I’m not surprised to see a grumpy response from Foreign Policy to the decision to forcibly oust Gaddafi. We’ll see how accurate their reporting is on the internal divisions in the White House. Those allegedly against going to war with Libya:
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates
National Security Advisor Tom Donilon
Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough
Those allegedly for war:
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
Samantha Power, NSC senior director for multilateral engagement
Gayle Smith, NSC senior director for global development
Mike McFaul, NSC senior director for Russia
Vice President Biden
President Obama
Or, as Steve Clemons says:
“Gates is clearly not on board with what’s going on and now the Defense Department may have an entirely another war on its hands that he’s not into,” said Clemons. “Clinton won the bureaucratic battle to use DOD resources to achieve what’s essentially the State Department’s objective… and Obama let it happen.”
Does anyone hear echoes of Kosovo, when Hillary was notable for her strong advocacy of intervention?
I hope we do not use many DOD resources, and I hope that what little we do use is not very visible. Most of all, I hope Gaddafi is out of power in days, because if this drags on everyone is going to look like a moron.
I keep coming back to Hillary’s Senate Armed Services Committee nickname of “Madame Yes.” She’s as much of a hawk as McCain; it was the biggest reason I opposed her ’08 presidential bid. Obama’s appointment of her to State was politically brilliant – were she in the Senate right now you know she’d have an exploratory committee – but this was the very predictable consequence.
It seems like the liberal pundits/blogs are jumping to conclusions that the Libya decision is a push for war. I don’t see that at all. Providing tactical support for a European/Arab coalition is different from what we did in Bosnia. I understand the concern about mission creep, but it does seem that many on the left are just jumping to conclusions not based in fact. It feels a lot like the “Catfood Commission” vapors the left had last year. No amount of fact would calm the usual suspects down. Why can’t these people who have proven wrong over and over again stop inventing things to have the vapors over?
You mean…after Wikileaks “everyone” does not already look like a moron?
Please.
The system is broken up and down the line.
The entire corporate/government gestalt…in every PermaGov-style country in the so-called “free” world… is broken. All you have to do is look at the lame excuse for an emergency reaction that is happening in Japan to figure that out. Hell, man…Japan’s one of the better ones, and it is almost as broken as is the U.S.
Please.
Stop the charade. Radical change is necessary, not some little stopgap “Change” candidate. The real deal.
Soon.
AG
Can we assume that you’ve formed an exploratory committee? The field is really pathetic at this point. And the progressive bench is worse.
Well, Tarheel…I’d run if drafted.
Just think of the fun!!!
Will this happen?
Not bloody likely.
So it goes.
Muddle on…
AG
“They threw away the playbook.” Oh, come on! When a popular revolt erupts across a region, the playbook is gone to begin with. It is a rapid time of trying to catch up with what is going on with many players acting all at the same time. There are still active opposition movements operating politically in Yemen and Bahrain. When Saleh or the Khalifas repress dissent as thoroughly and forcefully as Gaddafi tried to do, there will be a different situation requiring different responses. Gaddafi forced essentially political movements into military rebellion. Why should US responses be the same?
It appears that for now Morocco and Jordan are moving in the direction of a constitutional monarchy and just dickering over how much power the monarch has left. Fatah and Hamas are moving in the direction of unity talks. Iraq has scheduled snap provincial and district elections. And no one is talking seriously about invading Iran (which makes John McCain very sad) in spite of their hypocritical insertion into the Bahrain conflict. And Bahrain invoked the mutual security clause of the Gulf Cooperation Council to get reinforcements from Saudi Arabia. Please tell me what playbook could handle all of those different contingencies.
Was there this much handwringing and second-guessing when first Poland, the East Germany, then Czechoslovakia threw out their Soviet puppets? That process took the better part of 10 years to work through. The current movements for change have had traction for only three months.
Did George H. W. Bush have a playbook for the collapse of the Soviet Union? No, the CIA and he got caught flatfooted and failed to respond adequately.
I sure hope some leadership besides the US is doing the planning of the Libyan operation. The general staff of our military always seems to think it’s the Cold War all over again. And execution seems to go off the rails by not being sufficiently smart. (I was going to used the word “restrained”, but it is not the intensity of force used at any point, it has been the hamhandedness and poor timing.
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Mar-17-11 05:12 PM
Original message
Roger Ebert: Dear Congress, While Defunding NPR, How About… Updated at 7:35 AM
@ebertchicago Dear Congress, while Defunding NPR, how about Removing Limbaugh from Armed Forces Radio Network?
If it is true and Limbaugh is on AFRN then I call Bullshit.
Go ahead, you can call it. As of October 13, 2010, he was on every afternoon according to the first google entry.
This is ridiculous. No wonder I’m arguing creationism, whether Obama is a socialist (good grief) and other wacko shit with the ex-military people at work. They have been listening to that idiot when they are deployed.
Not on my dime. Bullshit!
With what Limbaugh says about the CIC, I don’t know why he is on there.
Great essay, because it agrees with me 100%.
Does anyone hear echoes of Kosovo, when Hillary was notable for her strong advocacy of intervention?
Possibly, but remember the Department of War wanted Kosovo in the worst way, and used it to establish a base network that served as a launching pad for all kinds of subsequent mid-eastern military actions. So even if Hillary has the same position as she did then, the Department of War does not and I suspect the Department of War will win this argument.
Remember, back in 1998 the DoW was led by a bunch of Cold War vets who were sitting around with all these war toys they’d barely had the chance to play with. Grenada, Panama — those don’t even count as practice sessions. And Iraq 1991 was fun but it was over way too fast. Today the DoW sees all the commitments (“protecting American gigacorporate interests in 175 countries world wide”) they already have and isn’t keen to take on any more stupid invasions.
And for those of you who don’t know your history, “Department of War” is what we used to call the Department of Defense. Quite ironically the name was changed at the same time that the mission changed away from one of mostly defensive preparation to one of waging permanent war.
So when the people of the Middle East finally take the “Islamic enemy” away, the Department of War plus Department of the Navy (it was separate until 1947), the CIA, the Department of Homeland Security and a whole raft of black ops will have lost their raison d’etre until another enemy is found. (refrain from “I’ve Got a Little List from the Mikado).
Once again I plug James Carroll’s The House of War, a tour-de-force about how a temporary building and its occupants in World War II started a process that led to an intractable military-industrial complex.
Department of Homeland Security
I prefer the name in the original German: Heimlandversicherheitsamt. Just seems more authentic and true to the original purpose somehow.
.
As hundreds of men chanted anti-regime slogans, Fadhil Radhi, 45, stepped forward. “I have a message for Obama,” he said. “He asked for change and change took him to the top. But since then he has given these people (Bahrain’s ruling al-Khalifa family) the green light.”The people know the truth now, it is not like before. They cannot hide things, the media is strong and it reveals their lies. Obama knows it too and he has to show us what change means.”
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."I thought we are so broke? Cut ss, medicare, mental health, state $, laying off thousands, throwing out collective bargaining for state workers BECAUSE WE’RE SO BROKE.
Please. Seems like there is alwas enough money to intervene in places we have no reason to go to.
3 wars at a time?? GREAT. Let’s get more of our military folks killed over oil.
This is ridiculous. Are we the ONLY country now? Are the Europeans thinking of going in? The Chinese? The Canadians? ANYONE???
LISTEN TO THE STATEMENT that Obama made today.
geesh.
At the start of this week, the consensus around Washington was that military action against Libya was not in the cards. However, in the last several days, the White House completely altered its stance and successfully pushed for the authorization for military intervention against Libyan leader Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi. What changed?
FLIP. FLOP. FLIP. FLOP.
GEESH.
The international situation changed. The EU and the Arab League showed interst in a no-fly zone and the UN Security Council OK’d it this week.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iap0Pv-uqWoyLeuBn5wwIcEJBp7Q?docId=CNG.1b0ea7f102
897ebbe12de098e6807562.de1
We are supporting this and I think we should be supporting it. But we are not taking the lead on it.
I admit it’s a little embarrassing to find oneself in agreement with Hillary on something like this, but so be it. People, whether on the left or right, tend to place too much reliance in superficial historical analogies without paying enough attention to the differences. Obviously I could be wrong, but I do not think the situation in Libya is that much like Iraq or Iran, nor (despite what many on the left say) is Obama very like Bush.
Interesting the Samantha Power and Hillary Clinton are both on the same side on this one. When Egypt was erupting, the division in the Whitehouse apparently pitted them against each other, and of course they have a history.
under the bed in fear of the Hillary Monster.
Try to remember that Barack Obama is the President of the United States.
He gave the saber-rattling speech on Libya. He committed us to another three wasted years in Afghanistan. He agreed to cuts in domestic spending while raising military budgets. He approves of the torture of Bradley Manning.
http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/03/18/obama-statement-on-libya-leaves-many-questions/
I figured with 2 hot wars: one Iraq and one in Afghanistan, a cold war with Iran, a secret war in Pakistan we pretty much covered the board.
But I would be wrong now wouldn’t I.
When do we strike Oceania?
When the Aussies and the Kiwis start acting up.
What is also troublesome is the entire lack of Congressional input. Events are moving quickly and the Republicans would probably deny it just to fuck him, but it’s another step down an unfortunate road none the less.
What’s worse is that the problems of intervention are being compounded by the fact that, despite bluster about military action “within hours” of the UN resolution, here we are two days later and all they’re doing is sitting around in Paris while Gaddafi moves on Benghazi.
If you’re going to promise to do something, you need to back it up.
I think that list is bogus. No way Obama and biden want a war. A Republican who was in the situation room with the president and Sec. Gates confirms that. Obama said no ground troops. I can’t speak for the others though because I don’t know them. Hillary is a hawk but who knows what she really thinks? When people start listening to the president and stop looking for words that W used, then we can have better analysis of what’s going on.
The French are flying over Libya.