1

That's Obama's MO: first, give a nice speech; second, golf.

You're kidding, right? The forecast here in DC is Sunshine & 70+ degrees. Speeches can wait.

2 A no fly zone is too little too late.  The rebellion is all but over.  The lucky ones are already dead. 

3

You'll note the UN res said more or less whatever it takes to protect civilians.

Awfully open-ended. Suppose daffy continues to succeed without his fixed-wing assets? Now we have to go after his armor and rotary-wing guys, and his artillery, and troop concentrations.

If the rebels advance, do they remain civilians for the purpose of being protected?  If they advance and daffy's troops are putting up a stout defense, do we attempt to degrade daffy's defensive capabilities?

And whom to blame when the MB takes over?

4 A no fly zone is too little too late.

Probably.  It would be hard not to do something after the Presidents says stuff like:

"You have seen with great clarity that he has lost legitimacy with his people," Obama said during a White House press conference with Mexican President Felipe Calderon. "So let me just be very unambiguous about this. Colonel Qaddafi needs to step down from power and leave. That is good for his country. It is good for his people. It's the right thing to do.” Obama added: "It's time for Gaddafi to go."

Damned if we do and damned if we don't.

Barry has made the US look feckless and untrustworthy.

5 Remember how many times we heard the media use the phrase "wag the dog" to describe military actions under Republican presidents?  Wanna bet how many times we'll hear it now?

6 Should "Western" powers intervene?  Yes, just not us.  Don't put a single service member in danger while we have this idiot CIC.

7

"You have seen with great clarity that he has lost legitimacy with his people,"

The Audacity of Irony

8 Palin Doctrine Emerges @ NYSun  by Korn

With the likes of Ahmed Chalabi cheer leading, what could possibly go wrong?

9 Should Western Powers Intervene in Libya?

That would be a negatory, good buddy.

10

Foreign policy needs to be played with the skill of a world-class poker champion, not the indecisive bumbling of someone learning to play “Go Fish”.

In the first days of the uprising, Obama should have made a public statement to the effect of:

“The United States fully supports the people of Libya in their quest to bring democratic reforms to their country. Although we view this uprising as an internal matter that needs to be decided by the Libyan people, I have ordered our carrier task force to station itself off the Libyan coast. In the event that any genocidal actions or crimes against humanity do occur, the U.S. will act on behalf of the civilized nations of the world to defend innocent people.”

Maybe it would be a bluff, maybe not. But thatÂ’s how someone with balls would play it. Regrettably, the MSM didnÂ’t vet for balls previous to the election.

To all those would-be freedom fighters suffering under oppressive regimes, all we can tell you is “Go Fish”.

11 Bush!  Bush!  Bush!

12 I raised in that post -- is intervention practical, legal, ethical?

Bad question.  Nations do not have ethics or "friends". They are not people. As for legality, LOL we are talking about war. The only people who give a shit about legality in the end are the winners.

Whether or not we get involved in a civil war in Libya is dependent on whether or not it is in our national interests to get involved and mostly whether or not we can satisfy the goals of going to war within the perceived costs.

I have maintained all along that we have no national interests in Libya and we should stay out of it.

If we are going to become the "world's policeman" and make it our job to get rid of evil dictators and such then we need to get rid of the UN entirely and have the rest of the world pay a world tax to us to support the police force.

13 Bush!  Bush!  Bush!

14 When it looked like the MB, aka the "rebels", looked like the would get another victory in the ME, Obama was all in. Best of both worlds, he gets more terrorists buddies to pal around with and he doesn't have to lift a finger. Now, that Daffi is winning, he will support military action. The reason the resolution is open ended is because Obama wants to do oust Daffi, but doesn't want to be responsible for what his terrorist pals are going to do.

15 Here's the thing: Ever since K-Daffy saw the Saddam Hussein's fate, he's been pretty tame on the international stage. No nuke program, no more terrorism. Behaving himself. NOW Obama said he needs to go. There's a line from Shakespeare: if you strike the king, you better be damned sure you kill him. Translation: IF we decide to intervene in Libya, we BETTER be sure Ka-Daffy is at room temperature by the time we finish. Does Obama have the balls for that? Or even the French, who I am convinced of course have more nads than little Barry?

16 BTW, I don't know how many Morons picked up on this but Obama has stated we will be providing little more than logistical support in this endeavor.

IOW no planes and no troops. I wouldn't even be providing any logistical support and would have voted no in the U.N.

17 but Obama has stated we will be providing little more than logistical support in this endeavor.

That's the best news of the morning so far.

18 ...but Obama has stated we will be providing little more than logistical support in this endeavor. Translation: The West will do just enough to convince Ka-Daffy that playing nice with the West was a bad idea, and that he may as well go back to the good old days of bombing aircraft and toying with nukes. Great.

19 Don't bother me, I have  games to watch and trip to Rio ...

20 I can't think of anything more depressing than being a US troop and being ordered to support a UN "police" action with Obama as CinC, unless it is being a US citizen with Obama as President.
This, as with all things the O touches, will not end well for anyone, especially us.

21 I only see at most some cruise missile strikes or maybe some UAV's.  Do note that I did see a headline today that stated Gaddafi's son is indicating that they may hold back on attacking Benghazi due to the newly instituted no-fly zone.  All the more reason that Obama should have pressed for this weeks earlier.  The mere threat of having permission to engage could've held Gaddafi's forces in check much earlier.  Time will tell how this plays out.

22 That's the best news of the morning so far.

I guess it is better news than the other but it still shows what a vacilitating turd Obama is. If he thinks we have a dog in this hunt he should have made the case to the public and went in whole hog with the Europeans.

This man is a total stupid shit and I still say he is the worst President for foreign policy in my lifetime which started with Truman.

23 BTW, I don't know how many Morons picked up on this but Obama has stated we will be providing little more than logistical support in this endeavor.

I love it. We'll give the Euros the same half assed support they've given us.

24 If the "UN" takes on Qadhafi, that's the UN's business, not ours. We should be removing ourselves from the UN, anyway.

When Bush invaded Iraq, Chalabi had been a prime instigator in the removal of Hussein, and was supposedly "the man" to bring Iraq together under the Bush proposed Democratic Government. Think back how that played out.

Who's the Libyan "great leader" waiting in the wings to replace Qadhafi upon removal? If there were great Libyan statesmen, we'd certainly have heard of them by now. They'd be making great speeches at the UN and rallies in sympathetic countries drumming up support. But no, that's not the case.  Whoever the "anti-Qadhafi revolutionaries" are remains in the shadows. The anti-Qadhafi rebel eastern Libyan hold-out hosts Islamists well practiced in anti-American Military warfare. Remove a monster with a bigger monster.

What's gained? Where are the contracts insuring oil trade at what price before the American Military and American taxpayers become obligated in ANOTHER war front?

Remember since Clinton's cuts, Rumsfeld and Gates have already whittled the US Military down to only handling two fronts at a time. And our troops have already redeployed repeatedly for a decade non-stop. It isn't as if MORE volunteers than the percentage that already join up are going to appear out of thin air...only with the DRAFT.

25 With a lawyer heavy administration, there is no way these fools can come up with coherent ROE for a no-fly zone, much less rational ROE that protect our troops, in any way shape or form when , not if, things go south, even if the ROE are based on the expectation of pure Clintonian 20, 000 foot air support.

26 This will undoubtably be a screwed up intervention. Who is in charge? What is the objective? Who is the other side? Who's on first?

27 We should be removing ourselves from the UN, anyway.
Posted by: by any other name at March 18, 2011 08:06 AM (H+LJc)
But the UN is "global" you know, there is no way O will ever remove us from it.  Besides the longer we remain a member of the UN, the more the hands of future US presidents are tied with those invisible bonds of diplomacy!

28 It's understood that this final push from the Q is going to be a very bloody one but to "what end" do we send in military assets. What window of opportunity we did have to back the rebels seems to have past if our intent is to bring about a regime change for the sake of bringing in what more than likely will be a Q clone. So here we are, we now toss up a no fly zone, it's a token gesture that will not change the outcome of this event at this point other than to ruffle the feathers of the despot who will most likely remain in power. And by the way, that country is now in almost a certain state of civil war, interfering in that mess is not our problem and not in our national interest. As usual, the time to effect a change in that country is past if that is what the our governments intent was, now it's just a situation where we piss off half the country for no good reason and that half of the country will almost certainly retain power.

29 In a few more days it will be all over, Ka-Daffy will still be there and Obama will be giving one of his "Let Me Be Clear!" speeches about the NEXT crises.

30 We're also officially abrogating our position as the leader of the free world. Seems we're gonna let the French lean this one while Bambi is in Rio

31 Can't we just quit the UN and join the UFP? The UFP sounds like a lot more fun, and Starfleet chicks look hawt.

32 @30: Liberals have never been comfortable with America as the Leader of the Free World. Come to think of it... Liberals have never been comfortable with America. Too much freedom.

33 Trite but true- the UN is all "sound and fury, signifying nothing"

Some jets will fly over, drop a few bombs, and that will be it.

34 Can't we just quit the UN and join the UFP? The UFP sounds like a lot more fun, and Starfleet chicks look hawt. Posted by: CoolCzech at March 18, 2011 08:14 AM (kUaEF) Or the UFT, then we could really mind-fuck them and make trouble at all their demonstrations?

35 33 Trite but true- the UN is all "sound and fury, signifying nothing" Some jets will fly over, drop a few bombs, and that will be it. Posted by: Museisluse at March 18, 2011 08:15 AM (xrmna) That's an unfair statement. If the Blue Helmets get sent in, quite a few underaged Libyan vajajays will be poked, too.

36 This will need a vote in congress imho to be legal. Bush got congress to support both Afghan and Iraq war. I forget, but did Clinton request legal authority for the Iraq no fly-zone and the Kosovo bombing?

37 Posted by: CoolCzech at March 18, 2011 08:15 AM (kUaEF)
I, myself, think Sarkozy makes a much more dashing leader of the free world!

38 We should've parked some ships and subs off the coast ASAP and started bombarding military facilities with cruise missiles. If the world complained we should've said "FU, this for Lockerbie". By now, the whole Libyan military infrastructure should be nothing more than ashes.

39 Kadafi or Al Qaeda?  Let them sort it out and kill the survivors.

40 @37: Let's make Carla Leader of the Free World! I'd follow that caboose anywhere!

41 I, myself, think Sarkozy makes a much more dashing leader of the free world! Posted by: Carla B at March 18, 2011 08:19 AM (DCpHZ) It's undignified for the Leader of the Free World to be going down on you. So ya want my phone number?

42 "On the legal front, the UN has blessed intervention, so international law is no obstacle."

Huh?????? Where in "international law" does it state a country/countries require U.N. "permission" to wage war?  If that's the case, you might wish to ask Mr. Clinton how he was able to "intervene" in Bosnia without UN "approval".

43 Libya ain't the free world.

44 Posted by: 4rc at March 18, 2011 08:18 AM (BlXLg)
I just loves me those executive orders.  I get to do what I want before anyone wakes up, and the MBM covers for me!

On a related topic, I would like to see NATO/UN try to run a military action without us.

45 We could just defuse the tension by offering to bring Kaddafy to the US on a student visa.

46 Posted by: Ed Anger at March 18, 2011 08:19 AM (7+pP9)

Ed, retribution is so immature.  What reason would we have for remembering Lockerbie or al-Megrahi?

The O team prefers to not do things, but in a nice diplomatic way.

47 Intel. That's what we're really needed for.

48 We could just defuse the tension by offering to bring Kaddafy to the US on a student visa. Posted by: sartana at March 18, 2011 08:23 AM (7Xm5b) Barbazon School Of Modeling?

49 East is East and West is West and never should the two oils meet.

We need to get in the goony goo-goo mobile and get the fuck out of the middle east.

50 Posted by: nevergiveup at March 18, 2011 08:27 AM (0GFWk)
Amazon Bodyguard Training Institute of America teaching position?

51 If we are going to become the "world's policeman" and make it our job to get rid of evil dictators and such then we need to get rid of the UN entirely and have the rest of the world pay a world tax to us to support the police force.

Posted by: Vic at March 18, 2011 07:57 AM (M9Ie6)

Or we just do what we, as Americans -- citizens of the greatest country the world has ever known -- think is the right thing to do. We can balance a strict analysis of our global interests with more intellectual and emotional goals like helping out people who had the balls to rebel against a psychotic, homicidal dictator (and do it while chanting one of our presidents' names). Or the more more emotional and basic goal of blowing up the man who ordered the deaths of hundreds of innocent Americans.

Realpolitik isn't such a wonderful policy. Just ask Mika's dad and his buggerpartner Kissinger.

52 Question: Should the US get involved militarily in Libya? Answer: We're broke. Next question.

53 So I bet Daffy Ducks declares victory and hides his assets and waits the "international" coalition out.

54 Yup, all that "Smart Power", offering meetings to despots and dictators without preconditions, Cairo speechifying, extending open hands instead of fists, hopenchange, etc. has worked out perfectly, hasn't it? Everyone in the Middle East and North Korea loves us and is behaving nicely, now that we got rid of that stupid, evil cowboy. We haven't even had any more terror... errr... I mean man-cause disaster attacks in the U.S. The system works! Sure, the economy has been sluggish in spots, but word has it that cost of living is now the highest it's been since Carter! See! Recovery Summer, baby! Heck, even with all this recovery and rebounding, you can get the new iPad for the same price as the original! Yup, nothing but rainbows and unicorns, just like we told you. Almost make you yearn for the days when we were pursuing all those stupid "Wars on Terror" that were just an excuse for us to get cheap oil. I mean, imagine! They actually expected us to believe that we were liberating people from repressive regimes! Heh! As if! If Iraq or Afghanistan wanted to get rid of their leaders, they would have just marched in squares like in Egypt. But what can you expect from people who support Israel. Those damn Jews will say anything to get support for their reprehensible housing projects.

55 Question: Should the US get involved militarily in Libya? Answer: We're broke. Next question. Posted by: Bugler at March 18, 2011 08:30 AM (VXBR1) We're not broke and we have the assets and ability. The question is, is Libya the place to spend them? I don't think so

56 This is all a conspiracy, started by my old network, to try and push me out of the headlines and steal the thunder from my upcoming live tour.

57

My fundamental concern was addressed:  There is a credible alternative to Qadaffi.  Yes, it was more credible ten days ago.

For those who want to blithely turn away, I would remind you of the innumerable lessons of the last hundred years about the course of events when the United States is not engaged.

Having said that, I will be damned if I could tell you what our actual policy is at the moment.

58 On the "legality" issue (U.S.) they are hinging their legality on the War Powers Act that allows 60 days by Presidential authority only. That act was passed by a large Democrat majority with a lot of Republican support as well since it required a 2/3 vote to override Nixon's veto.

But here is the kicker.  No President since Nixon when it was passed has been willing to challenge it in court. Even RR would not challenge it when congress was beating the shit out of him with it over the Nicaragua thing. And why not?

Because it is blatantly unconstitutional. Although it reins in the President's ability to go to war, it does give him a 60 day war window which is NOT authorized by the Constitution. So in effect it doesn't rein them in at all constitution-wise, it allows more.

The President's (or their lawyers) have been worried that if they challenge it they will likely lose that 60 day window.

Trument committed us to war in Korea without Congressional approval. That was the first and a major precedent. He did that based on the "stated theory" that we did it via treaty commitment to the U.N. (never mind that the U.S. virtually controlled the U.N. at that time). That theory is full of shit. Treaties with the U.N. can NOT supersede the Constitution no matter how much the Dems want to use it as an end-run. The supremacy clause is based on laws and treaties made in accordance with the Consitution.

Since Truman, working from memory here, I do not think any Democrat President who has got us involved in a War has ever obtained congressional approval.

59

The UN Charter, which we are a signatory to. The far right scoffs at "internationl law" and conveniently forgets that we have, in fact, signed on to many international laws and the U.S. Constitution holds those acts as high as the laws of Congress. Read the Constitution sometime, chap.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at March 18, 2011 08:34 AM (nPZxi)

Read a history book. International laws aren't worth the paper they're written on.

60 From AT: Couple of good point here.

Surely Qaddafi is emboldened by a President who is the exact opposite of Ronald Reagan.

61 This is OT, but while we're debating helping out the Libyan rebels (which I don't trust):

Report: U.S. considering strategic outreach to Hezbollah

The only reason we should engage in "intellegence efforts" with Hezbollah is to provide the Israelis real-time targeting info as to kill Nasrallah and the other high-level Hezbollah scum.

/Further proof that this Administration loves Islamists.

62 We should have gotten there as fast as possible, destroyed his planes runways and tanks, and then left them to their own devices.   As I said in the thread with the poll.

A no fly zone is a standing responsibility, breaking some stuff, so that it can't be used against protesters, which is what they were at the time, they hadn't reached rebel status yet.

Now, it's too late, we are stuck with a stupid no fly zone, when we could have created one weeks ago.  Ho Hum.

63 Read the Constitution sometime, chap.

You could use a little of that yourself

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

64 Libya is Obama's Vietnam Crimean War.

65 This is OT, but while we're debating helping out the Libyan rebels (which I don't trust): Report: U.S. considering strategic outreach to Hezbollah The only reason we should engage in "intellegence efforts" with Hezbollah is to provide the Israelis real-time targeting info as to kill Nasrallah and the other high-level Hezbollah scum. /Further proof that this Administration loves Islamists. Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at March 18, 2011 08:41 AM (9hSKh) Yeah I posted on this early this AM. makes my head spin how stupid and inexperienced and did I say stupid these people are.

66

Seriously, though - Should the US intervene (Western Powers. Right) now?

Certainly we should, if nothing more than to correct the errors of the past few weeks.

Can we intervene in a meaningful (that is, life saving) fashion? No. That time has passed. People are dead.

Any discussions on "intervention" at this time are just irrelevant babble & idle pistolwaving.

Our administration stood still w/a vapid grin whilst people died, and is now splattered w/the blood of innocents. Go to Rio, you fool, and see if rum, short ribs, & seafood can remove the stains.

67 This just showed up on my news service.   Libyan Foreign Minister, addressing recently passed UN resolution, says it will close all air space; have decided on an immediate ceasefire  

68

 It would be better if he had committed U.S. support and then followed through than his present policy of committing U.S. support and then waiting to see all the Libyans who took him at his word get shot in the head.

 

Kinda like what we did to the Hungarians in 56, and  Czechs in 68.

69 Posted by: Vic at March 18, 2011 08:42 AM (M9Ie6)
Another error on the part of the founders. 
But, even a 100 years ago,  they had diplomats amongst them.

70 This just showed up on my news service. Libyan Foreign Minister, addressing recently passed UN resolution, says it will close all air space; have decided on an immediate ceasefire Posted by: Just Sam at March 18, 2011 08:46 AM (lUCqx) Like I said: 53 So I bet Daffy Ducks declares victory and hides his assets and waits the "international" coalition out. Posted by: nevergiveup at March 18, 2011 08:30 AM (0GFWk

71
Kaddafy could play the lead in the Lifetime Biography of "Senorita" Sonia Scotuspeor. Yes, the resemblance is stunning:


http://tinyurl.com/4p6fkgm and http://tinyurl.com/49weqf8

72 Since we are aggregating.

The Snark-free guy has a good thread too.

Dig the bracket theme photo.

73 Well, like it or not, it looks like Obama and the UN just declared war on Libya. What is happening there is a sovereign matter, with no international casus belli.
That sets a very dangerous precedent for international intervention.
 
Hypothetical; Republicans win the White House and Congress in historic numbers, enough to push through any legislation they want. Congress and the President proceed to repeal healthcare, revamp Social Security, etc. etc. Democrat's, and let's say the "Obamists" riot and start a shooting insurgency to fight back. The government, led by Republicans, corners the insurgents in NY and Chicago.

Democrats declare they are the "legitimate" US government due to the egregiously anti-democratic actions of the Republicans. Democrats are recognized as the de-facto US government, negating a veto. The UN then declares the US a no-fly zone. Intervention against a sovereign and act of war? You tell me...

74

Maybe Libya will end up being split into two, East and West.

It may be for the best, especially since eastern libya has a ton of oil.

If we could force the Serbs to give up  parts of Bosnia and Kosovo which historically, and rightfully theirs,  then why couldn't we do the same with Eastern Libya?

I am hoping England and France do the heavy lifting. Heck maybe Italy will do some bombing runs as lord knows Berlusconni could use a wag the dog military distraction

75 We dont need "two" bomb, we need " a bomb. "Kadaffy" has blood of Americans on his hands its time for a final payback.

76 Another error on the part of the founders.

If they had an error, it was even adding that treaty bullshit to the clause at all. All it did was provide a tent opening for the big government liberals to drive their damn camels in with.

77 No matter what we (or the euros) do NOW, it will not turn out well.  Just like the usual UN plan.

78 If they had an error, it was even adding that treaty bullshit to the clause at all. All it did was provide a tent opening for the big government liberals to drive their damn camels in with.

Posted by: Vic at March 18, 2011 08:51 AM (M9Ie6)

My point exactly!

And they indubitably knew better, remember the entangling alliances phrase?

79 71 This just showed up on my news service. Libyan Foreign Minister, addressing recently passed UN resolution, says it will close all air space; have decided on an immediate ceasefire
Posted by: Just Sam at March 18, 2011 08:46 AM (lUCqx)

So now we'll have a long term standoff that ties up resources and accomplishes nothing. Great.

80

OT

Heh. Do you think that ditzy dingbat Althouse is still proud of her lame brained vote fo' da Zero?

81 So now we'll have a long term standoff that ties up resources and accomplishes nothing. Great.

Iraq 2, basically. 

82 Posted by: schizoid at March 18, 2011 08:56 AM (OhL+1)
What could possibly go wrong?

83 I mean "Iraq 2" in that we never finished off Saddam after the Gulf War.

84 BTW, I don't know how many Morons picked up on this but Obama has stated we will be providing little more than logistical support in this endeavor.

I hope you are right but I have reason to believe that this is not the case. For personal reasons I hope we have nothing to do with Libya, but setting those aside I also have political reasons for non-intervention, and those mainly have to do with the near certainty of mission creep when a Democrat is in the White House.

85 Another situation where we are walking in eyes wide shut on the basis of little thought or knowledge of what's going on. Intervening in Libya is the equivalent of  jumping into a mosh pit in the dark.

86 36 This will need a vote in congress imho to be legal. Bush got congress to support both Afghan and Iraq war.
I forget, but did Clinton request legal authority for the Iraq no fly-zone and the Kosovo bombing?

Yes. He requested it.

The House refused to authorize it. And he did it anyway.

But welcome to the Imperial Presidency.

87 Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at March 18, 2011 08:58 AM (JxMoP)
Mission incoherence bothers me as well.

88 Libya declares a ceasefire?  Well played, Colonel.  His government has now retaken majority control of the country, will pause to placate the morons in the UN, and then quietly finish off the rebels over time.

Obama delayed, the UN got played.  And how many died while our President played golf and boogied to Motown?  Who cares, it's historic!!1!

Looks to me like all those geniuses just got outsmarted by a crazy man.  Smart power.

89 And they indubitably knew better, remember the entangling alliances phrase?

Wasn't that Washington's farewell address? Yeah, he probably knew better but the historians say that he didn't speak a lot in the convention because he felt he would hold undue influence. He more more less acted as a moderator and peacemaker.

We probably would have been better off if he had acted more proactively and if Jefferson had been there.

But, what did it matter? What we did get they immediately started undoing it with Adams and the rest of the Federalist followed by the Whigs.

90 Does anyone else get a sick feeling about all of this?

Biden went over seas, Rice missed critical votes and wasn't she some weird place (country?), BO is going to Rio (or is he...will they cancel his trip (after they hyped it so much, so he looks Presidential), BO's golfed, etc.

Is BO doing all this dithering in exchange for campaign money (illegal - overseas money)?
Is that why he sent Rice and Biden away?  To keep them from saying something?

Has the terrorist chatter increased?  Is there a threat we haven't heard about that Biden/Rice/Clinton (who also went overseas) were looking into?

Is that why Obama is leaving the country?

Did the WH pumped his vaca story so he would look like a leader when they cancel it?

Something is wrong.  No of this adds up.  Not even when you account for Obama's lack of leadership because he always regurgitates what he thinks we want to hear and he didn't even do that.

Sorry, for the typos, and poor grammer.  I have a huge head cold, and I am finding it difficult to put my questions/fears into words.

Either we haven't been told something, we have missed something, or Obama is using this situation for money or power.

91 I hope you are right but I have reason to believe that this is not the case.

You may be right as he is a notorious liar. But which is the lie; intervention or non-intervention?

92

 But which is the lie; intervention or non-intervention?

Non-intervention.

93 84 I mean "Iraq 2" in that we never finished off Saddam after the Gulf War.

Yeah, just a slightly different situation. I missed where Libya invaded a neighboring sovereign country, subjugated/murdered the populace and annexed the territory.
 

94

Libya declares a ceasefire?  Well played, Colonel.  His government has now retaken majority control of the country, will pause to placate the morons in the UN, and then quietly finish off the rebels over time.

The Euro's looooooove ceasefires.

I'm guessing the Euro media is declaring victory. Chalk one up to soft power and threats! Neglect the fact that the entire country except for Tobruk and Benghazi are under his control.

95 Another OT, but this is about Michelle Malkin's cousin:

Missing UW student may have signed on to AOL

So there is some hope there, as any lead will be useful. 

btw, I looked at Debka this morning (I know, I know) and there's an article that suggests that Hezbollah may have a role in the Libyan uprising.  Of course you need a paid subscription to see it...

96

Sorry to hear about your shitty health, Momma.

or Obama is using this situation for money or power.

Bingo.  Some day, likely after the 2012 elections, we'll see who paid, how much, and why. 

97 "no one has identified any U.S. interests"  What more need be said?

98 I will also say that I hope this thing in Libya is all over before Obama has the chance to make it worse, and by making it worse I mean getting Americans killed.

99 Yeah, just a slightly different situation. I missed where Libya invaded a neighboring sovereign country, subjugated/murdered the populace and annexed the territory.

You're right, of course.  I still can't wait to see how the UN screws this up. 

100 Check Drudge. The 'no-fly" resolution seems to have already had the intended result.

101

Morning all!

This is an OT I posted this over on the headlines thread, but I wanted to make sure folks saw it, since it's an update to a sidebar story.

----

Typical lefty victimhood.  You remember the sidebar story yesterday about the piece of gutter trash who was threatening Althouse & Meade?  Now he's being a whiny little bitch and claims the right is unfairly trying to silence him.  (Link to The Other McCain)

Here's the pull quote:

Because of a right-blogosphere campaign to silence me, I have been forced to commit Identity Suicide. I have never supported or advocated violence for any purpose other than self-defense against terror attacks by the armed wing of the American RightÂ….

Oh give me a fucking break, you asshat.  What do you call the threats of violence you directed toward Althouse & Meade, punk?  Last I checked neither of them was raising anything more than a video camera against you and your thug buddies.  You're problem is you got found out, and now you're trying to backpedal and play the victim instead of the aggressor.  Typical leftist tactic.  Go cry victim somewhere else, you nancyboy.

102 OT, but related sort of:

Obama said this at a fundraiser: (thanks to TheQuietMan in THC thread)

“The first time around it’s like lightning in a bottle. There’s something special about it, because you’re defying the odds. And as time passes, you start taking it for granted that a guy named Barack Hussein Obama is president of the United States,” Obama said. “But we should never take it for granted.”

“I hope that all of you still feel that sense of excitement and that sense of possibility, because we still have so much more to do.”

I know that sometimes people may get frustrated and think, you know what, Obama is being too nice and we need to get in there and take it to them. And there will be times where that’s important,” the president said, adding that his own wife sometimes had to turn away from the spectacle of political brawling.

“Politics in this country can be tough. And I’m sure that some of you are like Michelle and at some point had to just stop watching cable TV because it was getting too frustrating,” Obama said.

But he added: “As important as our political labels are — Democrat and Republican — as many tough fights as we’re going to have, part of what made 2008 special is we brought the country together.”

Even as Obama said more remained to be done, he asserted that he’d delivered on his campaign pledge from 2008. “The promise that we made to the American people has been kept, that we have delivered on change that we can believe in.”

103 Either we haven't been told something, we have missed something, or Obama is using this situation for money or power.

Posted by: momma at March 18, 2011 09:00 AM (penCf)

Overseas, the WH is not required to keep logs of personal conversations or meetings.  The bags of cash go in a special compartment on AF1.

104 Frickin' sock.

105 Since Truman, working from memory here, I do not think any Democrat President who has got us involved in a War has ever obtained congressional approval.

Posted by: Vic at March 18, 2011 08:37 AM (M9Ie6)

Tonkin Gulf Resolution.

106 Check Drudge. The 'no-fly" resolution seems to have already had the intended result. Posted by: Heaving at March 18, 2011 09:06 AM (xMT+4) That's just the smart move by Libya. First of all they have almost defeated the rebels anyway. Now they can sit and wait out the "International" community. As someone else said, the UN, France, and Obama just got played

107 Al jizzera is saying K'daffy declared an instant ceasefire....

Amazing what would likely have happened in iraq had our "buddies" stayed with us....I suspect as the forum wars have shown that the nations who tried to ratfuck us were trying to interfere in internal US politics.

108 Quaddafy should lay siege to Benghazi.  Literally do nothing for awhile and let the UN bomb away against an inactive national army if they still want to, and then when they stop (which won't take long) sabotage its power and food & water supplies.

Welcome back to the future the middle ages all over again.

109 107 NGU,

I suspect the international community will hang on to this operation....

they don't even need to do much just keep the gun loaded and pointing.

K'daffy probably just lost defacto control over benghazi and the nation may overtly split.

110 Posted by: Truman North at March 18, 2011 09:03 AM (8ay4x)

Thanks.  I hate Ohio in the spring because it screws with my sinuses.

I left you and rdbrewer a little note about my bracket in the TH thread (#66).  Rember yesterday when I was saying I picked some long shots? Well, turns out I did, but I didn't.

111 Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at March 18, 2011 09:07 AM (LH6ir)

Yeah, that's right, but the argument can be made there that Kennedy had already got us into that war which is why those tin cans were over there to begin with.

112 International law (itself a misnomer) is binding on U.S. citizens via treaty only when the regulations in question were already valid under the Constitution. Otherwise, the Constitution wouldn't be worth shit and could be voided at will by the government by signing onto statutes abroad at will. Most of modern day international law has no constitutional standing in U.S. law - no matter if the U.S. government signs onto it, because they never had the authority to do so. They can't sign away the rights of U.S. citizens or their own delegated powers.

113 I suspect the international community will hang on to this operation.... they don't even need to do much just keep the gun loaded and pointing. K'daffy probably just lost defacto control over benghazi and the nation may overtly split. Posted by: sven10077 at March 18, 2011 09:10 AM (kq1lG) If it's a waiting game, my money is on Daffy Duck.

114 109,

Perhaps, but I am willing to bet that what happens instead is K'daffy tries to cut a deal.

Time is not his friend and his hold on power is less strong than SH's was.

Jugears dithering is what let K'daffy keep the military and especially the air force, he decides to send his air ops out to work under the threat of NATO they'll defect.

115 100 Yeah, just a slightly different situation. I missed where Libya invaded a neighboring sovereign country, subjugated/murdered the populace and annexed the territory.

You're right, of course.  I still can't wait to see how the UN screws this up.

You need a super-computer to calculate that. The possibilities are endless. Especially since this sounds like it is going beyond a no-fly zone to select strikes which take out ground targets. I am simply curious who the "rebel" representative is that the UN is speaking with? What are their plans if they take down Gaddafi- Gaza-Part II? Yeah, that was a success...

116 114 NGU,

I think, perhaps, you are forgetting the Suez canal.

EUtopia literally HAS to stay involved or its fuel line is made either longer or cut....and the "made longer" involves exposing even more maritime assets to Somali Sam the pirate.

117 94 84 I mean "Iraq 2" in that we never finished off Saddam after the Gulf War.

Yeah, just a slightly different situation. I missed where Libya invaded a neighboring sovereign country, subjugated/murdered the populace and annexed the territory.
 

Posted by: Marcus at March 18, 2011 09:02 AM (CHrmZ)

And when it was over we were stuck defending Kuwait and Saudi Arabia for 10 years, just as we're going to be stuck defending Benghazi now.

118 I think, perhaps, you are forgetting the Suez canal. EUtopia literally HAS to stay involved or its fuel line is made either longer or cut....and the "made longer" involves exposing even more maritime assets to Somali Sam the pirate. Posted by: sven10077 at March 18, 2011 09:14 AM (kq1lG) What does the Suez Canal have to do with this? Last I looked that was in Egypt

119 Posted by: MlR at March 18, 2011 09:11 AM (uxyPr)
You forget the living nature of the Constitution in your literalist analysis.

120

Smooth move gadaffey.

Look at a map. Most of Libya's infrastructure and population is near the cost.

Gadaffey took the town of ajdabiya, which completley cuts off access to the rest of the country.

It's like Canada, there is like 1 highway, and Ajdabiya is the linch pin that cuts off the Tobruk/Benghazi side of the country.

121 119 That's the Panama Canal.

122 Posted by: Vic at March 18, 2011 09:11 AM (M9Ie6)

Tonkin Gulf Resolution was a rubber-stamp. But it was also the correct thing to do. Confronting aggressive communism is never a bad thing. Too bad that congress fucked it up in the 70s.

123 OT thought:  More people have died inside Ted Kennedy's car than have been killed in the entire history of American nuclear power.

124

Something I haven't heard anyone mention in regards to the Libya situation is what happens to us should Mummer Gadfly regain power.  Our esteemed Commander In Chief is publically on record saying that Gadfly must step down.  Gadfly, we all know, is a psychotic, spoiled brat, who will no doubt take the empty words of our courageous CIC as a personal insult.  I can almost guarantee that within a month of him regaining power we'll see an uptick in terrorist chatter directed at the US from Libya.  Meanwhile, the TSA will be too busy shaking down grandmothers and three-year-olds to bother screening the pockmarked Libyan "tourist" who ends up taking out another airliner ala Lockerbie.

The question is, if we get rid of Gadfly, does a terrorist government of al Qaeda operatives take his place?  If that happens, then it's a lose-lose situation for the West in general and the USA in particular.

125 Kdaffy calls a cease fire.. The old crazy ass dictator can make decisions in minute while Obummer takes weeks. I give crazy credit for not being a complete bat shit moron. Pretty sad when your outmaneuvered my a tin pot...

126

 says it will close all air space; have decided on an immediate ceasefire

Spot the weasel words.

127 That cease fire is funny.  Clever. 

128 OT thought: More people have died inside Ted Kennedy's car than have been killed in the entire history of American nuclear power. Posted by: Truman North at March 18, 2011 09:17 AM (8ay4x) Well actually I think some American Soldiers were held in prison camps in Hiroshima and got killed by the American Atomic bomb, so techincally that may not be true

129 Posted by: Truman North at March 18, 2011 09:17 AM (8ay4x)

Not really. Military reactors have had problems. I don't remember where, but a screw-up in a military reactor killed several men.

Vic? Do you have details?

130 119 NGU,

Right the Suez is in Egypt, but the point is that K'daffy is in a psoition where if left alone he can exert force on what happens in the aftermath of the Cairo Caucus.  EUtopia is desperately struggling for regional stability in a way they never bothered to engage in vis a vis iraq.

Unless I miss my guess there are thinkers in brussels who saw K'daffy coming out way ahead in the event of his weathering this rebellion well.  Suez is not the main thing at play, but EUtopia wants to at least have some influence with both Egypt and Libya's "what comes next".

131 130 CBD,

You're discussing the SL-1 in idaho falls.....

though in modern parlance what likely happened was "workplace violence".

132 Posted by: sven10077 at March 18, 2011 09:21 AM (kq1lG)

I remember something like that. Someone was banging someone else's wife? Did they ever prove it, or was it just supposition?

133 Posted by: sven10077 at March 18, 2011 09:20 AM (kq1lG) Your theory might make some sense if you and anyone can tell me who the rebels are and what they stand for. And libya is in no position militarily to take on Egypt.

134

OT thought:  More people have died inside Ted Kennedy's car than have been killed in the entire history of American nuclear power.

Didn't some of the Manhatten Project scientists die from radiation?

135 Didn't some of the Manhatten Project scientists die from radiation? Posted by: Ben at March 18, 2011 09:23 AM (wuv1c) Only in the movie

136

Your theory might make some sense if you and anyone can tell me who the rebels are and what they stand for. And libya is in no position militarily to take on Egypt.

They want to bring down the Empire and reconstitute the Intergallactic Senate.

137 THERE GOES OIL! OH SHIT IT'S DOWN! MAYBE MY FREAKOUT OVER A SUB-2% MOVE WAS UNWARRANTED. NEVER MIND.

HOW ABOUT THOSE GAMMA RAYS!

138 OT thought:  The Duke Blue Devils have the best chance of repeating as champions, since no other team won the tournament last year.

139

Didn't some of the Manhatten Project scientists die from radiation?

Posted by: Ben at March 18, 2011 09:23 AM (wuv1c)
Only in the movie

You mean that wasn't a documentary?

140 133 CBD,

they never proved it because  they didn't want to....they think the two guys went out and banged a hooker and the sailor said to the soldier, "if I had your wife I wouldn't be fucking the stripper".....

and the rest is history.

141 128 That cease fire is funny.  Clever. 

Posted by: rdbrewer at March 18, 2011 09:19 AM (jrNtB)

For a lunatic, Gadfly can be crafty when he wants.  Sure, they'll call a ceasefire.  All those suspected rebels who "disappear" every night and turn up dead in mass graves months later?  They must have killed each other!

142

OT thought:  this is my wife's horoscope

It's going to be hectic and stressful for the next few days, but it'll all be worth it by Friday when the pope excommunicates you for the coolest reason ever.

143 134 NGU,

"ifluence" does not mean "invade".....

I am of the opinion that the "rebel alliance" in both nations is backed by at a minimum iran and at worse Iran and AQ.....

K'daffy doesn't need to have 40 divisions ready to rumble to have a big hand in deciding what happens in Egypt is the US and EUtopia both get busy with their bracketology.

144 144,

"influence" PIMF

145

107 That's just the smart move by Libya. First of all they have almost defeated the rebels anyway. Now they can sit and wait out the "International" community. As someone else said, the UN, France, and Obama just got played

 

Bingo!

146 144,

"if the US and EUtopia"

Goddamn it I need more CranCherry to get the motor working

147 Vic? Do you have details?

SL-1, Army reactor prototype for their portable unit.

148 146 mark,

yeah we probably got played, BUT if EUtopia is determined we didn't......

notice by "we" I mean the US and most especially O'Juggsy

this is EUtopia's game because the First Duffers' is "Ferris Bueller's Day off".

149

Posted by: nevergiveup at March 18, 2011 09:23 AM (0GFWk)

Actually, I think something did happen where some people died, but if I remember correctly it was at the University of Chicago, before the Manhatten project got going.

150 "ifluence" does not mean "invade"..... I am of the opinion that the "rebel alliance" in both nations is backed by at a minimum iran and at worse Iran and AQ..... K'daffy doesn't need to have 40 divisions ready to rumble to have a big hand in deciding what happens in Egypt is the US and EUtopia both get busy with their bracketology. Posted by: sven10077 at March 18, 2011 09:27 AM (kq1lG) I see NO evidence that Libya had or has anything to do with Egypt. What the international community- read UN- does or doesn't do in Libya has nothing what so ever to do with Egypt. The fact of the matter is that Libya for the last 15 years has been a bit player on the international stage. Sure they might support some terrorists, but Iran has long ago usurped the dominant role in that. Libya is just a side show that produces oil.

151 Fox news e-mail alert:  (WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!)

Japan's radioactive fallout has reached Southern California, but first readings are "about a billion times beneath levels that would be health threatening,” a diplomat with access to UN radiation tracking tells the Associated Press.

The bolded text is what is in the e-mail subject line.

'A billion times beneath levels that would be health threatening.'  Got that?  These people are a joke.

152 148 Vic,

Yeah poisoning even a low yield reaction manually with boron rods is "hard core".

153 I am of the opinion that the "rebel alliance" in both nations is backed by at a minimum iran and at worse Iran and AQ.....

Posted by: sven10077 at March 18, 2011 09:27 AM (kq1lG)

So? We should have supported the rebels (from a safe distance, with air power and drones and cool shit) just to depose Khaddafi and get a shot at blowing him up. He is directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans. That's reason enough.

No matter what happens in Labia, the government is going to hate us. How much worse would the rebels be?

154 Oops...wrong thread....

155 How much worse would the rebels be? Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at March 18, 2011 09:32 AM (LH6ir) Much worse, especially since Qaddafi and Libya has been mostly neutered the last 15 years.

156 151 NGU,

There is nothing wrong with your analysis, and you are correct Libya is a bit player in the status quo ante, however his not deciding what happened in Egypt does not mean he can't influence continuing events.  I suspect Egypt caught the Muslim world as off guard as it did the Western world K'daffy does have military and non-attributable assets he can use if his own house is in order.  Likely?-no but disquieting anyway.

157 Check out the pic of Carter in the sidebar.

158 156 NGU,

indeed....

they can be "much worse"...of course we could both be wrong and they could be the green shoots of a neo-enlightenment in Eastern North African  affairs.....


shit like this is why I am THRILLED the mules nuetered the world's best HUMINT back in the mid 70s.

159 158 RDB,

yeah I think as we age the "missing link" becomes much more visible.

160

 I say stay the hell out of Libya. It's not my fault that the Libyans allowed this madman to come into power or stay in power. I do not think we have the moral obligation to stick our nose into every failed third world sand republic just because they pump a few barrels of oil.

Iraq... it sorta made sense. Even if you take out the WMD assertion, we had (barely) enough reason to go to war. I wish they'd have been clearer about the reasons, but since Iraq wasn't the best neighbor and between them, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia, you have 50% of the world's oil, yeah, keeping Saddam in power wasn't such a hot idea. We gave the dude a chance to reform and he still wanted to be a dick, so I have no problem with a short rope and a long drop.

In the case of Libya, we don't have a compelling reason to take out The Crazy Bedouin^™. There's not enough oil there, so no super big economic interest. Also, there's not a high likelihood any replacement government would be particularly friendly to us. The only reason we’d do it is because we’re pissed at Colonel Mustard in the Desert, with an oil derrick, for giving us the finger for 40 years. Not a good enough reason. Until we decide to take out Havana for the same reason, that one doesn’t hold any water.

The human suffering and civilian losses truly and completely suck. But I wouldnÂ’t ask our fighting men and women to spill a drop of sweat, let alone a drop of blood in the Libyan sand.

 

161

"All options are on the table."

 

Let's see...driver, 3-wood, 2-iron...

162 There is nothing wrong with your analysis, and you are correct Libya is a bit player in the status quo ante, however his not deciding what happened in Egypt does not mean he can't influence continuing events. I suspect Egypt caught the Muslim world as off guard as it did the Western world K'daffy does have military and non-attributable assets he can use if his own house is in order. Likely?-no but disquieting anyway. Posted by: sven10077 at March 18, 2011 09:34 AM (kq1lG) This no fly zone is bullshit and Libya is a distraction from the real problem: IRAN The ONLY reason the UN is picking on Libya is because they can. It's easy. Their cowards and impotent in the face of real danger. This whole thing is a waste of time

163

lol @nevergiveup Yeah, I'm thinking that UN involvement should be considered another reason to stay out. When have they EVER come up with a good idea?

164 161,

Had Sir Golfsalot kept his fucking mouth shut and not led Libyans to die "telling K'Daffy you have to go" I'd agree....

165

"idiot child"

This is what I've been saying since the campaign of 2008.  They treat Obama as if he were a retarded child.

166

This is what I've been saying since the campaign of 2008.  They treat Obama as if he were a retarded child.

Posted by: God at March 18, 2011 09:47 AM (BvBKY)

But stereotypes always have a grain of truth embedded in them.

167 163 NGU,

Yes and.....

Look just because everyone is looking around the elephant in the room (iran) doesn't mean you shouldn't kick the aardvark if it is in the way.

It is pretty obvious we are not a world power for at least the next two years, and it is probably a safe bet we will need a decade to repair Carter II's damage to the perception of our resolve just like Carter one did to us.

I had always wondered what having a spineless retard child in charge would be like and now I know....Carter was a naive retard idealist but he looks like Rambo compared to O'Juggsy

168

I am going to save this thread.

Obama finally follows the 3 week old Palin Doctrine on Libya!!!!!

http://tinyurl.com/4c9ovo4

 

169 I am of the opinion that the "rebel alliance" in both nations is backed by at a minimum iran and at worse Iran and AQ.....

So am I, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary.  I don't advocate for risking US men and material defending a shadowy 'democracy' movement that may well be the same people we're trying to kill in other theaters.

170 170,

yeah it sure is awesome we elected a guy who has never even deployed a cub scout troop as an executive and who think Checkers is Grand Strategy to the office eh?

//rhetorical

171 Wow. By the time I refreshed to see if the ceasefire article had been expanded, I see the new headline about airstrikes killing 25. Well, that was a nice ten minutes.

172 Yes we should have intervened and I mean we should have intervened right after the Pam Am bombing and the Berlin bombing. Quackdaffi should have stopped breathing decades ago. Bottom line is its never too late.

173

We should stay the hell out of Libya.  Just because there's a fight going on somewhere in the world doesn't mean we have to be in it.  We have little at stake in Libya, which is not worth the bones of a single Marine.

Khaddafi is a big murdering bastard with American blood on his hands.  He deserves to die.  The world will be a better place without him.  However, the rebels who oppose him are little bastards with American blood on their hands.  Libya is one of the main sources of jihadis fighting us in Iraq.  East Libya, home of the rebels, is the main recruiting ground for those jihadis.  The Washington Post just ran an article profiling two of the rebels.  One had fought us in Iraq and bragged about killing American soldiers riding a Humvee.  His brother fought for Al Qaeda.  Why would we ever support such enemies of America?

Taking the rebel side will not buy us any goodwill.  Gratitude is not an Arab Muslim virtue.  We delivered Saudi Arabia from abject poverty to the lap of luxury and, in return, they preach a doctrine of hate toward America, fund terrorist operations against us, and recruit terrorists to attack us.  We saved Afghanistan from the Soviets and they thanked us by hosting Al Qaeda's Sep 11 attacks.  We pay Egypt two billion bucks per year and they villify America in their mosques, media, and government.  We saved Kuwait from a bitter invasion and a few years later I saw Kuwaiti college kids dismiss that, saying that was then, this is now, and America deserved the Sep 11 attacks.  Why would anyone think the Libyans would behave any differently?

If the Arab world wants a no fly zone, let THEM do it.  Egypt sits next door to Libya with 220 F-16s to enforce a no fly zone.  The Saudis have 166 F-15s and a wing of Tornadoes. Why don't THEY intervene?  This whole demand for America or Europe to intervene is all about the Arab penchant for manipulating other people to do their work for them while they sit back and bitch about it.

If we must be involved, and we don't, a no-fly zone is dilly dallying at war.  We should cut to the chase and kill Khaddafi.  A few dozen cruise missiles should do the trick.  Once Khaddafi is dead, the Libyan military loses its reason to fight. 

174

I don't think I answered your question last time -- ah, well; either way -- my answer is the same now, which is I don't know but probably not. That is, no intervention.

My reasoning is simple: We're already involved in one war, the Global War on Terror, in several theaters. Unless it's evident that Qadaffy is an enemy in this war (and it appears that he is not) or it's clear that U.S. interests are being harmed (and this is not clear) then an intervention can't be justified.

"Because we should" by itself doesn't cut it for me. "Because we can" is even weaker.

175 Demon Core.

176

Should Western Powers Intervene in Libya?

 

We should take the oil and leave the Libyan scumbags to run around in the desert stabbing each other in the butts (as if an arab national pastime).  Reduce the threat that is posed to the civilized world by these obnoxious, stupid, aggressive, violent primitives - which means taking control of the oil fields and keeping their power out of the hands of the Libyans - and then the Libyans can do whatever the hell they want to each other.

177

My answer, Part II --

The "I don't know" part of my answer derives from the fact that I don't know what our relationship with the Libyan government is. The Colonel changed his spots abruptly back in 2001 or '02 -- I'm guessing an arrangement was made between Qadaffy's people and Bush's people. I don't know what that arrangement (if there is one) involves.

Having actions follow words goes in that direction, too. If the United States pledged to not try to oust the regime or kill its leader, than Obama really ought to follow through on that.

Ace pointed out that no one is calling for Obama to seek Congressional approval for waging some kind of war over there. That it's not a political issue here is telling. The only person who wants to poke this hornet's nest is our country's top-ranking diplomat. That's telling, too.

178 Posted by: Tantor at March 18, 2011 10:39 AM (blNMI)

Saved me a lot of time.

A thousand times, this.

179 Why should we continue to play the part of peace keepers to these UN thugs why should we allow a bunch of so called liberals to be a bunch of spoiled little wussietards

180 K-Daffy is a punk he will blink at even a threat of western air power.

The big question is if we will go in and kill his sorry ass or let him off the hook again.