Comedy Gold Power

Did she really say this [expletive deleted] with a straight face?

Clinton: US using “smart power” for Libya, Syria

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton defended the U.S. response to crises in Libya and Syria on Tuesday, saying the Obama administration is projecting “smart power” by refusing to act alone or with brute force to stop autocratic repression in the two countries.

. . .

Clinton said Libya was a study in the use of “strategic patience,” whereby the United States resisted the impulse for immediate intervention and instead helped to build support for the country’s nascent opposition, which the U.S. now recognizes as Libya’s legitimate government. She said the unprecedented NATO-Arab alliance protecting civilians on the ground was a key result of the tactics of smart power.

“This is exactly the kind of world that I want to see, where it’s not just the United States and everybody is standing on the sidelines while we bear the costs,” she said.

In Syria, Clinton said Washington had adopted a similar stance. The administration has imposed sanctions to protest a ruthless crackdown on reformers but has thus far resisted calls to make an explicit demand for President Bashar Assad to step down, something it did with Qaddafi.

Clinton said it would be a mistake for the administration to demand Assad’s ouster on its own because it wouldn’t be effective given Washington’s long-strained ties with Damascus and limited U.S. influence and trade with Syria.

See also:
U.S. taking “smart power” approach to Libya, Syria
Clinton: Libya, Syria show ‘smart power’ at work
Clinton: Libya, Syria show ‘smart power’ at work
Clinton: Libya, Syria show ‘smart power’ at work
Clinton: Libya, Syria show ‘smart power’ at work
‘Smart power’ at work, says Hillary Clinton
Clinton defends U.S. response on Syria
Clinton Passes Up Chance to Call on Assad to Step Down as Obama Remains Silent
A Conversation with Secretaries Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta

Let’s recap: for months now, we’ve been bombing the [expletive deleted] out of Libya, a country that isn’t a direct threat to U.S. national security, killing civilians, destroying infrastructure, and backing a “rebel” movement containing elements of al Qaeda. That’s “smart power” and “strategic patience”, check. Meanwhile, Bashar Assad in Syria, a dictator in a country with plenty of American blood on its hands and a huge threat to U.S. national security, is killing civilians on a daily basis, with a death toll totaling in the thousands, and we’re doing nothing, because our relationship with Syria is “strained”. That’s also “smart power”, as well as “protecting civilians”, check.

What manner of counterproductive, nonsensical bull[expletive deleted] foreign policy is that? Smart Power my ass!

/are you seriously telling me that we have to put up with these moronic clowns for another year and a half?

Advertisements

How’s Your Kinetic Military Action Going Samantha?

Hey, check out our U.S. allies in Libya. It’s bad enough that they’re militarily inept and have dragged us, willingly, into an expensive quagmire, but now they’re killing each other!

Libya rebel leader Younes killed, Benghazi wobbles

That Abdel Fateh Younes, the longtime enforcer for Muammar Qaddafi whose stunning defection to the Libyan rebellion in February was an early indication of the depth of the challenge to Qaddafi’s regime, is dead, you can take to the bank. General Younes had been head of the embryonic rebel army from practically the moment he’d switched sides.

As far as the rest of the story – who killed him, when, precisely where, and why – all remains murk and conjecture, created by cross-cutting rivalries within the rebellion and the often misleading and contradictory way that Libya’s Transitional National Council (TNC) communicates with the press and the Libyan public.

See also:
Libyan Rebels Military Leader Killed in Mysterious Circumstances
Libyan Rebels Say Military Chief Shot Dead
Libyan rebels say their military chief is dead
Libyan rebel chief dead
Libyan rebel leader Younis shot dead
Death of military chief weakens Libyan rebels
US says commander’s mysterious killing is another challenge for Libyan rebels fighting Gadhafi
Libyan rebels in disarray after mysterious killing of leading military commander
Commander’s Killing Creates Challenges for Post-Al Qathafi Libya
Libyan Rebel Leader’s Death Fuels Fears Of Fracturing
Libya: Who Killed Abdel Fattah Younis, the Rebel Leader?
Who killed Abdel-Fattah Younis? Death of military chief worries Libyan rebels’ Western backers
Killing of general risks Libya rebel split
WRAPUP 7-Mystery surrounds killing of Libyan rebel army head
Libyan rebels ‘killed their own leader’
‘Double agent’ Libyan rebel leader Abdel Fattah Younis shot dead
Editorial: Body blow to TNC
Libya: Thousands Attend Abdel-Fattah Younis Funeral, But Death Remains Unexplained
Funeral Held For Libyan Rebel Military Chief

Let’s recap, we can drop thousands of tons of bombs on Libya, kill civilians, destroy infrastructure, and yet Muammar Gaddafi is still alive and well, thumbing his nose at Obama. Meanwhile, our Libyan allies, the Transitional National Council (TNC) are busy killing each other and they have no hope of ever sacking Tripoli. So, The Beat Goes On, a stalemate and, adding insult to ridiculousness, the U.S. taxpayer is stuck picking up the tab for this “Three Stooges go to war” farce.

/where’s Samantha Power been these last few months, anyone seen her, she’s got a hell of a lot of explaining to do?

Taking Questionable Sides In A Foreign Civil War

It’s official, we’re no longer hiding behind the fictitious fig leaf of “responsibility to protect” civilians (R2P), we’re now showing our true colors. We’re in Libya for regime change. I’m not quite sure when the United Nations approved that?

US, allies formally recognize Libya rebels

The United States granted Libyan rebel leaders full diplomatic recognition as the governing authority of Libya yesterday, after five months of fighting to oust longtime ruler Moammar Khadafy.

The decision at a meeting here of more than 30 Western and Arab nations is the first step in giving the rebels access to Libya’s frozen US assets, worth more than $30 billion.

“I am announcing today that, until an interim authority is in place, the United States will recognize the TNC as the legitimate governing authority for Libya,’’ Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said, referring to the rebels’ Transitional National Council, prompting other ministers to break out in applause.

Who, exactly, are we now in bed with?

Rights group: Libyan rebels looted and beat civilians

Libyan rebels have looted and burned homes and abused civilians, a human rights group said Wednesday.

The New York-based Human Rights Watch said that, in “four towns captured by rebels in the Nafusa Mountains over the past month, rebel fighters and supporters have damaged property, burned some homes, looted from hospitals, homes, and shops, and beaten some individuals alleged to have supported government forces.”

See also:
U.S. recognition of the Libyan rebel government leaves many questions unanswered
US Formally Recognizes Libyan Rebels
United States recognizes Libyan rebels as legitimate government
U.S. recognizes Libyan rebels as ruling authority
Libyan Rebels Get U.S. Recognition, Await Cash
Libyan rebels win recognition and promise of financial support
Libyan Rebels Get U.S. Recognition Yet Must Wait for Cash
Mary E. Stonaker: What formal recognition given to Libyan rebels means for the oil markets
Rights Group: Libyan Rebels Loot Seized Towns
Rights group accuses Libyan rebels of abuse
Libya rebels loot seized towns, says rights group
Human Rights Watch criticizes Libyan rebels
Rights group exposes Libyan rebel abuses

Lets recap: The United States has now formally aligned itself with accused war criminals we hardly know, in a foreign civil war that we have absolutely no business being militarily involved with in the first place, and our mission creep to regime change isn’t even authorized or approved under international law. Is that about it?

/well played Obama administration, what are we now, a rogue nation?

Why Aren’t We Stomping Syria’s Guts Out?

Obama couldn’t wait to bomb Libya using the flimsy excuse of “protecting civilians”. Well, Bashar al-Assad has killed at least as many civilians as Moammar Gadhafi ever did and today Assad backed mobs attacked the U.S. embassy in Damascus, arguably an act of war. Why aren’t we bombing Syria and demanding that Assad leave the country? What’s Obama waiting for, another Iranian hostage situation?

Demonstrators storm U.S. embassy in Damascus

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has lost the legitimacy to rule after pro-government demonstrators stormed the U.S. Embassy in Damascus on Monday in what U.S. officials described as an orchestrated attack.

Regime supporters hurled rocks, smashed windows and tore down the American flag at the embassy, triggering the strongest U.S. condemnation yet of the Syrian government. Clinton suggested that the United States is contemplating the prospect of a post-Assad future in Syria nearly four months into a brutal government crackdown on pro-democracy activists inspired by the revolts in Egypt and Tunisia.

See also:
U.S. accuses Syria of unleashing mob attacks on U.S., French embassies
Syrian protesters attack U.S., French embassies
Syrian protesters attack U.S. Embassy in Damascus
Syrian protesters attack US, French embassies
US Embassy In Syria Attacked
Assad’s Embassy Raid
Deeply disappointed by the attack on American soil?
Clinton condemns US and French embassy attacks in Syria
U.S. Official: Syria’s Failure To Protect U.S. Embassy Is ‘Outrageous’
Assad Has ‘Lost Legitimacy,’ Clinton Says After Embassy Attacked
U.S. says Assad “not indispensable” to Syria

Is this what passes for consistent foreign policy in the Obama administration? The leaders of both Libya and Syria have killed thousands of civilians. Syria is infinitely more of a threat to U.S. national security than Libya is. Yet we’re bombing the [expletive deleted] out of Libya and trying to kill Gadhafi or drive him out of Libya at the same time we’re politely, diplomatically “condemning” Syria and giving Assad a total free pass. WTF?

/if we have a legitimate reason to be doing what we’re doing in Libya, we have even more of a legitimate reason to be doing even more of it in Syria and, by corollary, if we’re going to do nothing concrete about Syria’s brutal crackdown on civilians, we have absolutely no business whatsoever bombing Libya and we should get the hell out immediately, we’ve already done enough human and infrastructure damage there without any tangible results

Taking NATO To The Woodshed

On his way out the door, retiring U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates lets it fly.

Gates Says NATO Could Face ‘Irrelevance’ in the Future

American Defense Secretary Robert Gates has told NATO members that they need to do more — and spend more — to support the alliance.

ROBERT GATES: “The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the US Congress — and in the American body politic writ large — to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defense.”

On Friday, Mr. Gates gave his last policy speech before he retires as defense secretary on June thirtieth. He spoke in Brussels, Belgium, at the headquarters of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO was created in nineteen forty-nine to defend western Europe against the Soviet Union.

See also:
Transcript of Defense Secretary Gates’s Speech on NATO’s Future
Gates rebukes European allies in farewell speech
‘Collective Military Irrelevance’
After Gates’ Blunt Warning, What’s Next for NATO?
US warns Europe over NATO future
Libya, Europe and the future of NATO
NATO’S future at risk, warns Pentagon chief
Gates offers grim account of NATO’s Libya efforts
Gates slams NATO allies over share of combat burden
Where Gates criticizes, Obama celebrates
How long will the U.S. find NATO relevant and affordable?

Just how worthless is NATO? They’ve been battling third rate military power Libya for three months now, NATO’s running out of ammunition, and Moammar Gadhafi is still there. What would NATO do if, say, Russia attacked western Europe? If NATO can’t defeat Libya, how can they possibly defend themselves? It’s more than obvious that NATO has outlived its usefulness and needs to be disbanded. Why should the United States continue to put up the vast majority of funding, troops, and equipment to support Europe’s defense, when Europe refuses to defend itself?

/and why the [expletive deleted] is Turkey a member of NATO, they not only don’t contribute much of anything, they actively work against the other alliance members, how insane is that?

Definitely Not Mission Creep In A Not War

There’s nothing to see here, move along, it’s all just part of enforcing the U.N. mandated humanitarian no fly zone to, ahem, protect civilians. It’s definitely not ramping up NATO offensive military operations in support of one side in a civil war.

Liam Fox denies Apache strikes are a change of tactics

The Apaches hit targets near the Libyan town of Brega during the latest wave of Nato strikes against forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, the MoD said.

The Defence Secretary, epeaking at a security forum in Singapore, said that the use of British Apache attack helicopters in Libya was a logical continuation of the Nato-led military operation against Muanmar Gaddafi’s forces and did not mean that fighter jet attacks had failed.

“It’s not plan B at all,” said Dr Fox.

“The use of the attack helicopters is a logical extension of we have already been doing. We already have fast jets in action, this gives us a chance to target new targets in a way we weren’t able to do.

See also:
NATO uses attack helicopters for first time in Libya air assault
British, French helicopters strike Gadhafi troops
U.K., French helicopters strike Qaddafi troops
NATO Attack Helicopters Strike Libya Targets for First Time
NATO helicopters hit targets in Libya
Combat helicopters enter Libya fray
British, French helicopters strike Gadhafi troops
Army Apache helicopters launch first British helicopter strikes in Libya against Gaddafi’s forces
British Apache helicopters strike Gaddafi’s forces for first time
Night strikes by French Tigre helicopters
NATO launches helicopter strikes in Libya

So now NATO is using attack helicopters, where the hell in U.N. Resolution 1973 is that authorized? The current NATO operations are now way beyond what was ever intended or mandated by the original, authorized, humanitarian U.N. mission. Seriously, can ground troops be far behind the attack helicopters?

/just how kinetic does a humanitarian kinetic military action have to get before one may dare call it direct, offensive, one sided, military intervention in a civil war?

Are We There Yet?

And so the end begins. You just knew this was bound to happen, given that there’s no actual strategy involved. Run away! Italy doesn’t want to play anymore.

Italy to try to seek date for end of Libya mission

Italy pledged on Tuesday to seek an end date for NATO’s Libya operations as Premier Silvio Berlusconi sought to placate a key government partner opposed to Italian participation in the bombing missions.

Foreign Minister Franco Frattini told reporters that Rome “will try, along with international organizations, and until, until I’m proven wrong, NATO, and its allies, to set an end” date for the operations.

See also:
Italy says it will try to discuss date with NATO, allies for end of Libyan operations
Italy says it will try to work out a date with NATO, allies for end of Libyan operations
Italy to try to seek date for end of Libya mission
Libya: End of mission to be decided with Nato allies says Italian foreign minister
Berlusconi Says Bid to Limit Libya Role Not a Problem
Berlusconi patches up row with allies over Libya
Leave Libya or we will bring you down, allies tell Berlusconi
Interview: Italian experts urge Rome meeting on Libya to change strategy
Libya’s Rebels Spending $60 Million A Day

How is it that it’s suddenly fashionable to start a war and then declare a time limit as to how long you’re willing to fight? Even a five year old can figure out that all the enemy has to do is to wait until you leave and then declare victory. Other than to waste lives and resources, what’s the point of starting a war you’re not going to finish?

/whatever happened to that old fashioned concept of, you know, fighting wars to win?