Obama on Libya: “It’s in Our National Interest to Act” — Defense Secretary Gates: “No, It’s Not a Vital Interest for the United States”…
This is what Obama had to say yesterday:
(AFP) — President Barack Obama gave a staunch defense of the US role in the international military mission in Libya Saturday, as he comes under pressure to explain US goals to a public exhausted by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obama’s weekly radio and online address was his most detailed review of the UN-sanctioned action so far, and comes ahead of an address to the nation Monday on the US strategy in Libya.
“Make no mistake, because we acted quickly, a humanitarian catastrophe has been avoided and the lives of countless civilians — innocent men, women and children — have been saved,” Obama said.
When innocent people are brutalized by a leader like Kadhafi who was threatening a “bloodbath,” and when nations are prepared to respond together, “it’s in our national interest to act,” he said. “And it’s our responsibility.”
And here’s Gates today:
David Gregory: Is Libya in our vital interest as a country?
Robert Gates: No, I don’t think it’s vital interest for the United States, but we clearly have interest there and it is a pat of the region which is a vital interest for the United States.
So which is it?
Posted by ZIP on Sunday, March 27, 2011, at 12:30 pm | 
Tweet
Hey, while we’re at it theres a revolution going on in Syria right now too. They are BFF’s with with Iran , Hezbollah and Hamas, how come taking them out isn’t our best national interest?
Every ass has two cheeks.
Many arabs have told me the US is the laughing stock of the world. When i see sh!t like this … how can i dispute them!
obama thinks outloud “It’s a pecious islamo moslim country that’s not worshipping me to the fullest. And now that my good buddies the islamo moslim brotherhood and dear special friends in jihad al qaeda are tying to more radicalize Libya in a sharia way close to my heart, I pesonally feel great joy in them knowing that it was I that decided to save them, so when they come to power we will have that special islamo moslim bond that the puppet moohamhead has with all of his followers.”
I wonder if Al Qaeda will use Libyan oil money to fund terrorist activities? Obama knows the poor guys need money. He’s just trying to help out.
Note to Obama,
Secretary Gates will lie if you order him to. It’s his job to follow your orders. But in order to do that, he needs prior notice.
.
I’m sure Sec Gates is just counting down the days until he can leave within a few months.
I remember watching Gen Jones when he resigned, he looked pissed. Same with the dude who Clapper replaced, they all looked pissed.
@Jimco….
“…I wonder if Al Qaeda will use Libyan oil money to fund terrorist activities?…”
– — –
You may be onto something there…
AQ is trying to go legit… from selling poppy to fund themselves
to selling oil
Hillary is having difficulty of her own.
Did she really mean to use the term “police action” here? Isn’t that what the US did in Vietnam?
—————–
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/27/ftn/main20047627.shtml
When asked about recent brutalities committed by the Syrian regime against civilians, Clinton suggested that “there’s a difference between calling out aircraft and indiscriminately strafing and bombing your own cities, than police actions which frankly have exceeded the use of force that any of us would want to see.”
.
Oh, oh, they loaded Obummer’s teleprompter wrong.
I think Obumbler got this one all wee-weed up. From his “difference in calling out aircraft and indiscriminately strafing and bombing your own cities, than police actions.,,.”. I suppose that his teleprompter got mixed up with the old LBJ teleprompter sitting in the White House basement!
If this shit is so important and such a good idea for our national interest, why haven’t we been told why? Why haven’t we been told more about those “freedom fighters” and “rebels” who the US is wasting valuable time and finances (which we don’t have) to support? It seems like this is just another Clinton dog-wagging moment. How much in kickbacks is Chicago Jesus getting for this and from whom?
“Make no mistake, because we acted quickly, a humanitarian catastrophe has been avoided and the lives of countless civilians — innocent men, women and children — have been saved,” Obama said.
=======================================
Sort of like those jobs that have been saved (or created)? I guess we can’t prove him wrong, as there is no way to predict how many lives would have been lost.
“Obambarian at the Gates”! Or, “tweedledumb and tweedledumber”.
“our national interests ” LMFAO. Nothing Baraq does is in our national interest. Was it in our national interest for the US to give Gaddafi millions just last month for his “military”- Obama asked Congress for that. Knowing of course Gaddaffi was responsible directly for the Pan Am 103 terrorist attack..and you GIVE HIM US TAXPAYER MONEY ? !
Pantsuits basically outlined what was becoming clear. Obama took us to war at the request of Pantsuits, Samantha Power, and Susan Rice, based on a principle of “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P). Now known as The Obama Doctrine. It is obvious the Pentagon/Defense Department did not concur with the State Department’s interventionist approach.
Interesting she states we went to war in Libya at the request of Italy, France, and the UK (in that order) as loyal payback for their support in Afghanistan. Clinton admits we have no immediate interest, and dismisses that concern by stating our allies had no immediate interest in Afghanistan. So the overt narrative is we went to war #1. to stop a slaughter in Benghazi (humanitarian), and #2. to support Italy, France and the UK.
This lends to what exactly why were Italy, France and the UK so concerned about? (The covert narrative) Two major issues. #1. Libyan oil for their diesels. #2. Stop the flow of immigration from North Africa – and the subsequent economic impact from it.
Herein lies the problem with R2P intervention ideology. Where does it stop? In this Libyan instance it is less about Libyan people (humanitarian), and more about Europe (economic). So you can see economic impacts have a larger influence in R2P principles than humanitarian ones. Indeed, this is historically the case. Rwandan genocide had no economic benefit for intervention. Nor does Israel. See where this global principle leads? Indeed the R2P consideration stops at the door of irrelevent economics. But, that is indeed what ultimately the United Nations interventions come to. How does this impact globally? If economically unquantifiable, then no intervention is needed.
Obama has conceeded sovereignty in this approach. The New World Order being played out on stage around the R2P principles. This is the ideological Obama Doctrine of global intervention. It is also why this doctrine is filled with massive hypocrisy.
The Libiturds conflicting comments were hard to take when they were voiced by different trolls; but now that they conflict in the same statement it’s getting even weirder!
What’s next? I feel strongly both ways!
But no one in Libya carried ot Lockerbie.
The US and Iran, using their agencies, the CIA and Pasdaran did, to give Iran its one and one only revenge for IR655.
Charles Norrie