• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

“What are Republicans afraid of?” Everything.

Fight them, without becoming them!

The republican caucus is covering themselves with something, and it’s not glory.

How can republicans represent us when they don’t trust women?

When we show up, we win.

The most dangerous place for a black man in America is in a white man’s imagination.

Hot air and ill-informed banter

I know this must be bad for Joe Biden, I just don’t know how.

We are aware of all internet traditions.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

It’s not hopeless, and we’re not helpless.

Conservatism: there are people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

The current Supreme Court is a rogue court. Very dangerous.

So many bastards, so little time.

Roe isn’t about choice, it’s about freedom.

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

You can’t love your country only when you win.

Black Jesus loves a paper trail.

You are so fucked. Still, I wish you the best of luck.

Somebody needs to explain to DeSantis that nobody needs to do anything to make him look bad.

Consistently wrong since 2002

…and a burning sense of injustice to juice the soul.

Dead end MAGA boomers crying about Talyor Swift being a Dem is my kind of music. Turn it up.

Mobile Menu

  • Four Directions Montana
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2024 Elections
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Open Threads / NATO is Taking Over the Libya Shenanigans

NATO is Taking Over the Libya Shenanigans

by Imani Gandy (ABL)|  March 24, 20117:47 pm| 122 Comments

This post is in: Open Threads, War

FacebookTweetEmail

But what about Boots Onna Ground™?

The latest on Libya:

Western allies and Turkey have reached a breakthrough deal to put the entire military campaign against Muammar Gaddafi under Nato command by next week.

The deal, confirmed by Nato secretary-general Anders Fogh Rasmussen, gives political oversight of the military action to a committee of the international coalition involved in the campaign.

Rasmussen said that the 28 member nations have agreed to act in order to protect Libyan civilians from attacks by forces loyal to Gaddafi.

French president Nicolas Sarkozy, who had tried to diminish the role of Nato in the Libyan campaign, conceded, in the face of determined Turkish opposition, that a new two-tier structure will be established to run the operation:

And this:

Americans are grappling with an unfamiliar role. They are accustomed to running things – especially when those things involve going to war. Not this time. As the west’s fighter jets patrol the skies over Libya, President Barack Obama has told his generals and diplomats to stand back. We have been shown the new geopolitical landscape.

 

Europeans – or at least the French and the British – find this territory equally strange. Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron put themselves in the vanguard of diplomacy to stop Libya’s Muammer Gaddafi. When Mr Obama eventually consented, he attached a condition: you want it, you can own it.

 

Consider this your daily Freak the Fuck Out About Libya Open Thread.

[via Financial Times and The Guardian]

[cross-posted here at ABLC]

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Long Form Snark
Next Post: Open Thread: On, Wisconsin »

Reader Interactions

122Comments

  1. 1.

    MikeTheZ

    March 24, 2011 at 7:49 pm

    Very well, I shall proceed to freak the fuck out about Libya

    ….fuck it, too tired. Someone else do it plzkthx.

  2. 2.

    freelancer

    March 24, 2011 at 7:50 pm

    NATO is Taking Over the Libya Shenanigans

    The restaurant Farva likes with the goofy shit on the walls and the mozzarella sticks? News about Quadaffhi gets weirder by the day.

  3. 3.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 7:51 pm

    Not remotely surprising: American role is limited, American role is shrinking, control of operation turned over to Europeans, no ground forces.

    Surprising: there are twenty-eight members in NATO? Did we start including culinary schools and Boy Scout troops?

    If NATO eventually includes every country in the world, will that mean there won’t be any more wars?

  4. 4.

    JAHILL10

    March 24, 2011 at 7:52 pm

    I shan’t freak the fuck out, because this is what I expected to happen.
    Now, where did I get that idea? Wait, let me think….oh yeah it was that Bush-lite Obama guy who said it was going to go down this way. Go figure.

  5. 5.

    The Dangerman

    March 24, 2011 at 7:54 pm

    OMG! Americans will be operating under the command of some French Dude!!

    /Republicans

  6. 6.

    Joe Beese

    March 24, 2011 at 7:54 pm

    Who said this?

    The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.

    You’ll never guess.

  7. 7.

    sherifffruitfly

    March 24, 2011 at 7:55 pm

    Who put the sand in Cole’s vagina anyway?

  8. 8.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 7:55 pm

    Wouldn’t it be awesome if the House Armed Services Committee scheduled hearings on Odyssey Dawn, and it ended before the hearings happened?

    Maybe they can hold hearings on how that name was chosen.

    Odyssey – a story about a leader who got lost in the Mediterranean, going from place to place and getting into all kinds of adventures with terrifying monsters, losing crew members all along the way, until he finally returned home years later.

    Dawn – the beginning of something.

    So, that’s just *%^$ing great. Someone in the Pentagon made a funny.

  9. 9.

    Omnes Omnibus

    March 24, 2011 at 7:55 pm

    This is the kind of news I was hoping for with this operation. It is early days yet, but things seem to be going as planned.

  10. 10.

    Emily L. Hauser/ellaesther

    March 24, 2011 at 7:55 pm

    Hmm. Who was that dark-skinned young miss who told me with such wisdom the other day that I needn’t freak the fuck out…? She was was, that young miss was.

  11. 11.

    Angry Black Lady

    March 24, 2011 at 7:56 pm

    @Joe Beese: good thing that this was multi- and not uni- lateral.

    fucking language! how does it work?!

  12. 12.

    Angry Black Lady

    March 24, 2011 at 7:56 pm

    @Emily L. Hauser/ellaesther: i don’t know, but that bitch is CRAZY.

  13. 13.

    Calouste

    March 24, 2011 at 7:57 pm

    @ joe from Lowell:

    Nope. See Cyprus.

  14. 14.

    Unabogie

    March 24, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    @The Dangerman:

    Book it.

    But who cares? This is what I expected as well. And I don’t support any part of this, but they’ve been saying for days they don’t want a long term commitment.

  15. 15.

    mr. whipple

    March 24, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    Looks like the people in Libya are happier with the UN/US/Britain/France then we are.

  16. 16.

    Joe Beese

    March 24, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    good thing that this was multi- and not uni- lateral.

    Ah, the “Unless the UN says he can, and he’s a Democrat” clause.

    Also, what the meaning of “is” is.

  17. 17.

    Moonbatting Average

    March 24, 2011 at 7:59 pm

    @freelancer: You clearly need a pistol-whipping

  18. 18.

    IM

    March 24, 2011 at 7:59 pm

    @joe from Lowell:

    Do want to play the ugly american or what?

    Iceland is a NATO country without armed forces. The number isn’t surprising, after all most of eastern europe is now in the NATO.

  19. 19.

    Emily L. Hauser/ellaesther

    March 24, 2011 at 7:59 pm

    @Joe Beese:
    Actually, we will probably ALL of us guess, because everyone on the intertrons has been waving that quote since the NFZ was announced.

    This country did not declare war on anyone. It joined a United Nations effort which, depending on how you read your law, was entirely in keeping with Article 42 of the UN Charter. Reasonable argument can be made that Article 42 can be interpreted differently, but it is not reasonable to say that what President Obama authorized flies in the face of what Sen Obama said back then. Because it doesn’t.

    I highly recommend this extraordinary piece of exegesis on the matter: http://www.angryblacklady.com/2011/03/22/libya-i-hardly-know-ya/#more-45649

  20. 20.

    Konrad

    March 24, 2011 at 8:00 pm

    Please note that (possibly) similar operations, in Bosnia and Kosovo, were run by the USA because the EU countries did not want to step up and commit to stopping violence they admitted was wrong. Hats off to Obama for getting the UK and France to follow through on their denunciations of what is going on in Libya.

  21. 21.

    Hewer of Wood, Drawer of Water

    March 24, 2011 at 8:00 pm

    @Joe Beese: do you put this into every thread? Why are you wasting everyone’s time? Does it really give you that much satisfaction to trot out the same crap time after time? If so, what a pathetic excuse for a life you have

  22. 22.

    Emily L. Hauser/ellaesther

    March 24, 2011 at 8:00 pm

    @Joe Beese: Oh, I see. You’re just being a dick.

    And pie it is! Lemon, I think, for your bitter juices.

  23. 23.

    Cermet

    March 24, 2011 at 8:01 pm

    @joe from Lowell: Uh, every country in Europe EXCEPT Russia – they were refused. Need at least one enemy.

  24. 24.

    Emily L. Hauser/ellaesther

    March 24, 2011 at 8:01 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: It’s the tides, ABL. The tides.

  25. 25.

    Angry Black Lady

    March 24, 2011 at 8:01 pm

    @Joe Beese: yeah, if you want to dispute the meaning of words like “unilateral” and “multilateral,” you can go ahead and do that, champ. i suggest that you not go to law school, though.

    i said i’d eat crow if i was wrong. i’ll pass you my share.

    now change the subject to afghanistan like a good little derailer.

  26. 26.

    Lolis

    March 24, 2011 at 8:02 pm

    I still wish we didn’t get involved but this is turning out to be a lot better than it could be. President Obama and his cabinet are handling this really well. I don’t care about the daily P.R. of this. Remember when some said the BP oil spill was Obama’s Katrina? It was probably Joe Beese. Haha.

  27. 27.

    Angry Black Lady

    March 24, 2011 at 8:02 pm

    @Hewer of Wood, Drawer of Water: it’s not even correct crap. it’s sub-crap. he’s got his own dictionary and his own set of rules.

  28. 28.

    Bob Loblaw

    March 24, 2011 at 8:02 pm

    When did NATO become space aliens? Someone should tell Adm. Stavridis.

  29. 29.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:03 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    good thing that this was multi- and not uni- lateral.

    Indeed. If it was unilateral, instead of authorized by the Security Council under Article 42 of the UN Charter, it wouldn’t be specifically authorized by Section 6 of the United Nations Participation Act.

  30. 30.

    Incoherent Dennis SGMM

    March 24, 2011 at 8:04 pm

    America will provide Command, Control and Communications. America will also provide, as it does now, 100% of the aircraft flying sorties over Libya. NATO will provide coffee and donuts as well as a heap of after-action criticism.

  31. 31.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:05 pm

    @Joe Beese:

    Ah, the “Unless the UN says he can, and he’s a Democrat” clause.

    Actually, it’s more commonly known as Section 6 of the U.N. Participation Act.

  32. 32.

    RinaX

    March 24, 2011 at 8:05 pm

    I kinda remember some black guy saying that this is how it would go down when this started. Hmmm…

  33. 33.

    agrippa

    March 24, 2011 at 8:06 pm

    @Joe Beese:

    better that you did post ata all if that is the best that you can do.
    But, this is a free country, so post whatever you like.

  34. 34.

    General Stuck

    March 24, 2011 at 8:06 pm

    Looks like Obama is taking the opportunity to introduce the spanky new Obama Doctrine. Which basically says to western and rest of world, we will hold your hand but when the dance starts, you are on your own. Unless it is a vital US interest, of course. It is and will drive the neo cons fucking nuts for fear it will succeed, and ruin their patented brand of let’s take a sledge hammer to the pottery barn, and let the libtards clean up the mess. While the galtian’s clean up all the spare cash.

  35. 35.

    IM

    March 24, 2011 at 8:07 pm

    And as far as i understand, NATO involvement will mean for the time being the existence of two operations. The old British – French – American one and a new NATO operation.

  36. 36.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:07 pm

    @Calouste: Hi, Cyprus!

    So…what am I looking at?

    Anyway, here’s the controlling U.S. law:

    SEC. 6. The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter. The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to tile President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.

  37. 37.

    Butler

    March 24, 2011 at 8:08 pm

    @Joe Beese:

    Who said this?

    Yes, some of us do watch “The Daily Show”. Imagine that.

  38. 38.

    Brian S (formerly Incertus)

    March 24, 2011 at 8:09 pm

    I’m not a programmer, but if I were, I’d try writing a filter that added “Liz Lemon” to the end of everything Joe Beese says. It would certainly improve the quality of the text.

  39. 39.

    Cermet

    March 24, 2011 at 8:09 pm

    If Turkey takes over general command (Note – a Turk General did command American troops in another operation – not uncommon), the Arabs will shit bricks because they fear those SB’s like no tomorrow.

  40. 40.

    Suck It Up!

    March 24, 2011 at 8:09 pm

    Did I miss the conversation about Yemen’s leader stepping down? this is good news. One less country Imperial O will have to invade, yes?

  41. 41.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:11 pm

    @Incoherent Dennis SGMM: Not donuts.

    Biscotti.

  42. 42.

    Butler

    March 24, 2011 at 8:11 pm

    America will also provide, as it does now, 100% of the aircraft flying sorties over Libya.

    Which part of America did this “American” jet come from?

  43. 43.

    Corner Stone

    March 24, 2011 at 8:12 pm

    @Incoherent Dennis SGMM: From the linked article it looks like the Turks and the Frogs don’t care for each other very much.
    The article also doesn’t say who will do C3, just NATO. C3 guesses who that will end up being.

  44. 44.

    The Sheriff's A Ni-

    March 24, 2011 at 8:12 pm

    @joe from Lowell: Turks and Greeks staring at each other over barrels and barbed wire.

  45. 45.

    Josie

    March 24, 2011 at 8:14 pm

    @Joe Beese: I can’t see why you find it so difficult to imagine that a candidate for office or a senator might have one view of international diplomacy and then change his/her view somewhat when faced with the realities of governing. I would assume that the president is in possession of intelligence to which we don’t have access and which might just have bearing on the decisions that he makes. The bottom line is that we voted for him and must trust him to make good decisions. Moreover, who else would you put in that office to make those decisions. I see no man or woman, Democratic or Republican, that I would trust more than Obama.

  46. 46.

    Davis X. Machina

    March 24, 2011 at 8:15 pm

    ICC 100% sure to prosecute Gadaffi regime, says its lead prosecutor.

  47. 47.

    Incoherent Dennis SGMM

    March 24, 2011 at 8:15 pm

    @joe from Lowell:
    Damn! If I wasn’t older than the hills I’d join up. Love me some Biscotti.

  48. 48.

    pattonbt

    March 24, 2011 at 8:17 pm

    @freelancer: God I love Super Troopers!

  49. 49.

    IM

    March 24, 2011 at 8:18 pm

    Of course NATO while multilateral,is still X% US and that X is a big number. Not that it really matters to the morality or practicality of the war in Libya.

  50. 50.

    Bob Loblaw

    March 24, 2011 at 8:21 pm

    @Suck It Up!:

    You don’t know much about Yemen, do you?

  51. 51.

    Konrad

    March 24, 2011 at 8:21 pm

    @Corner Stone:

    It’s almost like one country is keeping the other country from joining the EU or something.

  52. 52.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:21 pm

    @General Stuck:

    Looks like Obama is taking the opportunity to introduce the spanky new Obama Doctrine.

    Do you think so? I see admin officials bending over backwards to explain that this is a one-off action, taken purely in an opportunistic manner.

    It is and will drive the neo cons fucking nuts for fear it will succeed

    The only thing that neoconservatives hate more than Europe having too little military capacity and depending on us is Europe building up its military capacity so they can take action independent of us.

  53. 53.

    JAHILL10

    March 24, 2011 at 8:21 pm

    Cue fallback positions and renewed hand wringing over some other aspect of the operation in 3, 2, 1…

  54. 54.

    soonergrunt

    March 24, 2011 at 8:23 pm

    I’ll believe that when I see it.
    I don’t doubt the President’s intent and objective to turn over the operation to NATO.
    I doubt NATO’s political (not operational) ability to run the operation for any length of time without the US in the leading role.

  55. 55.

    Incoherent Dennis SGMM

    March 24, 2011 at 8:23 pm

    @Corner Stone:
    I was going to use C3 but, I was concerned that it might be too much of a military insider term. I don’t see this new development as having much of an effect on America’s part in this fracas. The iron facts of capability and basing (Anyone else ever heard of NAS, Rota, Spain) will determine our role.

    God bless the people going into harm’s way for this cluster.

  56. 56.

    Joseph Nobles

    March 24, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    Daily freak out about Libya thread? Don’t we need an hourly one?

  57. 57.

    Calouste

    March 24, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    @joe from Lowell:

    Sorry for being unclear. Cyprus was a reply to the last sentence in your post, “If NATO eventually includes every country in the world, will that mean there won’t be any more wars?”, as the division of Cyprus was a war by proxy fought between NATO members Greece and Turkey. Although both Greece and Turkey being NATO members has probably prevented a full scale war between them in the last half a century.

  58. 58.

    BombIranForChrist

    March 24, 2011 at 8:25 pm

    I eagerly await Newt’s new flip flop:

    Flip Flop the First: “No Fly Zone” now, bitches!

    Flip Flop the Second: “No Fly Zonez” R SUXX0rZ!

    Flip Flop the Third?? What will it be? Will he call for a Double Triple No Fly Zone now?

  59. 59.

    Mike in NC

    March 24, 2011 at 8:25 pm

    Some Neo-Confederate nostalgia time:

    RALEIGH — The pardon of a Reconstruction-era governor of North Carolina impeached and removed from office was put on hold Wednesday at the legislature because Senate Republicans aren’t unified on whether to absolve him for actions stemming from his opposition of the Ku Klux Klan.

    Read more: http://www.thesunnews.com/2011/03/24/2057796/pardon-of-1871-governor-delayed.html#ixzz1HZB4JtZF

  60. 60.

    soonergrunt

    March 24, 2011 at 8:26 pm

    @joe from Lowell:

    The only thing that neoconservatives hate more than Europe having too little military capacity and depending on us is Europe building up its military capacity so they can take action independent of us.

    This much is true. The first is fodder for propaganda about why we have to do all the stuff and we should be in charge because only we can. The second would give the lie to the first.

  61. 61.

    Mark S.

    March 24, 2011 at 8:26 pm

    @Corner Stone:

    Yeah, they do seem to hate each other. But my brother and sister-in-law who live in France also hate Sarkozy, so it seems a common reaction.

  62. 62.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:27 pm

    @JAHILL10:

    Cue fallback positions and renewed hand wringing over some other aspect of the operation in 3, 2, 1…

    Which is fine! Our country just got engaged in another military operation. Hand-wringing would seem to be appropriate over any number of legitimate concerns.

    Just not some of the more fanciful, hysterical ones we’ve seen over the past week or so.

  63. 63.

    Keith G

    March 24, 2011 at 8:29 pm

    @joe from Lowell:

    SEC. 6. The President is authorized

    Section 6 of what?

  64. 64.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:31 pm

    @Incoherent Dennis SGMM:

    I was going to use C3 but, I was concerned that it might be too much of a military insider term.

    It is. Do you mean this C3?

  65. 65.

    JPL

    March 24, 2011 at 8:31 pm

    Isn’t it Thursday..What’s cooking tonight?

  66. 66.

    stuckinred

    March 24, 2011 at 8:32 pm

    @JPL: Still in dragnet mode over here.

  67. 67.

    Corner Stone

    March 24, 2011 at 8:33 pm

    @pattonbt:

    God I love Super Troopers!

    I absolutely can NOT tell you how many times I type the word “meow” at the end of some of my comments, then erase it.

  68. 68.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:33 pm

    @Calouste: Ah, of course. I thought there were something Cyprus-related to say about the UN Participation Act.

  69. 69.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:34 pm

    @BombIranForChrist:

    Flip-Flop the Third: Obama is ceding American leadership to the French, who will incompetently command, and probably molest, our troops.

  70. 70.

    Corner Stone

    March 24, 2011 at 8:35 pm

    @Konrad: They have what we call in my neck of the woods a little “history”.

  71. 71.

    jazzgurl

    March 24, 2011 at 8:35 pm

    Isn’t every damn fricking shenanigens ‘Obama’s katrina’? The fools that are this country’s msm are uneducated and insular as can be. They need to all expand their awareness, learn more about other people’s cultures, travel more and stop pretending they know sweet fuck-all about what they report on the middle east et al! What a bunch of pretenders filling up the airwaves with their daily drivel.

  72. 72.

    pattonbt

    March 24, 2011 at 8:36 pm

    Although, in my opinion, the real hard yards and risks are yet to come (for the Libyan people and active coalition participants), it is nice to see the US’s leadership involvement apparently stepping back (with a big caveat for “it’s only words right now” – but they are important words).

    If our (the US) leadership involvement does cease and our involvement in operations becomes minimal (of a support nature), I will be impressed and relatively pleased. But I do think this is far from over for those directly involved and very tough times are still ahead for the people of Libya.

  73. 73.

    Angry Black Lady

    March 24, 2011 at 8:36 pm

    @Keith G: The UN Participation Act

    I’m still amazed that all of the coverage I’ve seen makes no attempt to wrestle with the interplay between international and domestic law.

    It’s much easier to make pronouncements in a vacuum that Things Are Unconstitutional.

  74. 74.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:36 pm

    @Corner Stone:
    “Here on Viva Variety, we make fun of many different people – but none more than the Turks…How to Get Along With Turks – it’s the next best thing to not being around Turkish people at all!”

    Anyone? Anyone?

  75. 75.

    jeffreyw

    March 24, 2011 at 8:37 pm

    @JPL:
    Cake

  76. 76.

    Uriel

    March 24, 2011 at 8:38 pm

    @Joe Beese: We’ve discussed this. Ad-nausium. For days, now.

    Move on, little turtle- sometimes slow and steady wins the race, but sometimes it just bores the fuck out of everybody watching.

    You’re quickly falling into the latter category.

  77. 77.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:38 pm

    @Keith G: The UN Participation Act.

  78. 78.

    Angry Black Lady

    March 24, 2011 at 8:38 pm

    @freelancer: littering and… littering and…

    smoking the reefer.

    that movie has the single funniest opening sequence of any movie ever in the history of everything.

  79. 79.

    Bob Loblaw

    March 24, 2011 at 8:40 pm

    @joe from Lowell:

    The real moral of the story is don’t ever try to assassinate the Saudi Crown Prince.

    Because for all their high minded talk of humanitarianism, the US and Europe would have let Benghazi burn if the GCC wasn’t pulling all the strings in the Arab League.

  80. 80.

    Joe Beese

    March 24, 2011 at 8:43 pm

    I would assume that the president is in possession of intelligence to which we don’t have access and which might just have bearing on the decisions that he makes. The bottom line is that we voted for him and must trust him to make good decisions.

    Ah, the old “The President has secret knowledge and we must trust in his goodness”. A Bush-era classic.

  81. 81.

    Uriel

    March 24, 2011 at 8:43 pm

    @RinaX: Yes, but he was lying! I know, because random people on the Internet assured me of that!

  82. 82.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:43 pm

    I always thought that movie looked stupid.

    Really? Worth Netflixing?

  83. 83.

    pattonbt

    March 24, 2011 at 8:45 pm

    @Corner Stone: Chicken Fucker!!

  84. 84.

    General Stuck

    March 24, 2011 at 8:45 pm

    @joe from Lowell:

    well, I don’t suppose they would announce it as such, that is my characterization, but it is just Obama putting into practice what he always preached, getting the world involved in stuff like this, in a non cowboy way, and America more humble and part of a team. Which is the exact opposite of what the wingnuts are about with the US as some allegorical to a John Wayne country, superior and manly in every way.

    In reality, it is the way America mostly has functioned both with gooper presidents and dem ones, with more or less emphasis on American involvement. The reason it stands out now as something maybe unusual, was eight years of Bush cowboy diplomacy and war fighting.

  85. 85.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:46 pm

    @Bob Loblaw: The list of people Khadaffy has managed to piss off is truly impressive.

    You’re probably right. Now Gulf Cooperation Council support, no Arab League support. No Arab League support, no UN support. No UN support, no NATO support. No NATO support, no Obama, no specialized US assets, no mission.

  86. 86.

    Keith G

    March 24, 2011 at 8:46 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:
    @joe from Lowell:
    Thanks ever so.

  87. 87.

    Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal

    March 24, 2011 at 8:46 pm

    @General Stuck:

    but what if we told the neocons, the obama doctrine is, the usa fucks them, leaves, then their gay european friends come over to cuddle and whatnot after we’re gone?

    think they’d buy it?

  88. 88.

    pattonbt

    March 24, 2011 at 8:46 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: I’m freakin out man!

  89. 89.

    joe from Lowell

    March 24, 2011 at 8:48 pm

    @General Stuck: The last time we were in a wartime coalition that we weren’t leading was…what?

    World War One?

  90. 90.

    Josie

    March 24, 2011 at 8:49 pm

    @Joe Beese: The difference is that, being from Texas, I didn’t trust Bush any further than I could throw him. After having listened to Obama and read his books, I decided that I could trust him, if not to be correct on every detail, to think carefully and use his best judgment. He is a hell of a lot smarter than I am and probably than you are, so that’s the decision I made. I really resent having him equated with Bush, by the way.

  91. 91.

    JPL

    March 24, 2011 at 8:51 pm

    @stuckinred: Earlier today they interrupted local broadcasts to show the swat squad. It has to be unsettling because this is one guy who is not going to be taken alive.

  92. 92.

    Uriel

    March 24, 2011 at 8:52 pm

    @Joe Beese: OH MY GOD! You were right all along-it’s JUST LIKE BUSH!

    Well, apart from the parts that aren’t that aren’t- but whoncares about that stuff when you’ve got a narritve to push!

  93. 93.

    General Stuck

    March 24, 2011 at 8:52 pm

    @joe from Lowell:

    Well, the leading part is new for the Euros, and why you could call it a new Obama Doctrine. I suspect with training wheels and daddy warbucks in the background pointing out potholes and such. I don’t personally care whether we lead or not, so long as we don’t put troops on the ground in any numbers, and make the others spend some of their coin and ordinance.

  94. 94.

    stuckinred

    March 24, 2011 at 8:57 pm

    @JPL: Yea, that was a dry hole. We are dumbly just going about our business. I could pack but I don’t have a carry permit and I’d proly shoot some innocent civilian anyway.

    You read that the guy did 11 years for a $3 stickup and his brother had a gun at a cops head and it misfired so the cop killed him. Sleepy little southern town.

  95. 95.

    EJ

    March 24, 2011 at 9:04 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    Do you really not understand that “unilateral” was being used in a completely different context in that Obama quote? The question was whether the President can make war without Congressional approval, not whether it was approved by the UN security council.

  96. 96.

    Corner Stone

    March 24, 2011 at 9:07 pm

    @General Stuck:

    so long as we don’t put troops on the ground in any numbers

    In any numbers? Or as long as they’re “non combat”? You seem to be qualifying your line in the sand a little more each time.

  97. 97.

    Ron

    March 24, 2011 at 9:10 pm

    @Joe Beese: Dear Joe, I know reading is hard and all, but the US constitution says that it AND ALL TREATIES are the supreme law of the land. I wonder if we have a treaty signed with the UN. hmm

  98. 98.

    srv

    March 24, 2011 at 9:13 pm

    When was the last time NATO won a war (w/o us doing all the work)?

  99. 99.

    Ron

    March 24, 2011 at 9:14 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: Yeah, Kucinich whined about the attack being unconstitutional, but he has a fail in his understanding of what the Constitution actually says.

  100. 100.

    soonergrunt

    March 24, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    @srv: Let’s see…carry the one…divide by….square root….
    Oh, yeah. The answer to that question is Fucking never.
    you gotta do the math right, meow.

  101. 101.

    General Stuck

    March 24, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    @Corner Stone:

    teehee CS, that was a big hook with bait, and you swallowed it like I figured when I wrote it. Think some. The US is not going to insert troops into a hot war zone in a foreign land in likely anything under a brigade and they would be combat troops, for force protection and then whatever mission they might have, at least until all this is settled in some way. Then there could be advisors or trainers, or any number of different support roles. I don’t have a problem with that. My metaphor of ” a single troop with a combat mission” stands for now, and in the future.

    So there is really no dif between what I said in practical effect given the reality of the situation right now.

  102. 102.

    Corner Stone

    March 24, 2011 at 9:23 pm

    @General Stuck: It’s more likely you are doing a little CYA from your previous comments.
    But, wevs.

  103. 103.

    General Stuck

    March 24, 2011 at 9:25 pm

    @Corner Stone:

    It’s more likely you are doing a little CYA from your previous comments.

    And this is likely you are doing a little CYA from being an idiot.
    But, wevs.

  104. 104.

    Angry Black Lady

    March 24, 2011 at 9:30 pm

    @EJ: and that question can’t be answered without reference to international law, which no one seems to care about, so whatevs.

  105. 105.

    John Cole

    March 24, 2011 at 9:30 pm

    Who put the sand in Cole’s vagina anyway?

    Hunh? I have nothing to do with this post. What am I missing?

  106. 106.

    Stillwater

    March 24, 2011 at 9:31 pm

    @EJ: EJ, you might be right about the meaning of ‘unilateral’ in the quote. But what about the meaning of ‘imminent’? Surely even you can see how defending the rebels from Qdiddy’s onslaught is a response to an imminent threat to the US, right?

    If not, I’m sure Joe from Lowell can splain it right up.

  107. 107.

    Suffern ACE

    March 24, 2011 at 9:32 pm

    @Bob Loblaw:

    The real moral of the story is don’t ever try to assassinate the Saudi Crown Prince.

    Because for all their high minded talk of humanitarianism, the US and Europe would have let Benghazi burn if the GCC wasn’t pulling all the strings in the Arab League.

    I thought the moral was don’t sign too many production contracts with different countries. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4304284.stm

    When I went looking to find out more about who he was dealing with, I found that pretty much every country with z company with whom he has signed a contract is either at war with him or abstaining from security council votes. Et tu Norway? He did not get much leverage. Maybe the more you got to know him, the less you liked him.

  108. 108.

    Angry Black Lady

    March 24, 2011 at 9:34 pm

    @Bob Loblaw: i thought the moral was never start a landwar in asia?

  109. 109.

    Davis X. Machina

    March 24, 2011 at 9:37 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: No, no, the moral was never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line.

  110. 110.

    Stillwater

    March 24, 2011 at 9:37 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: You bested my giant, so that means you have incredible strength…

  111. 111.

    stuckinred

    March 24, 2011 at 9:38 pm

    @Davis X. Machina: Whatever it is, I’m against it!

  112. 112.

    Davis X. Machina

    March 24, 2011 at 9:39 pm

    @Stillwater: Not just any giant — if memory serves, this giant has a posse.

  113. 113.

    Joe Beese

    March 24, 2011 at 9:40 pm

    @Josie:

    I really resent having him equated with Bush, by the way.

    Heh, I’ll bet you do.

  114. 114.

    Stillwater

    March 24, 2011 at 9:42 pm

    @Davis X. Machina: Are you using Bonetti’s defense against me?

  115. 115.

    Uriel

    March 24, 2011 at 9:51 pm

    @Joe Bee.se: Boy, you really kicked some rehtorical ass there! I’ll admit that at first I thought he/she brought up some good points- but then you posted a link to Brittany Spears saying something stupid about a completely different president, and I was like “DAMN! Game, set, and fucking match!”

    You and Aristotle…

  116. 116.

    Martin

    March 24, 2011 at 9:51 pm

    Well, the deal with NATO isn’t really the entire story, from what I’ve been able to suss out.

    The agreement seems to be that NATO, who is handling the naval blockade, will also take over the no-fly zone. But NATO will not conduct any ground strikes unless shot at.

    So that leaves a component of this endeavor – a non-trivial one – that NATO won’t be taking over. I think that puts things back with the French ‘let’s form a working group’ strategy to handle that component of it, but unfortunately, that’s the component that the US is most adept at. Anyone could do the no-fly zone.

    So, this is a positive development, but not the whole enchilada. It’s possible now that France has 2 carriers in the area and the UK has 1 that we can still back out now that the really nasty stuff has been done, but there’s more still to keep an eye on.

  117. 117.

    gnomedad

    March 24, 2011 at 9:53 pm

    @BombIranForChrist:
    Infield Fly Zone?

  118. 118.

    nestor

    March 24, 2011 at 10:07 pm

    Gee, look Candy…Joe Beese is here.

    What a great party.

  119. 119.

    keestadoll

    March 24, 2011 at 11:10 pm

    I think we’re missing the bigger picture here. We’ve been handed yet another new term to mock at will. “Kinetic Military Action.” I mean, COME ON!!!!!!!!!!!

  120. 120.

    General Stuck

    March 24, 2011 at 11:13 pm

    Looks like the WP devil got this thread by the short hairs.

    edit – well, it fixed itself. I love WP. It scares me a little, but I do love it so.

  121. 121.

    EJ

    March 24, 2011 at 11:29 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    So are you saying that international law (ie majority vote by the UN Security Council) potentially trumps the US Congress with regards to committing US forces to waging war? ‘Cuz if that’s true, I gotta say, shit, maybe the John Birch society is on to something.

  122. 122.

    Pococurante

    March 25, 2011 at 7:36 am

    Otherwise signing a treaty wouldn’t mean much, would it.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Baud on Wednesday Morning Open Thread: The GOP Insists There Will Be Blood Impeachment (Apr 17, 2024 @ 10:44am)
  • wjca on Tuesday Night Open Thread (Apr 17, 2024 @ 10:44am)
  • Betty Cracker on Wednesday Morning Open Thread: The GOP Insists There Will Be Blood Impeachment (Apr 17, 2024 @ 10:44am)
  • rikyrah on Wednesday Morning Open Thread: The GOP Insists There Will Be Blood Impeachment (Apr 17, 2024 @ 10:44am)
  • Netto on On The Road – BillinGlendaleCA – The Milky Way Reimagined. (Apr 17, 2024 @ 10:43am)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning
Proposed BJ meetups list from frosty

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8
Virginia House Races
Four Directions – Montana
Worker Power AZ
Four Directions – Arizona
Four Directions – Nevada

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
Positive Climate News
War in Ukraine
Cole’s “Stories from the Road”
Classified Documents Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Political Action 2024

Postcard Writing Information

Balloon Juice for Four Directions AZ

Donate

Balloon Juice for Four Directions NV

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!