We Must Support Gaddafi’s Enemies
Since the uprising in Libya began in February 2011, the United States and her Western allies have been in a conundrum. The burning question is whether or not to support the so-called “rebels” who have bravely taken up arms against the murderous and monstrous forty-two year regime of Muammar al-Gaddafi. Diplomats, military personnel, and political pundits have denigrated this resistance — and it is a resistance — as “ragtag,” “silly,” “Islamist,” “rabble” — even “al-Qaeda.” However, as the old proverb goes: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” In the case of Gaddafi’s Libya, it doesn’t appear that the West has an alternative.
Muammar al-Gaddafi swept to power in a bloodless coup on September 1, 1969, by overthrowing King Idris I. Enamored with pan-Arab socialism, the twenty-seven-year-old Gaddafi was a disciple of Egypt’s president, Gamal Abdel Nasser. From the time that Gaddafi assumed power (self-promoting himself from captain to colonel), he has been in the forefront of international terrorism. Whether it was his support of the PLO, the IRA, the ETA, or intervening militarily in sub-Saharan Africa (most notably in the invasions of Chad in 1980 and 1983-1987), Gaddafi’s hands have been filled with the blood of thousands of innocents. This includes the imprisonment, torture, and summary execution of untold numbers of Libyans and foreigners over the decades. His history of terrorist attacks is too eventful to recount.
In 1986, President Ronald Reagan finally had enough of Gaddafi and bombed Tripoli and Benghazi. This attack was carried out in response to the bombing of a West Berlin disco that resulted in the murder of two U.S. servicemen and a Turkish woman. Intelligence had traced the attacks to Gaddafi. Rumors abound that Gaddafi was tipped off, either by the prime minister of Malta or of Italy. He slipped away and survived.
The hypocritical and craven West welcomed Gaddafi back into the “family of nations” after he supposedly gave up his WMD program in 2003. To this day, many intelligence analysts believe that it was a farce, and that Gaddafi still holds on to chemical agents at the very least. This did not stop Tony Blair of England from visiting Gaddafi in Libya in 2004, even though one of Gaddafi’s diplomats murdered a British policewoman back in 1984, never having to stand trial for this crime. Ironically, the murderer may have been captured by Libyan resistance fighters in the last week.
And what of them — those who are fighting against the forty-two year reign of Gaddafi? It is true that a great number of Libyan Islamists went to Iraq to fight against the Americans. Most notable is Yahya al-Libi, one of al-Qaeda’s “rising stars” and a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). The LIFG, according to a 2007 report, had the second largest number — next to Saudi Arabia — of foreign jihadis fighting against the U.S. in Iraq. It is also true that some members of Gaddafi’s own government and army commanders have thrown in their lot with the resistance, feeling that Gaddafi will ultimately fall. However, the West must take the chance that there are indeed Western-educated Libyans who are also fighting against Gaddafi and would like to install a government that is not, at the very least, antithetical to the West.
The Interim Transitional National Council of Libya was founded on February 27, 2011. It is headed by Gaddafi’s former justice minister, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, who quit the government in February after seeing the army’s brutality against the civilian population of Benghazi. Abdul Jalil is a conservative Muslim, but he has been praised by many for having openly protested Gaddafi’s treatment of political prisoners while still serving in his government. One of the groups under the umbrella of the Transitional National Council is the National Conference for the Libyan Opposition. This group recently posted a fatwa from Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the spiritual “godfathers” of the Muslim Brotherhood, calling on Libyans to overthrow Gaddafi. There are indeed many Libyans in the opposition who are seeking an Islamic republic. Qaradawi is virulently anti-American, anti-Israeli, and anti-Jewish. And this is to say nothing of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Libyan branch, which of course seeks a strong position in any post-Gaddafi government.
All of the above makes for a disturbing labyrinth that America and the West must maneuver through. But now that the West has committed itself to a no-fly zone, leaving Gaddafi in power as a wounded jackal may only make him more emboldened and dangerous. The West really has no alternative but to see this campaign through and make sure that Gaddafi’s regime is dismantled. This does not mean putting “boots on the ground.” What it means is for Western intelligence agencies to establish contact with the various factions of the resistance, and determine which ones are amicable to establishing, at the very least, a regime that will not be hostile towards the West. This will also have to include arming at least some of the factions who oppose Gaddafi.
Many have asked if the West may inadvertently be arming Islamists who will turn against the United States. (Recall Afghanistan and the Mujahideen.) However, the real question to be asked is whether the Libyan resistance can be any more murderous than Gaddafi. It should be remembered that Gaddafi did not have an extensive network of training camps in Libya — yet he was able to perpetrate the bombing of Pan Am 103 as well as support various terrorist groups over the decades. It must also be kept in mind that the Pan Am 103 atrocity was carried out in 1988, two years after President Reagan’s retaliatory raid on Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986. So much for the “colonel” keeping quiet. What will he do if the West now “cuts and runs” and allows his criminal regime to continue? It is likely that Gaddafi’s threats of revenge will culminate in a new campaign of terror against both European and American targets, convinced that the West has no resolve or backbone to remove him from power.
There is no doubt that the Libyan opposition is an unknown quantity at this point. America and the West are stuck with a Hobson’s choice of leaving a murdering terrorist in power or taking the chance on that unknown. Now, overthrowing Gaddafi and courting moderates among the opposition appears to be the West’s best — and only — hope.






But what if they are WORSE than he is after all the MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD is now taking power in Egypt thanks to Obambi.
And, of course they will be worse—far worse; for, Gaddafi is selfish—because he organizes everything around just one man, he isn’t to difficult to keep ahead of, or to cow.
To the other side, drawing on Pan-Arab socialism, the Brotherhood embraces the larger and more powerful mentality, . . . rue the day, . . .
Obama will do anything to please his Jihadi masters. Stand up for freedom in Iran, Mr. Pres., the only country where Islam will not benefit in a revolution. The war is against Islam and its totalitarian ideology. Anything else is a LIE.
Get the facts from this eye-opening historic interview on Israel National Radio which reconciles ancient history and gives clear vision. http://www.marcrubin.com/judean-eve.ivnu
The US MILITARY on call to militant Mohammedans EVERYWHERE . Just look at our credentials we ousted those pesky Christians from Kosovo and Bosnia and bombed their Christian homeland Serbia too just to teach them a lesson how dare they hold back the Mohammedan hordes for centuries. Now we have made it easy for the Mohammedan Brotherhood to take over in Egypt and we are well on the way to letting Al Queda take control in Libya and who can forget our outstanding performance in installing a SHIA and Iranian loving REGIME in Iraq. Afghanistan is a WIP but dont worry we will let the Taliban back in there too. So Mohammedans got a problem just call Hillary and the Pentagon we are at YOUR service.
“Overthrowing Gaddafi and courting moderates” may be forlorn hopes, beyong practical politics. In that case attempting those two objectives is counter-productive. We have no legal case for overthrowing Gaddafi today. We have no casus belli. The UN is not supposed to interfere in the domestic affairs of the member states, so there is a limit on how far the UN can take us towards a casus belli. As for ‘Moderates’ – there are many when they have no responsibilities, and few when they are in power.
As for “we have no alternative” – we certainly do. Every good soldier learns how to wait and when to ambush. Every good housewife learns that a burned pot can be left to soak in soapy water before being scrubbed. You do not have to rush at the dirty pot as soon as you see it is dirty. You can be in control. You can prioritise.
Gaddafi is not the main threat to the USA today or in the near future. Just because he is on TV it does not follow that he is important. Divide his victims by his years in power.
The financial cost to the USA of this military action is far greater than any conceivable benefit. Many Americans will have their life shortened if they cannot afford to buy medecinal drugs, heating, clothing and other basics. A good economy helps people live. The spending on Libya is deeply unrealistic, because it deepens and prolongs the stagflation that is going to kill many poor people in the USA. In addition stagflation, especially high unemployment, will have a pyschological effect of increasing appeasement and pessimism.
The combination of economic malaise and psychological gloom could well cause North Korea (or Iran, or Burma or Venezuala or Egypt) to miscalculate and go too far. That in itself could be much more sinister than Gaddafi. There are many countries more important or more powerful than Libya. We need to be ready to face them. If we waste our money on a flea we cannot spend that money on a snake.
The US government has run a deficit since 2000, and it will do so forever according to Obama, the CBO, and anyone else you ask. The government is spending $175.70 for every $100.00 that it receives in taxes. The price of government extravagance is not only borrowing and interest. It is not only higher taxes in the future. It is also suffering and premature death for the poor. You cannot spend the same money on the poor and on restraining Gaddafi. You have to chose. Either the suffering people of America deserve help or the suffering people of Libya deserve help.
One needs to distinguish between Gaddafi’s enemies to know whom to support and not to support.
In all likelihood it will be those enemies who are worse than Gaddafi who will worm their way into power.
As for But now that the West has committed itself to a no-fly zone, leaving Gaddafi in power as a wounded jackal may only make him more emboldened and dangerous. only displays how stupid the West is to fall for the rhetoric of the Muslim Brotherhood and others without weighing all the factors. Of course that’s why Obama did not want Congress in on the decision made by the UN under its ideology of “responsibilty to protect”.
Some are even speculating that Gaddafi is the fall guy for the trial run of the said ideology to be used against Israel at an appropriate time.
The reasoning behind this article is almost as idiotic as the reasoning in another PJ article a couple months ago promoting Jeb Bush for President. Both articles prove the proposition that the neo-cons aren’t dead, but are some kind of stalking corpses in a modern rendition of Night of the Living Dead. Please. Leave us alone. Libya: not our job.
(And if a BA in Political Science is so clueless about the fact that both sides in Libya are, simply, evil — the “rebels” are largely a front created by Iran, pushed right now as part of a bigger plan, and being helped by Al Qaeda — don’t posture as someone who knows what they are talking about.)
Apparently almost everyone but Mr. Simpson can see that the necessary consequence of ousting Gaddafi is to install an islamic jihad administration Gaddafi is not going to embark on a program of world conquest; but the moslem Brotherhood, et al, certainly has. You will find them involved and taking over, in Egypt, Syria, Tunisia, Yemen, Libya, gaining power in Saudi, etc. These exporters of Sharia would control the world. And if we don’t kill every one of them, they will.
Simpson should stick to checking out books at the front desk; at least until he learns that ripples result from pebbles tossed into ponds.
Having moved on Qaddafi, we must take him out.
No, we do NOT have to support the rebels. We never should have gone into Libya in the first place. This is NONE of our business and the worst thing you can do is choose sides in a civil war. Libya is in the middle of a civil war. People die in a civil war. That is just a plain fact. There are civil wars all over Africa right now, with literally thousands of people dying each year. What makes Libya so special? Why not Nigeria, or Zimbabwe, or Ivory Coast, or Darfur, or Liberia, or Congo, or Rwanda, or Yemen, or a bunch of other countries all over the world? But now we have chosen a side in this civil war, thanks to our “fearless” leader in the White House. Great, so what if the people we are supporting are WORSE than Gaddafi? What if they are Islamic fundamentalists or, worse, allies of al Qaeda? What if, after all this, Libya is no better than Somalia is today?
People die in civil wars. We had a civil war once and over 500,000 Americans died in that civil war, yet no one intervened. In fact, Lincoln went to great pains to prevent England, especially, from intervening. This was a very bad error on Obama’s part to get involved in this mess. If the French and the British were so hot on getting involved, well, then let them do it. But if our “adventure” in Somalia taught us anything, it was that there never seems to be any winners in an African civil war.
Why Libya? Because it was on TV dummy (not you, just quoting the movie Network). Just like Somalia at Christmas 1992 and the Balkans in 1994-99 the images pluck the heart strings of caring liberals who then change from ardent pacifists to blood thirsty warriors. It doesn’t matter if we end up supporting the decendants of Nazis (Croatians, Bosnian Muslims and Kosovar Albanians) or our current enemies from AQ or the Muslim Brotherhood. My advice to the Qaddafis and Assads of the world is before you begin your crackdown pick up all the TV reporters, wine and dine them and then send them on their way home first class. No TV coverage, no Foreign intervention.
We have no business in Libya, and have attacked her illegally and unconstitutionally. Obama wants to help his moslem brothers take over and could care less about the “poor civilians”. The proof is that he did exactly nothing about the several genocides in Africa, Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, etc. He may well be a hapless dunce who hasn’t got enough smarts to get it right; but his behavior is deliberate. He is a traitor who wants the raghead crazies to enslave the world.
If the Weeping Bartender had any guts at all, he would impeach Oscambo, prosecute and execute all his supporters, clean house, and start over.Odumbo is not covered by the War Powers Act Obambo moved to support worldwide islamic jihad. Just watch the chicken GOP raise the debt limit and ignore Orambos illegal war.
no, we must not
Wow.
So only a decade after 9/11 we should be fighting along side Al Qaeda?
I don’t know if that is stupid or evil.
Yes to both.
There is no good outcome. Pick one: Gaddafi, Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Qaeda. All are raving barking mad jihadist loving folks with the exception of Gaddafi who seems to be just nuts.
Libya has only around 6.5 million but will control a huge amount of oil. Your choice is fund the nut case or the murdering jihadists. Gaddafi’s past indicates he does care for his life. Thus, one should pick Gaddafi. Never forget those signs the folks hold up with the slogans “Democracy Go To Hell”. Those are the “rebels”.
Simpson, you have it all wrong. If the enemy of our enemy is our friend, then why isn’t Gaddafi our friend instead of the theocratic rebels? We have no friend in this fight and no reason to be involved. Let the chips fall where they may. We should mind our own business for once.
Yeah and we must support the Soviet’s enemies in Afghanistan and look how well that worked out. Better we’d let the Soviets annex the damn country.
Now look! We’ve taken their place and I wouldn’t be surprised if Russia is chuckling while they send the Taliban weapons since Hollywood was keen enough to make a movie advertising to the whole world how we humiliated the Soviets as clowns during their own war in Afghanistan. I’m sure Putin was laughing all the way through it and wants to build a statue of Tom Hanks.
Certainly something is being paid for the massive amounts of heroin that are coming into Russia in recent years. When are we going to learn to just butt out? It’s like we’re addicted. Just say no.
In the case of Libya, Obama was actually wrangled by the world press into intervening and without any real numbers of casualties or clues as to who was really fighting who, why, and towards what goals. Yeah, perfect reasons to get involved.
The rebels have already signed a contract with Qatar to take oil out of Libya WHILE the fighting is going on; what does that tell you?
We’ve been arming the Mexican drug cartels…why not al qaeda? perfectly consistent…we just know the ulterior motive. or maybe we do.
Daffy seems to be quite tractable if he knows you’ll kill him if he steps out of line. I would have preferred him over Al Qaeda fanatics. They look forward to dying for their cause. Now we’re handing ANOTHER nation over to them. I look forward with great interest to see what they’re going to do with Libya’s oil money.
A smart administration would have figured out how to condemn Daffy while slipping him some cluster bombs.
OBAMA TAKES CREDIT FOR REGIME CHANGE IN IRAQ
Last year Joe Biden on Larry King took credit on behalf of the administration for stablizing Iraq and moving it toward a representative government. But last night in his speech on Libya Obama exceeded Biden’s lies by actually taking credit for regime change in Iraq.
Click my name and read my piece: Barack Obama’s Claim Game, or Taking Credit for Regime Change in Iraq.
“The alternative is a more dangerous Gaddafi than ever.”
Wrong.
The alternative is a more dangerous Obama than ever.
Oppose EVERYTHING that he does. There is always always an ulteriour motive.
Thats “ulterior”.
Don’t try to talk on your cellphone and type simultaneously.
If you believe this drivel get you President to ask Congress for a Declaration of War. If you are so morally indignant about Linya what about North Korea, Zimbabwe, Syria,and Iran. More people have been killed in Mexico in the last 5 years. Should we invade Mexico? The same idiot has been in power for 40+ years, why now? North Korea has not changed in 60+ years. Why not now? If you think the US can save the world one piece at a time you sir are not rational.
You are right, we cannot save the world one piece at a time. We should save it all at once, and we should indeed invade all those countries you mention. What is more, I will personally volunteer to carry a gun. Join me?
I will join you after the populations are greatly reduced by internal fighting and starvation, and if the US sets terms, conditions and expectations from all of them in return for food and aid.
These relentless, manic urges – seemingly spurred by some self-congratulatory perception of the nature of American democracy – are very difficult to comprehend. The whole thing makes a person wonder about if in fact we are ever told the truth; seems not.
er …. How about, NO … NO …. NO, we do not have to support the rebels. Who are the rebels, wise one?
great idea, protect villians from monsters… yeah, that’s going to work out well.
If Obama, and Hillary are for this kinetic BS thing, then I am against it. We have no business there. It is a no win situation. Since you are gung ho about the removal of Gadaffi, I suggest you pay for it as the USA has no money, other than borrowed money.
The next time Hillary is looking for a new press secretary, I suggest you apply. I’ll put in a good word for you.
You, Mr. Simpson, have accumulated many facts about the Middle East, yet you understand nothing about the region. Here’s the money quote:
“However, the West must take the chance that there are indeed Western-educated Libyans who are also fighting against Gaddafi and would like to install a government that is not, at the very least, antithetical to the West.”
This is so absurd, on so many levels, that one hardly knows where to begin.
Democracy/human rights/equality does not exist in the Middle East, period. Get over it. Must we continue to bankrupt ourselves looking for it under every rock?
There is also a delicious irony in the statement, “Western-educated Libyans” who would not be “antithetical to the West.” Imagine a Libyan who pursues advanced studies in London, Paris, or Berkeley, and is bombarded with Leftist, anti-American propaganda. If I remember correctly, even Ho Chi-Minh was “Western educated,” converted to Communism while living in Paris.
I wrote (too hastily), “Democracy/human rights/equality does not exist in the Middle East, period.” I should have said “Arab world” instead of Middle East, to recognize the fact that Israel happens to be located in the region.
APPLAUSE!
There are good arguments on both sides. For example, former UN ambassador John Bolton is against Quaddafi even though what the opponents represent is uncertain. As for myself I would like to know which side the Russians are on. Now I know that they objected to removal of Quaddafi on the grounds that they agreed only to protect the opposition. Now that may be a head fake. The question is what will they do? If they want to protect Quadaffi how about putting some Russian troops on the ground. Then they would be more believable. I think that they support the opposition elements on the Muslim Brotherhood. They don’t really have to do anything since we are already doing a bang up job on that score. It looks to me that sinking Quaddafi may lead to some place that we don’t get at all.
Guess what – nobody asked me, or my US representatives. Is it stupid to jump in the middle of a dogfight? How about trying to stop a guy beating up his wife or girlfriend? Doesn’t usually work out too well.
We don’t know what’s really going on with all the rebellions in the ME. We don’t know who the good guys or bad guys are. We don’t know if our interference will mean fewer deaths, or more deaths later. We don’t have definition of objectives, planning, or scope, notwithstanding the belated speech. We don’t know the consequences to any of the parties, nor to ourselves.
No, I don’t like GDaffy. But his enemy is not necessarily my friend. I’d choose not to make their problems my problems.
Because in the world of politics nobody can EVER say “I was wrong, and I’m backing away from this”, it appears the American public has nothing to say about this, no choice at all. Who made the stupid rule that politicians can’t have the same humility we all have every day, admitting we make mistakes?
Utter nonsense. Al Qaeda and other Islamist radicals are among the rebels. The U.S. has no business there.
Er, seems to me the time to have taken out Libya’s Daffy Duck was back in the 80s and 90s, when he was being bad in drag. He was rehabilitated after he gave up his WMD–which apparently didn’t include mustard gas and the common fragmentation grenade; defining WMD down, in some blue states even a high capacity 9mm magazine and serial wolf whistling is a WMD. So I guess this means no more American female rock stars entertaining Daffy Duck on demand, and I can look forward to a new Michael Moore movie called Brother Man 911? Gee, if the girls want to liberate the Muslim ladies and prevent a hypothetical Muslim on Muslim genocide, I suggest the girls form up the Obama Brigades (like the Lincoln Brigades during the Spanish Civil War) and go fight against Islamofascim in Libya, because right now the girls are denied that career track in the military. Perhaps Obama’s Angels–Hillary, Samantha, and Susan–could get it organized for the great community organizer, and call them the Angel’s Brigade? In short, why don’t you people volunteer yourself for change?
This intervention is soaked in estrogen. Khaddafi is the guy at the party you can slap and get away with it. Not Putin, Ahmadinejad, or Wen Jaibao- these guys ain’t having any of it, ladies. For the life of me, I can’t assign anything more odious to our motives for hitting Libya than that we’re under the spell of girlymen- men who care too much for the welfare of the brood but haven’t a well thought-out plan for fighting to defend it if it comes to that. An organizer, if you will.
On par with food poisoning is the reaction one gets knowing our SOS is there for reasons of political expediency. Not competency, but a larded appointment to satisfy an electoral prerogative. This is a food-fight compared to what awaits anyone foolish enough to put lady-men and lady-women in positions of power. We now have both.
Hopefully, the organizer and his gals can get to the limo before some of Khadaffi’s crew change their plans. Fat lips and bruises for everyone. And, why would you attend a party where none of the guests really like your Westerness? Lady Obama’s teleprompter is not the skirt one should seek for shelter. This will only become more apparent as time passes.
You are 100% right. Unfortunately, I see every sign that the West and NATO are losing their nerve. Obama is busying himself assessing and coordinating, China is probably calling in its loans, Russia is glowering,
the Scandinavians are getting cold feet, Germany is dreaming of future arms sales to Muammar, the French are looking for someone to surrender to.
Unless Obama mans up in a big hurry, three weeks from now Khaddafi will be back in control of ALL of Libya and he will be a vengeful madman. How long before he buys nukes from Pakistan and/or buys equipment from Germany to make his own? The only bright side will be a guarantee of an Obama defeat in 2012. Cold consolation.
Sensamilla, right?
Mr. “Pragmatist”, man, oh man, you sure got that right—turn the Serbs loose—and, which was the central reason as to why the Russsian empire broke itself up; and, it took that strychnine because it is now 70% Moslem, . . . but then, as usual, the USA didn’t know which side of the bread didn’t have the butter, . . .
“taking the chance on that unknown.”
And thus the search for the mythical “moderate” islamic continues
But now that the West has committed itself to a no-fly zone, leaving Gaddafi in power as a wounded jackal may only make him more emboldened and dangerous.
Sadly, yes. We have taken the tiger by the tail and the least bad option left to us is to finish him.
The better choice, in fact, the only GOOD choice, would have been to respect the sovereignty of another nation and KEEP OUR NOSES OUT OF IT.
The least bad of the bad choices would have been to simply take out Daffy and his spawn, as justice for the American lives this pig has taken, and leave it at that.
We have never yet reaped a good harvest from meddling in the internal affairs of other countries.
I don’t know why members of the coalition are wasteing their time trying to protect Gaddafi from the rebels by finding a safe haven for him. The disposition of that guy is only a job for the rebels when they catch him. If anything, we should help them in their attack on him. If they want to hang him from a lamp post, would that not be just?
The very worst outcome is that Gaddafi is weakened, the “rebels” remain a mob, neither side can prevail. The civil war goes on for a decade, bringing utter ruin to Libya.
WHY are we in Libya ? Gates said we have no strategic interest there. Their oil goes to Europe.
What is Obama’s objective in Libya.
How will we extricate our forces “in a matter of days, not weeks”.
Exactly who are the rebels …. not only the ‘faces’ but the real power. Is it anyone besides al Q’aeda or the Muslim Brotherhood ?
What is our Exit Strategy.
What if Gaddafi winds up in charge? Will he execute the ‘rebels’ who dared to defy him.
Note: NATO is the United States. If NATO stays, then the US continues fighting.
Oh, please! It’s not “support one or the other”. It’s both. Support one side. Then the other. Then back to the first; then have second thoughts; then third thoughts… Just keep the whole thing going until they’re all dead.
It’s the only rational policy, short of nuking from orbit.
When the war in Afghanistan was getting revved up, the media was showing footage of the opposition forces tooling around barefoot, and I’m like, how in the heck can you fight a war without wearing shoes? Well, along with their dark ages garb, I soon found out about their dark ages tactics. Tunnels and caves, how clever. Now we are seeing footage of the rebel fighters in Libya, and I’m really not that impressed with their munitions and vehicles available to them. Every time they’re on camera, they fire a clip of ammo into the air. Seems careless to waste ammo. What would it take for them to drive into a trap and get wiped off the face of the earth? It doesn’t appear that it would take much to do them in. There is no place to hide like there was at Tora Bora. If that were to happen, Hilary could say that the U.S. tried and then we could maybe get the heck out of this game.
I don’t know whether this column is more psychotic than it is treasonous.
Let’s see: the United States Armed Forces are under attack by al-Qaeda and other Islamist groups in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many of those Islamist hail from Libya. Simultaneously, our young men and women in the Air Force and Navy, primarily, are being asked to help install these same Islamists into power in Libya. Did I miss something here?
Maybe folks like you and your pals at The Weekly Standard, AEI, and the Obama Administration can all join together in another grand adventure later. You can fundraise among your demented traitor buddies to buy huge spotlights to illuminate those Manhattan skyscrapers that you want hit in the next 9/11-type attack that emanates from the Libyan desert, post-Gaddafi. You already are providing the failed state, why not also collaborate in the next spectacular attack on our soil?
We really need to bring back the noose.
I’m sorry that I didn’t read your qualifications before I posted. Library science, yes, that’s the ticket. It makes you more qualified than Obama, I suppose, and less evil than Bill Kristol and Michael Ledeen, who presumably should know better.
Apparently, TL, Mr. A(W)OL Civilization, et. al. It is *you* who do not understand the Middle East. If you see by the title of my article, I state “support the enemies of Qaddafi.” I have no illusions or delusions about what the opposition may indeed be. I pointed out the Islamist connections in the opposition. But in the Middle East (a region that many of you apparently have never visited nor understand the culture) you do not leave your enemy standing (or for that matter down on the ground). You finish him off – permanently. My article was not about whether the current occupant in the WH was correct in getting America involved. But once there, it is time to finish off the job that President Reagan tried to do back in 1986. And yes, there can be Western-educated Libyans who are not unfriendly to the US. Again, I do not say friendly, only that they are not hostile to the U.S.
Mr. Simpson: I will try another method to convince you of the error of your ways. Please see the following account of Arab thinking; though fictional (and somewhat humorous), I believe it captures the essence of the problem at hand:
http://awolcivilization.com/?p=1891
“We Must Support Gaddafi’s Enemies”
Nah. We should have killed K-daffy and his henchmen and destroyed the Libyan government 25 years ago, and we ought to do so now.
But, we don’t need the rebels to do that.
Steven, you must have worked in a library with a really large Middle East section. Based on what you have written, you are ill-equipped to call anyone who has criticized you ignorant. I hope that is all you are rather than a traitor who supports jihadists who have and still do murder American soldiers. Because if you are such a traitor, there are slots open for you at FOX and National Review these days. Weekly Standard’s staff is full. Or maybe you can just go to work for the Obama Administration, which probably has more anti-American, Islamist projects to carry out.
Absolute baloney! There are no good guys in the middle east, save Israel. However it shakes out in Libya, bad people will run the political regime, just as has happened here in the United States.
We should stand back and let them kill each other until one side declares victory, then bomb the Jahannam out of the winner. That way we’ll know for sure that we eliminated our enemy.
There’s still time to do that but France and GB want their oil. I’m sure at some point we’ll send in protection for the oil fields (before Daffy pulls a Saddam)
AWOL,Laughing, et al.
You can issue your below the belt insults against my educational background as much as you want. Believe me, I am a conservative who would vote for a Colonel Allen West in the blink of an eye. If you care to read some of my other articles on other sites, you will see exactly what I feel and think of the “religion of peace.” Apparently, you have misunderstood my arguments. If you read my article through, I have highlighted the Islamist and Al Qaeda connection to the rebellion against Qaddafi. Just click on the hyperlinks. I am not a “neocon” or some dreamer who thinks that liberal democracy is going to come to the Arab and Muslim world anytime soon. What I tried to convey (and which you fail to comprehend) is that we are already there. The occupant in the Oval Office has already declared that “Qaddafi must go.” How will it look if we cut and run leaving this rabid “person” still in power? His terrorism is on a par with Al Qaeda. Remember the massacres in Rome and Vienna in 1986? His insane support for the PLO to the point that he welcomed surviving murderers of the Israeli athletes in Munich with a hero’s welcome in Libya back in 1972? In reality, it’s a no win situation. Unfortunately, the acting “Commander in Chief” has gotten us into a quagmire. I am merely stating that we should try and find out if there are indeed any moderates among the opposition. And yes. I would like to see Qaddafi eliminated for the blood that he has spilled all through these decades. In the end, my feeling is that the whole Arab world will return to the only thing they know: Islam. And of course, that means stabbing us in the back no matter what we do for them and no matter how much blood we have already spilt for them. Let me ask you all who disagree with me three questions: Do we just leave right now and let him keep control? How will that look to our enemies who already see us as a broken and defeated power? Will it not embolden him to strike back at us again? Answer these questions without any puerile babble and insults.
Eliminating Gaddafi automatically empowers the Opposition, who will turn out to be Islamic Jihad International, by whatever name.
And this is but one segment of the “coincidental” rebellions in islamic countries in the area, all of which on close examination will be manifestations of the Moslem Brotherhood, or some such, in action.
Can you not see the raghead crazies murdering innocents because someone else trashed their stupid, satanic koran? Nutcases are easily outraged.
islamists are all nutcases. No sane person supports a whacko religion founded by a criminal, pervert, adulterer, murderer, etc. Read suras eight and nine and see the exhortations to robbery, butchery and enslavement, all in the name of that demonic fiction they call “allah”.
Look at sharia in practice and see if you wish to trade your constitutional rights in on it.
If not, leave Gadaffi alone. Let the crazies zap one another. Then just watch the Arab League members supply the “rebels” with air, artillery and armor. When the rebels take over the subsequent elections will leave the Jihadists in power. Who would ever have guessed it?
Not that anyone who wrote such drivel richly deserves anything but insult, here’s your answers:
1. Yes. There is no need to compound this mistake.
2. Our enemies who seek us a “broken and defeated power” will be the force that replaces Gaddafi. They can then add the adjective “suicidal.”
3. That’s highly uncertain. What is certain is that the al-Qaeda-linked or dominated government that follows will strike at us, probably from bases in the Libyan desert.
Oh, as for your Middle East qualifications, they are no less than those of the POTUS or much of the chattering class wanting to engage in this psychosis. All of which is to say, they are zilch, nada, nothing.
There is a word for aiding and abetting enemies who are killing our enemies in the field, and it is the only crime the Constitution mentions. That’s what is going on now, and the loved ones of those slain in Afghanistan and Iraq deserve apologies.
O.K. Laughing boy, et. al.,
I should have known better than to try to debate a childish submoronic imbecile on an adult level. Your moniker says it all. You are a laughing joke masquerading as someone who believes that he is a knowledgeable individual. As for drivel, I defy you to submit an article to PJ refuting what I have to say. Only you don’t have the intellectual capacity to write an article or even string together a logical paragraph. You just hurl insults while you hide behind your computer and repeat the same idiocy that you do. “Aiding and abetting enemies who are killing our enemies in the field.”(???!!!) What kind of a non-sequitor is that? Do you even know what you are writing? In any event, children, the “debate” is closed. Now before you crawl back to the sewers that you came from, make sure mommy and daddy clean your diapers and give you new pacifiers.
If I was an Arab Muslim, I would be laughing my head off at useful idiots like you are.
“submoronic” is redundant.
He means that the Rebels are Islamic Jihad International, the demon child of the prostitute Hamas and the whoremonger Hezbollah; a bigger and badder enemy than Gadaffi, a solitary whacko we have already intimidated.
He is no more a world threat than was Sadam Hussein. And who does not now wish we had simply excluded both of the sociopathic Husseins,(Saddam and Barack)from polite company, and got on with the real world?
I was on your website and curious to see if you needed consumer or business email leads this year. You can search our databases and purchase the leads with unlimited usage.
http://www.novo-marketing.com Any questions feel free to contact me. Thanks!
suppport Gaddafi!!!