http://devil-ad-vocate.livejournal.com/ ([identity profile] devil-ad-vocate.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] talkpolitics2011-03-20 11:30 pm
Entry tags:

Graham says now is time to oust Gaddafi

Branding Moammar Gaddafi “an international crook,” U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham said today that now is America’s best chance to get rid of the Libyan dictator and criticized President Barack Obama for not seizing the opportunity sooner and more forcefully.

“He [Obama] needs to relish leading the free world,” Graham said. “Now it’s almost like leading the free world is an inconvenience.”

While Obama said the goal of military force in Libra is to protect civilians, Graham said the president should also take advantage of his best chance to knock Gaddafi out of power.

“Isolate, strangle and replace this man,” Graham said. “That should be our goal.”

source:
http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20110320/NEWS03/110320004/Graham-says-now-is-time-to-oust-Gaddafi-
---

At least Lindsey Graham offers a more honest condemnation of Obama's stated objectives in Libya than Gingrich's "Final Four Picks". Graham would like to see a full-fledged invasion of Tripoli to hang Gaddafi's corpse from the nearest tree - contrary to what the UN vote agreed upon. It's more of the "I've got a bigger d*ck than them Europeeans, and I'm ready to wave it" mentality. As usual, it would be with risking the lives of American soldiers - not his own hide. Given the opportunity, Graham would turn "Operation Odyssey Dawn" into "Operation Bottomless Abyss".

This operation has been a success thus far; I hope it continues with NO coalition troops on the ground. Let the Libyans finish it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2HLKemsOP4

[identity profile] okmewriting.livejournal.com 2011-03-21 05:25 am (UTC)(link)
Well seeing as they've just dropped a bomb on his compound, destroying an office block...

It's all well and good getting rid of Gaddafi like they got rid of Saddam but do they have a workable plan of how to build a new country? Something that is not going to implode in the next few years? When the allies took over Germany they planned for something like two years how to run the country.

This bunch of cowboys don't seem to have given it any thought.

Getting rid of a dictator is all well and good but if the majority of people end up having a better (safer) life under the dictator do you think they're going to thank you for it?

Not our problem. That's for the opposition to decide.

[identity profile] squidb0i.livejournal.com 2011-03-21 07:10 am (UTC)(link)

And they're organized enough to keep cities functioning despite Gadhafi's best efforts and can contact Hillary to arrange a meeting, so perhaps your paternalistic predictions of failure are premature?

Re: Not our problem. That's for the opposition to decide.

[identity profile] green-man-2010.livejournal.com 2011-03-21 08:36 am (UTC)(link)
Contrary to all talk of disaster, These Guys are the ones to watch.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12698562

Ii do realise that it is early days, but I insist that the UN was right.
it's not about the US 'bugging out', or 'butting in where it isn't wanted',
the USA has to find a new role for itself in the modern , post Cold War world.

The USA can't act in isolation any more without being accused of putting its own interests first, but if it wants to lead a coalition of the willing , as presently it is in Libya, thenonce the American sattelites and other ' unique assets have done thier job, Obama will find that other places in the Arab world and iin Europe will step up to the plate and support the overall agreed strategy.

Obama is becoming more like the foreman of the world's jury on international opinion. If he says "we ought to take out Gaddaffi , but let his own people deal with him while we back 'em up" , I think he will increaseAmerica's standing abroad. It will be like JFK and the berlin Airlift all over again.
Wether Americans will appreciate having a respected and loved president again after so many years, its hard to say.

Re: Not our problem. That's for the opposition to decide.

[identity profile] squidb0i.livejournal.com 2011-03-21 02:42 pm (UTC)(link)
Will they even recognize such a president when they see him? =/

Re: Not our problem. That's for the opposition to decide.

[identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com 2011-03-21 04:54 pm (UTC)(link)
Yes, the Berlin airlift where three years after WWII we defended the capital of what had three years earlier been Herr Hitler's mass murdering machine from a Soviet blockade, from a nation which had been through the murder of tens of millions of its own citizens at the hand of said mass murdering machine. Methinks as the Cold War fades from immediate memory it's going to look more senseless than ever.

Re: Not our problem. That's for the opposition to decide.

[identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com 2011-03-22 02:03 am (UTC)(link)
Let's not forget JFK was responsible for the Cuban Missile Crisis *and* for putting into effect Eisenhower's lousy idea for the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Pfftttt......

[identity profile] underlankers.livejournal.com 2011-03-21 04:53 pm (UTC)(link)
The Taliban ran Afghanistan more efficiently than anyone since 1979. The ability to run cities says nothing about what happens after the fall of Gadafi.

[identity profile] green-man-2010.livejournal.com 2011-03-21 08:39 am (UTC)(link)
Gaddaffi still has a lot of support from his own tribe, but the rebels took half the country off him before he called in his foriegn mercenaries.

I think these guys have got his number, and the war could go in their favour

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12698562