Gates: Libya not a threat, Was Not 'Vital National Interest' to Intervene

[justapixel]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalp...not-vital-national-interest-to-intervene.html

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that Libya did not pose a threat to the United States before the U.S. began its military campaign against the North African country.

On “This Week,” ABC News’ Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper asked Gates, “Do you think Libya posed an actual or imminent threat to the United States?”

“No, no,” Gates said in a joint appearance with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “It was not -- it was not a vital national interest to the United States

How many more Libyans will die because of Obama? How much more will this cost the US economy?

Obama had a chance to finish off Gaddafy four weeks ago, but could not make a decision. Now the US economy and US jobs are being hurt.

More people are dying.

Obama has been exposed as weak and indecisive.

Now, his own Sec. of Defense says "it was not necessary".

Can Obama do anything but destroy our once proud country?

 

[Kulindahr]

Trying to be "barely a photon" again? That post is pretty dim.

You're advocating a cynical, selfish foreign policy that regards the rest of the world as pawns, even sub-human.

As for "four weeks ago", Obama did make a decision -- to not pursue a solo, arrogant foreign policy.

So at least you're consistent: you attack him for not being arrogant, and you attack him for not being cynical and selfish.

 

[BostonPirate]

bullshit, pixie.

Theres not a sentence of truth in your words buddy.

Its a new low for you.

 

[rareboy]

Pixel.

You always cease to amaze me.

You still and never will get it.

Your obsessive, toxic and all consuming hatred for your black president doesn't permit you to understand the situation in Libya at all. If the US had not responded to the pressure to help implement a no-fly zone..and Gaddaffi had then continued to slaughter his own people....the US wouldn't be able to raise any future support from the rest of the NATO and western alliance countries.

When Halliburton wanted to invade a country and kick the shit out of it, and the rest of the owrld (except GB) was pushing for restraint, you would have been right there cheering them on. In this case, where the primary impetus came through a multi-lateral resolution in the UN to prevent a possible genocide....all you and Gates can think of is whether this is solely in the strategic interests of the US.

Oh and by the way. Gates is dead wrong.

 

[Kulindahr]

Oh and by the way. Gates is dead wrong.

He's also in disagreement with his boss.

 

[laikaNYC]

Were the left-wing ideologues concerned about Saddam committing genocide in Iraq? Of course not. But because this is Obama's war, they support it. Pathetic. Oh and I love rareboy and his Haliburton conspiracy theories!

 

[Kulindahr]

Were the left-wing ideologues concerned about Saddam committing genocide in Iraq? Of course not. But because this is Obama's war, they support it. Pathetic. Oh and I love rareboy and his Haliburton conspiracy theories!

There are none so blind....

Yes the left was concerned about the genocide in Iraq. Conservatives hardly made a peep. They couldn't be bothered to care until it was time to give the issue lip sservice when Georgie Bush got an itch to kill himself some Ay-rabs.

 

[chrisrobin]

..........
.........YAWN.........​

Punxsutawney Phil failed to see his shadow.

The swallows have returned to Capistrano.

The buzzards have returned to Hinkley, Ohio.

I'm still waiting to witness a genuine discussion of ANYTHING on CE&P. I'm not holding my breath.

I rule the roost. Get over it.​

I'd kiss you but I just washed my hair - Bette Davis

 

[CowboyBob]

What do you expect coming from the OP? No matter what the President does or says, justapixel will say the President is wrong about everything.

The OP cannot be taken seriously. It's another his EPIC FAIL threads.

 

[Kulindahr]

I'm still waiting to witness a genuine discussion of ANYTHING on CE&P. I'm not holding my breath.

Whoa. First we have a claim there are no conservatives in CE & P, now we have a claim there's no intelligent discussion.

In both cases, someone needs to read more -- though I'll admit it can sometimes be akin to searching in a haystack... not maybe for a needle, but for your pitchfork.

 

[vulgar_newcomer]

When was Saddam committing genocide?

Was the Iraqi people requesting US participation?

Was the Iraqi people requesting US troops to invade their country?

Was the international community already planning to invade Iraq?

Was the Arab League supportive of the US invasion of Iraq?

Hussien was wasting his people right & left, Kurds. But at the time there were Republicans of course running the USA. Maybe even using gas sold to Iraq by Reagan & Rumsfield to wipe out the Iranians . Thats how come they had those WMDS. Of course the US denies selling any such nasty shit to Iraq however did supply combat helicopters and trucks supposedly with the weapons removed. Those same helicopters were equipped with fire power & were trashing the Iranians firing gas on them during the war between Iraq & Iran, but the USA didn't sell any mustard gas to good buddy Hussein.
But you know Bush SR, didn't rush in to Iraq after Kuwait to stop the genocide either.
It was complicated however the US military was just sitting there on the border while Hussein was wasting thousands and they couldn't understand why the US wouldn't invade to help other throw Hussein.
Laika must not remember this.

 

[White Eagle]

Kulindahr, BostonPirate, rareboy, ElmyDonnstad, chrisrobin, CowboyBob and mitchymo. Don't you guys realize by now that pixie disappears right after he makes a thread. Y'all are talkin' to the wall. I say this because all of y'all have the smarts to know better.
Just my opinion, sorry.

 

[jackoroe]

I think the important point to take away from Gate's story is that Obama consulted with everyone except Congress. There was no declaration of war, nor a resolution authorizing use of force.

The fact that there was no vital interest involved or threat to the US, means that he had to get Congress permission first and he didn't. That's disregarding the Constitution.

 

[BostonPirate]

I think the important point to take away from Gate's story is that Obama consulted with everyone except Congress. There was no declaration of war, nor a resolution authorizing use of force.

The fact that there was no vital interest involved or threat to the US, means that he had to get Congress permission first and he didn't. That's disregarding the Constitution.

It was a treaty obligation. When congress endorsed NATO and the UN charter they committed us forces to any action these treaties require.

Did reagan go to congress to bomb libya the first time? No. Did Reagan go to congress when he invaded grenada? NO. Did Bush Sr ask congress before he invaded Panama? NO. What either of those actions were or weren't one thing is sure... they don't pass the test you are setting forth. The truth is that american policy on this has been set by Republican presidents for the nation.

You are misinformed as to what they are.

The war powers act of 1975 gives the president 60 days before he has to consult congress.

That is the law. That is the history of the law in action. Everything else is spin.

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalp...not-vital-national-interest-to-intervene.html



How many more Libyans will die because of Obama? How much more will this cost the US economy?

Obama had a chance to finish off Gaddafy four weeks ago, but could not make a decision. Now the US economy and US jobs are being hurt.

More people are dying.

Obama has been exposed as weak and indecisive.

Now, his own Sec. of Defense says "it was not necessary".

Can Obama do anything but destroy our once proud country?

if a folk a make pile dirt 3ft talls ans stands ons it in Arizona ans shout OUR Country do all da folkys ins da borders of da plot land USA hear it?

 

[Kulindahr]

Kulindahr, BostonPirate, rareboy, ElmyDonnstad, chrisrobin, CowboyBob and mitchymo. Don't you guys realize by now that pixie disappears right after he makes a thread. Y'all are talkin' to the wall. I say this because all of y'all have the smarts to know better.
Just my opinion, sorry.

I'm trying to further his personal growth by helping him feel someone cares.

 

[Zu-Mendel]

I'm trying to further his personal growth by helping him feel someone cares.

Nobody can breath life into old bones.

 

[Glafna]

I am very much surprised people still comment on this trolls posts.

Justapixel, as I said in another thread, try looking at things in a different light, other then your lame linear point of view.

 

[chrisrobin]

Whoa. First we have a claim there are no conservatives in CE & P, now we have a claim there's no intelligent discussion.

In both cases, someone needs to read more -- though I'll admit it can sometimes be akin to searching in a haystack... not maybe for a needle, but for your pitchfork.

I think I may have been unclear about this. Please do not mistake genuine discussion with intelligent discussion. If you make a statement and I just call you names or make scurrilous statements, I do not consider that genuine discussion. I consider it the actions of a petulant child or someone simply regurgitating someone else's talking points. Discussion implies a dialogue between two individuals. The absence of discussion only diminishes the value of the topic. Therefore, the thread turns into a Lite Beer commercial: tastes great - less filling, ad nauseam.

For example:
Person A: Bill Clinton apologized for not having enough involvement in Darfur.
Person B: Yea, he was too busy having his dick sucked by Monica Lewinsky.

This is not a discussion. Person B is only assuming the role of bomb-thrower. Maybe I expect too much.

 

[rareboy]

^ I think Kuli may have been a little rough here.

I think he'd be the first to agree that we have two or three trolls who have no interest whatsoever in having a genuine discussion on any subject, let alone the ability, as has become nakedly apparent, to have an intelligent discussion.

We have had example upon example of these few posters landing in almost every thread with the intention of either derailing any reasonable discussion, to insult other posters with hackneyed epithets and/or to divert attention away from the topic at hand.

Unfortunately, at least three of these avatars have so completely demolished any credibility they might have had to the point of destroying any thread, simply by posting in it.

Hence, the end of any possibility of genuine discussion.

Unless people finally and once and for all, stop feeding them and learn to put them on Ignore where they belong.