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) in Afghanistan. A handful of Soldiers were accused of murder. It does in fact appear that a tiny group of rogues committed premeditated murder. I was embedded with the 5/2 SBCT and was afforded incredible access to the brigade by the Commander, Colonel Harry Tunnell, and the brigade Command Sergeant Major, Robb Prosser.
.................................

he goes on to point out the problems with the RS article, the point that VDH is making is the remarkably different handling that the mainstream media has chosen when you juxtapose this incident with Abu, one was used by the media and democrats to try to drive a president from office and soil the reputation of the entire military, the other ( far more egregious) is largely overlooked and the only difference is the party that the presidents happened to belong to....if you somehow miss the bias then there is little hope for you....

...........
Sen. Edward Kennedy "we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management, U.S. management''....what a patriot he was

Last edited by scottw; 03-31-2011 at 08:58 PM..
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2011, 10:13 AM   #176
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
and the beat goes on, la da da da di, la da da da dah....

The rebels managed to take part of the oil town of Brega the day before, aided by an international air campaign, but the rocket and artillery salvos unleashed on the rebels indicates the government's offensive capabilities remain very much intact.

"When you see this, the situation is very bad. We cannot match their weapons," said Kamal Mughrabi, 64, a retired soldier who joined the rebel army. "If the planes don't come back and hit them we'll have to keep pulling back."

Rebel attempts to fire rockets and mortars against the government forces were met with aggressive counter bombardments that sent many of the rebel forces scrambling back all the way to the town of Ajdabiya, dozens of miles (kilometers) away. There did not appear to be any immediate response from the international aircraft patrolling the skies that have aided the rebels in the past.

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2011, 02:41 AM   #177
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chesapeake Bill View Post
There is a pretty interesting book entitled "The Next 100 Years" by George Friedman, president/CEO of STRATFOR, a leading private intelligence organization. In his book, Friedman suggests that the goal is not to win the war (or even the hearts of the people) in the middle east. Rather, he profers an idea that the goal is to ensure instability to prevent the growth of an islamic power. IN general terms the lives lost is a small price (his words not mine) for this instability if it means we will not have to deal with the economic problems or wars that would be attributed to such a formation. Interesting thought given the lack of a realistic exit strategy to date.
"the goal" appears to be paving the way for an islamic power


I guess when you are F-ing things things up you could explain your results by claiming that your intention was to cause chaos and instability all along....could be Obama's re-election theme "WINNING!"..."TIGER BLOOD!"

Libyan Rebels: 'Nato Is Now Our Problem'

Share Comments (108)6:53am UK, Wednesday April 06, 2011

Libyan rebels have accused Nato of being too slow to act - and asked them to suspend operations unless they "do the job properly".

Rebel leader Abdel Fattah Younes has complained the alliance takes hours to respond to events on the battlefield because of an overly bureaucratic process.

He claimed the alliance's inaction was allowing Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's forces to advance and was letting them kill people in the rebel-held city of Misrata "everyday".

He said: "Nato is moving very slowly, allowing Gaddafi forces to advance. Nato has become our problem."

Mr Younes also said if Nato wanted to lift Col Gaddafi's weeks-long siege in Misrata, it could have done it weeks ago.

Nato took over from a coalition led by the United States, Britain and France on March 31.

It puts the alliance in charge of air strikes targeting Col Gaddafi's military infrastructure as well as policing a no-fly zone and an arms embargo.Nato lacking strike aircraft for Libya campaign | World news | guardian.co.uk

good grief

Mr Younes said: "One official calls another and then from the official to the head of Nato and from the head of Nato to the field commander. This takes eight hours."

Last edited by scottw; 04-06-2011 at 04:07 AM..
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2011, 12:53 PM   #178
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Looks like the strategy is moving along well. I think Obama is playing this one perfectly...


d) Actually, if was Qadaffi who was ordering the bombing of civilians and not Maria Carey or Fiddy Cent

Considering the complexity and variability of the situation, its actually not looking all that terrible. Obama seems to have been pretty careful to not make statements or promises we can't keep, something very different from Bush.

And if the UN does impose a no fly zone in Lybia, who's going to stand behind the Lybian Govt? The Sudan??? I'm not sure the regime can survive...

While we don't want to get into a real battle, it does seem like Ghaddafi has crossed the line with his actions...they're going to squeeze him until he pops.

I think the bigger piece is that Khadaffi is now seen as damaged goods by even much of the Arab leadership.

Bush would have made some dramatic remarks about standing up for those who seek freedom, the neocons would have had a circle jerk, and then they'd do nothing.

Justification is because the Libyan government has turned to using the military against their own people without much regard. It looks like they've been bombing and shelling killing just about anyone. I've really some really gruesome stories.

As for Obama's statements, I thought they have been pretty clear on this. While the position of the Administration is that Ghaddafi should go, the legal resolution is only to protect the civilians and as such that is the direct mission.

They appear to be very mindful of the slippery slope and also the strategic situation.

And I think that's exactly the concern...another Rwanda like slaughter.

I wouldn't call this a "war"

Preemptive (or worse preventative) war isn't the same thing as an internationally legal humanitarian mission and you know it...

To assert that killing, bombs etc... is war because it's ugly...well duh.

I heard that today there were aircraft from Qatar over Libya under the UN resolution. This is pretty remarkable.

The situation in Libya is real. Indiscriminate bombing of civilians was occurring.


The situation was deteriorating and heading towards a likely genocide.



-spence


I'M SHOCKED!!!

Boston Globe /Opinion /Op-ed Alan J. Kuperman

False pretense for war in Libya?


By Alan J. Kuperman
April 14, 2011

EVIDENCE IS now in that President Barack Obama grossly exaggerated the humanitarian threat to justify military action in Libya. The president claimed that intervention was necessary to prevent a “bloodbath’’ in Benghazi, Libya’s second-largest city and last rebel stronghold.

But Human Rights Watch has released data on Misurata, the next-biggest city in Libya and scene of protracted fighting, revealing that Moammar Khadafy is not deliberately massacring civilians but rather narrowly targeting the armed rebels who fight against his government.

Misurata’s population is roughly 400,000. In nearly two months of war, only 257 people — including combatants — have died there. Of the 949 wounded, only 22 — less than 3 percent — are women. If Khadafy were indiscriminately targeting civilians, women would comprise about half the casualties.

Obama insisted that prospects were grim without intervention. “If we waited one more day, Benghazi . . . could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.’’ Thus, the president concluded, “preventing genocide’’ justified US military action.

But intervention did not prevent genocide, because no such bloodbath was in the offing. To the contrary, by emboldening rebellion, US interference has prolonged Libya’s civil war and the resultant suffering of innocents.

The best evidence that Khadafy did not plan genocide in Benghazi is that he did not perpetrate it in the other cities he had recaptured either fully or partially — including Zawiya, Misurata, and Ajdabiya, which together have a population greater than Benghazi.

Libyan forces did kill hundreds as they regained control of cities. Collateral damage is inevitable in counter-insurgency. And strict laws of war may have been exceeded.

But Khadafy’s acts were a far cry from Rwanda, Darfur, Congo, Bosnia, and other killing fields. Libya’s air force, prior to imposition of a UN-authorized no-fly zone, targeted rebel positions, not civilian concentrations. Despite ubiquitous cellphones equipped with cameras and video, there is no graphic evidence of deliberate massacre. Images abound of victims killed or wounded in crossfire — each one a tragedy — but that is urban warfare, not genocide.

Nor did Khadafy ever threaten civilian massacre in Benghazi, as Obama alleged. The “no mercy’’ warning, of March 17, targeted rebels only, as reported by The New York Times, which noted that Libya’s leader promised amnesty for those “who throw their weapons away.’’ Khadafy even offered the rebels an escape route and open border to Egypt, to avoid a fight “to the bitter end.’’

If bloodbath was unlikely, how did this notion propel US intervention? The actual prospect in Benghazi was the final defeat of the rebels. To avoid this fate, they desperately concocted an impending genocide to rally international support for “humanitarian’’ intervention that would save their rebellion.

On March 15, Reuters quoted a Libyan opposition leader in Geneva claiming that if Khadafy attacked Benghazi, there would be “a real bloodbath, a massacre like we saw in Rwanda.’’ Four days later, US military aircraft started bombing. By the time Obama claimed that intervention had prevented a bloodbath, The New York Times already had reported that “the rebels feel no loyalty to the truth in shaping their propaganda’’ against Khadafy and were “making vastly inflated claims of his barbaric behavior.’’

Last edited by scottw; 04-14-2011 at 01:05 PM..
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2011, 06:45 PM   #179
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,686
Originally Posted by JohnR ....This is what I fear will happen.

Hopefully Col Q's military and Mercs flip on him. Of course at this stage of the game even if Q is gone and the rebels take over we'll have one of 3 things happen:

1) Rebels will go all fundamentalist anyway.

2) Rebels will fall under Iranian influence and follow the pattern somewhere along option one.

3) We might have some semblance of a modern democracy that remembers help from the west.

Don't expect the latter.





Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Why do you believe a bunch of Sunni Arabs would fall under Iranian influence?

Huh?

Iran is most focused on neighboring states. Not sure where the joke is, unless you just took a long toke and need to giggle

-spence

-spence

I'M DOUBLE sHOCKED!!!


Clinton says Iran trying to hijack Mideast revolts

Apr 15, 4:11 PM (ET)

MATTHEW LEE

(AP) US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks during a press conference at the US Embassy in...

BERLIN (AP) - U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Friday accused Iran of trying to hijack democratic revolutions around the Mideast and warned Arab nations not to permit intolerance against women and religious minorities.

Clinton said Iran was clearly trying to use uprisings around the region to further its own goals and foment broader unrest while at the same time cracking down on its own reform movement.

"I think that that everyone(EXCEPT SPENCE) is aware if its efforts to exploit and even hijack what are legitimate protests. But certainly in an era of instant communication we hope that people will not be fooled by their tactics."
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2011, 05:37 AM   #180
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,686
Triple....

April 17, 2011
Syria Heading from Bad to Worse By Neil Snyder

Typical newspaper readers and those with untrained eyes probably read past the report on Monday that Syrian Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammad Riad Shaqfa declared support for anti-Assad protesters in Syria. Likewise, they probably failed to grasp the significance of a report on Tuesday that Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, Ramin Mehmanparast, said that the protests in Syria are the result of a plot by Americans and Zionists -- that's Jewish people in general and Israeli Jews in particular.


Syria is a Muslim country, but it's not an Islamist state. Bashar al-Assad, Syria's president, is a Muslim, but he's not a Sharia law aficionado. Even so, he has allowed Hamas, Hezb'allah, the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic Jihad, and other radical Islamist groups to set up field headquarters in Damascus, Syria's capital. Syria is a resource-poor country and a country that is still technically at war with Israel. Assad thinks that he's using these Islamist groups as leverage to maintain influence in Lebanon and to keep pressure on Israel, but the worm has turned. Iran has assumed the leadership position in the dark world of radical Islam, and Iran is using these and other Islamist groups to dislodge non-Islamist Arab leaders -- including Bashar al-Assad -- throughout the Middle East and North Africa.

Under the best of circumstances, Islamists can't be trusted. Lying is as natural to them as breathing is to normal humans. They don't even trust each other, and if it were not for the fact that they view Israel as their common enemy, they would fight among themselves until the bitter end. Bashar al-Assad, like his father before him, knows these things, and still he opened his arms to radical Islamists, believing as he does that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.


Iran is a game changer. The Iranians came to the party with a strong military, oil, money to burn (and radical Islamists love money), and a lust for transforming the world into a caliphate under Sharia law. From the radical Islamist groups' perspective, it makes perfect sense to dump Assad and embrace Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.


That explains what's happening in Syria, but what about the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman's remark about Americans and Zionists? Does he honestly believe that these groups are responsible for the unrest in Syria? The answer is a resounding "no." Why? It's because Iran is stoking the fires in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, Jordan, and Syria. From Iran's perspective, Assad was a good partner as long as radical Islamist splinter groups were relatively weak, but when they became stronger and more beholden to Iran, ditching Assad was a no-brainer.
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com