“Kinetic Islam”: that’s Andy McCarthy’s brilliant coinage. Between us, it means “jihad,” as in what excitable Muslims do after yelling “Allahu Akbar.” You know: Muslim major screamed “Allahu Akbar” before slaughtering 13 at Ft. Hood. Air Force shooter shouted “Allahu Akbar” before killing two US airmen in Frankfurt. Just another bomb-plotting jihadist yelling “Allahu Akbar!” in Portland, Oregon, at Christmas time last year. Ditto Sweden: “Jihad In Sweden: Homicide Bomber, Screaming Allahu Akbar, Targets Christmas Shoppers.” So many “isolated extremists,” so little time!
Future historians, looking back on this era, will marvel at its capacity for linguistic evasion: never speak about a “global war on terror” when you can talk instead about “overseas contingency operations.” Don’t mention “Islamic terrorism” when “anti-Islamic activity” sounds so much nicer. And just the other day, struggling to find the right, i.e., the politically acceptable, i.e., the patently mendacious, words to describe the President’s Excellent Adventure in Libya, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes proffered this gem: “I think what we are doing is enforcing a resolution that has a very clear set of goals, which is protecting the Libyan people, averting a humanitarian crisis, and setting up a no-fly zone. Obviously that involves kinetic military action, particularly on the front end.” Orwell, or at least the guardians of Newspeak about whom Orwell wrote, would have been proud.
Many people have, and have rightly, made fun of “kinetic military action” — it’s what rubes like you, me, and General Patton would call “war”—but in a way the more disturbing thing about Ben Rhodes’s smarmy little evasion is the phrase “enforcing a resolution.” Just whose resolution are we talking about here? We know what he meant by “enforce”: he meant bombing various targets in Libya. But the question remains: whose resolution, whose will was being enforced?
Was it the will of the American people, expressed through its duly elected representatives, the folks in whom the authority to declare war actually rests? No. Was it the resolution of the UN Security Council, which (with the abstention of Russia, China, and Germany) had voted to authorize the use of military force against Libya? Possibly, but what is the connection between a UN resolution and the use of the American military? Or maybe it was the Arab League, who liked the idea of establishing a “no-fly” zone in Libya but, to judge by their sudden about-face when the bombs actually started dropping, had not yet taken on board the Marxist precept that he who wills a certain end also wills the means to that end.
The embarrassing thing is that it is pretty unclear exactly whose resolution was being enforced when the planes took to the skies over Tripoli. The president seems to think that it was some species of voluntary social work instigated by the General Will of the “international community.” (Who?) Relaxing recently in El Salvador after the rigors of his swing through Rio De Janeiro and other hardship spots in South and Central America, President Holiday answered — or at least responded to — questions about what was unfolding in Libya. Ed Driscoll quotes this amazing statement:
And that’s why building this international coalition has been so important because it means that the United States is not bearing all the cost. It means that we have confidence that we are not going in alone, and it is our military that is being volunteered by others to carry out missions that are important not only to us, but are important internationally.
“. . . it is our military that is being volunteered by others . . .” What others? The others whose resolution we are enforcing. Who are they? The international community, e.g., the United Nations, the Arab League? Are they in command of the United States military?
A minor technical point: no F22s were involved. Only true stealth platform were B2s on opening night, striking airfield. There’s been no need for a stealthy air superiority fighter.
All your points about Orwellian newspeak and language massage are spot on. If only liberals would say what they actually mean, they wouldn’t tie themselves in knots trying to say something else.
Ruin? The United Nations authorized the airstrikes against Gaddafi’s forces, many countries are joining the United States, and several days ago Gaddafi’s army, having brutally suppressed protests and rebels in many other cities, were advancing on Benghazi. Gaddafi himself promised to show no mercy to the rebels and go door to door hunting them down in their closets. Had the United States not intervened immediately, tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of people would have been murdered simply for revolting against a dictator for freedom.
And Republicans in Congress? Don’t make me laugh. By the time John Boehner got out of his tanning salon (if indeed, they decided to do anything at all-they mostly support freedom and human rights only when it suits their interests) the rebels long would have been massacred in another Srebrenica.
Mr. Kimball, you point out that one of the rebel commanders is extremist and has ties to Al Qaeda. Fair enough. But the vast majority of people in Libya don’t. The vast majority of people celebrated when the UN resolution was passed and international forces began helping them. When the American pilot was downed they hugged him, gave him drinks, and praised him as a hero. They staged rallies to thanks foreign countries for the no fly zone. As Margaret Thatcher said, “People who are free to choose generally choose to be free.” Therefore from your above column, you seem to want to condemn huge numbers of people to rape, torture, and murder at the hands of a ruthless dictator based solely on the actions of a few, which is a morally abhorrent position to me.
Most of the protests and fighters in Libya are demanding freedom and economic opportunity and that Gaddafi be put on trial for his crimes, which are legion. He has murdered thousands of people, destabilized neighboring countries, blackmailed the United States with enriched uranium, and sponsored terrorist attacks against Britain and the United States. Even if you care nothing for the human rights and freedom of the Libyan people, surely weakening his grip on power would be in the U.S. national interest? (Although why stopping mass murder would ever not be in the U.S. national interest is beyond me).
But I won’t beat around the crux of the matter, Mr. Kimball. Obama, Clinton, Samantha Power, and Susan Rice are launching a humanitarian intervention in Libya because the United States is capable of saving a lot of lives in this situation, Gaddafi was killing his own people, and the United States has been a bystander to genocide and mass murder too many times. In her excellent book A Problem of Hell Mrs. Power details how the United States failed to stop the Armenian Genocide, how Jimmy Carter didn’t even try to overthrow Pol Pot and his murderous regime, how Reagan shilled for Saddam Hussein and apologized for his murdering 150,000 Kurds in 1988, how Clinton failed to act in Bosnia for three years to stop Slobodan Milosevic’s ethnic cleansing, and finally how Clinton defended human rights in Kosovo and stopped ethnic cleansing. It has taken far too long, but mass murderers are no longer protected from justice by the idea of state sovereignty. You scorn the Libyan intervention as “social work.” What?! The United States has saved hundreds of thousands of people from being massacred and it, with its allies, is crushing Gaddafi so he will never be able to threaten anyone ever again.
Just today one woman burst into the press room at Tripoli, shouting that Gaddafi’s troops had gang-raped her and pleading with the reporters to tell her story so that the world might know what was happening. The secret police grabbed her and are no doubt torturing her right now-should we not do something to help her? Judging by his actions, President Obama thinks so. I think so and therefore support him.
Finally, let me conclude with a quote from the great philosopher John Stuart Mill. “War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. When a people are used as mere human instruments for firing cannon or thrusting bayonets, in the service and for the selfish purposes of a master, such war degrades a people. A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice; a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for a free purpose by their free choice–is often the means of their regeneration…As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other.”
Mike, for you to have faith in the UN and ‘international forces’ in slowing/stopping the actions of Gaddafi is nonsense.
Look at recent events with Canada having ZERO faith in their leadership though Canada’s Lt. General (?) is in charge of NATO forces in the Libyan matter?? Yeah, I see this going REEEAL smoothly.
As for the French, Brits forces – they are back peddling far more quickly than I’d expected.
When American forces first entered Iraq in 2003 it too was a heroes welcome. Now, even though AMERICAN dollars have improved an infinite-like areas of commerce, Iraq’s citizenry and rag tag military are ready ‘to take over’. Sure they are.
As per your John Mill’s quote, according to Obama-speak were not going to war. (Odd, considering a large number of Naval carriers are enroute from our Eastern seaboards)
The U.S. intervened militarily in a country that has absolutely NO threat to our national interests. Your ‘support’ for him and his actions, we’ll have to agree to disagree with our respective stances.
The current Canadian election has absolutely nothing to do with Libya and the ME war.
The rules of the Canadian parliament state that IF the opposition parties – and there are THREE of them, including one federal party, the Bloc Quebecois, which is confined to Quebec and is voted on ONLY by Quebecers – IF the opposition parties vote against a BUDGET…then there must be an election.
The opposition parties voted against the proposed budget. Got that? Against the budget put forth by the govt. That means, in Canadian law, an election is required. The US does not have such a law.
Again – absolutely nothing to do with Libya. The Opposition parties had been waiting for the budget (always put forth in spring) to get ‘their chance’ at an election. It’s about the political parties and internal political power. Not about Libya.
Facts and the truth are important.
ETAB, Yep, ‘I got it’. Though I believe your experiencing a, ‘Can’t see the forest for the trees’ regarding my comment.
The light general in charge of NATO operations is by no means battle experienced for this type of herculean task. Though I appreciate and respect the general’s service his background is for the most part lacking. Not to mention he’ll be receiving orders from the braintrust in Belgium.. oy vey.
Secondly Canada supplying, what, half a dozen jets and less than 200 soldiers? All the while concerned more so for their completely understandable financial future?
The entire operation is a clusterf— in the making. Sarkozy’s not onboard with NATO’s role whereas Cameron is.
The Turks will pull out their airfield services in the near future whereas American forces stationed in southern Europe will then be forced to take up the slack.
Thank you, Mike, for so ably defending George W. Bush’s humanitarian mission in Iraq, without which the freedom movements in Iran, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Bahrain and Syria would never have been inspired. You have logically reminded everyone that Saddam was killing 140,000 of his own people a year until he was deposed in 2003 which, since that time, has saved the lives of approximately 1,120,000 Iraquis not to mention the additional Iranians and Kuwaitians that Saddam was not able to kill either. And all at the cost of killing only about 60,000 or 70,000 foreign invaders into Iraq sent their by Al Qaeda and its affiliates. Bush also took twelve or so chemical and biological weapons scientists out of action, all of whom confirmed that Saddam had ordered them, under pain of torture in his plastic shredders, to start reconstititing their slumbering programs. How many people would those newly created WMD’s have killed if Bush the Humanitarian had not acted? It is nice to know that Humanitarians like you can always be found to stand up for the great work that our US Military always does in defending the lives of the peoples of the world, though not always with the proper levels of respect and gratitude being paid. I am glad that you and Obama (where imitation is the sincerest form of flattery) are finally giving Bush and the American Military in the Iraqi theater of the Global War on Terror their proper due. Finally. And Well Deserved I say. Well Deserved.
Edmund, let’s not forget that if Bush had not gone into Iraq, we would have had two countries developing nuclear military technology in the Middle East instead of one. I’m sure the left would have argued that would have done a lot to stabilize the region, because they would have canceled each other out. Ye’, right. Can you imagine? – two idiots next to each other with nuclear weapons.
Not two, not three, but four: Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Israel. Now it’s just Iran and Israel, only one of which can be trusted to be responsible. Which one? (Hint: It’s the Jews.)
not two, but three countries – Lybia backed away from their program
“Obama, Clinton, Samantha Power, and Susan Rice are launching a humanitarian intervention in Libya because the United States is capable of saving a lot of lives in this situation, Gaddafi was killing his own people, and the United States has been a bystander to genocide and mass murder too many times.”
So it is ‘humanitarian intervention’ is it?
Obama to the rescue….
‘humanitarian intervention’\'kinetic military action’, is this New-speak for war?
The other wars were ‘bad wars’ and this is a ‘good war’?
Can you tell me why the US is intervening in Libya and not in:
Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, North Korea, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Myanmar etc…?
They all have their despots killing their own people AND most of them are supporting terrorist groups unlike Libya (Reagan took care of that). Are those people not worthy of ‘humanitarian intervention’\'kinetic military action’ by the US?
I call your bluff.
“The United States has saved hundreds of thousands of people from being massacred and it, with its allies, is crushing Gaddafi so he will never be able to threaten anyone ever again.”
When Bush went into Iraq, the United States saved hundreds of thousands of people from being massacred and it, with its allies, crushed Saddam Hussein so he was never be able to threaten anyone ever again–and he did it legally and constitutionally with the permission of Congress and the support of 17 UN resolutions. Oh, and he didn’t support Al Qaeda in the process.
You’re a clown–not even a good clown.
Oh, you are nitpicking…
Who cares Obama didn’t get the permission from Congress.
Al least he got the permission of the Arab League and his mentor and benefactor, King Abdullah.
AND the conflict with Iraq was a war, not a ‘humanitarian intervention’ and\or ‘kinetic military action’ like this one.
Stop being so ‘un-cool’.
Get with it!
“…terrorist attacks against Britain and the United States.”
I’ll support Obambi’s little war on K-daffy for that reason.
The rest of DeLong’s tirade is unmitigated nonsense, start to finish.
However, if leftards want to spew hogwash AND kill K-daffy and K-daffy’s henchmen, I’m on board…I’ll just ignore the nonsense.
Though it would be nice if the senior leftard would at least make an attempt at following the Constitution, by consulting Congress, and getting a vote to go to war, BEFORE he starts heaving missiles around. At least that way he wouldn’t look the wannabe despot he is.
He also might want to consider cancelling his vacation plans the next time he initiates military action. It makes him look like he doesn’t take killing folks too seriously when he takes off for Rio as the missiles start flying.
“…many countries are joining the United States,…”
No one is “joining” the U.S. The U.S. was sucked into this mess by the Brits, Frogs, NATO and Arab League, that has since slunk away, knowing that what is happening to Gaddafi may happen to them.
“revolting against a dictator for freedom”. What a nice and hugely misleading little phrase. Trading a meglomaniac dictator for a fanatical Islamist regime is – in the fantasist world of the Leftists – an improvement we must both facillitate and pay for. How many tens or hundreds of thousands have been murdered by the “Populist” Islamist regime in Iran? You don’t know because the Leftist filth in the MSM won’t report it. If it doesn’t advance the Leftist story-arc of heroic community organizers leading the poor to doors of the capitalist Bastille, it never happened.
I won’t bother to defend RINOs and too-clever-by-half pseudo-Republicans who think they can find some formula to work within the Leftist framework of lies and falsehoods and still achieve conservative ends.
And when that same supposed majority yearning to be “free” unquestioningly accepts a fanatical Islamist regime and begin stoning to death homosexuals, adulterers and non-Muslims, what then? Just because Quaddafi is a murderous Islamic thug does not mean the “other side” is the continental army led by an Arab George Washington. The other side is also a product of the Islamist civilization of clashes. Pull your head out of your posterior and try to think for once.
“Most of the protests and fighters in Libya are demanding freedom and economic opportunity…” As evidenced by what? The hope-filled carefully scripted “reports” by the Leftist MSM? The widespread thugocracys of the Islamic world are a direct product of the Islamic culture and worldview, but to hear or read almost any MSM reports the thugs like Quaddaffi, Saddam et al are somehow the products of “inequality”, capitalist malfeasance or western meddling. The Leftists have their script and nothing – especially the truth – will deter them from telling the story they want to tell.
“the United States has been a bystander to genocide and mass murder too many times” – More Leftist accusations without any context or truth. As for the Armenian genocide, that happened about 100 years ago and we had little recourse to rectify those events, especially considering the state of the world in that era. Jimmah Carter – Leftist. Clinton – Leftist. “mass murderers are no longer protected from justice by the idea of state sovereignty”, “The United States has saved hundreds of thousands of people from being massacred and it, with its allies, is crushing Gaddafi so he will never be able to threaten anyone ever again.” Well those things remain to be seen, don’t they? So like a Leftist, positing preposterous numbers (hundreds of thousands”) and declaring victory after only the first skirmishes. Stupid Leftists. Nothing short of a ground war will really effect the removal of the Quaddafi regime – nothing. The coming civil war in Libya will indeed cost “hundreds of thousands of lives”, but I’m sure our little Leftist Michael will feel smugly self-satisfied that those deaths are the result of capitalism, racism or anything other than his and his fellow Leftists intransigent stupidity and foolish assumptions.
The John Stuart Mills quote is so appropo, but not for the reasons our good Leftist intends. I do wonder what Mr Mills would think of the Libyan situation, where BOTH sides are products of a corrupt, utterly undemocratic culture and regardless of which “side” wins, the losing side will be subjected to the most vile and horrific treatment? Trading a tyrranical meglomaniac despot dictator for a tyrranical meglomaniac council of mullahs sure sounds like a winner to me. But if and when that happens, will out good little Leftist accept that he was not only worng, but he is in part responsible for the mass murders and Islamic thugocracy he helped bring about? But then, Leftists NEVER accept responsibility for their actions, do they?
“The secret police grabbed her and are no doubt torturing her right now-should we not do something to help her? Judging by his actions, President Obama thinks so. I think so and therefore support him.”
From 10,000 feet?
If Obama thinks he can help her with JDAMs he is a bigger fool than I thought.
This is an airshow and nothing more. You cant unhorse the Duck from the air and that is not even a stated goal. The whole problem here is that this is a half-assed attempt to make it look like we are doing something when we are not.
If we are using air power in support of the rebel army than we should at least be giving close air support directed by our own boots on the ground like we did in the early days of Afghanistan. But no, we wont even come out and take sides.
At best we are setting things up for a protacted ground war between loyalists and rebels. Now we will face a genuine humanitarian crises and a situation on the ground we cannot control. We do not even have influence among the rebels, some of them are known enemies, yet we giving them air cover? What kind of lunatic strategy is that? There is no end game here at all.
We ought to either do nothing or act decisively. For all we know we are creating another Afghanistan
@ Michael DeLong – Isn’t it possible to root for the overthrow Qaddafi’s evil regime without buying into some candy-coated portrayal of the “freedom fighters”? If we’re going to help these guys knock out the Father of the Fuzzy Hair (Abu Shafshufa, that’s Qaddafi’s nickname among the rebels), we’d better be prepared for what comes after, don’t you think? You seem to suggest that the rebel commander mentioned in Mr. Kimball’s article is the ugly exception to a happy rule. But in fact Libya sent more jihadists to Iraq to kill Americans than any country on the face of the earth, relative to its population. Many of them have returned to join the fight against Qaddafi. Furthermore, expressions of violent anti-Americanism emanating from the rebel movemement haven’t exactly been confined to local commanders or the rank-and-file. The head of the rebel government, former Justice Minister Mustafa Abdul Jalil, threatened on Al-Arabiya television to wage war against Americans or any other foreigners who dared set foot on Libyan soil. In fact, he made it quite clear that the rebels would fight even more fiercely against American troops sent to help him than they had so far fought against Qaddafi’s reviled mercenaries. This was how Abdul Jalil thanked Hillary Clinton for offering the rebels “any type of assistance” in their struggle to throw off the bonds of tyranny. And as far as I know, not a sinlge U.S. news source reported it; all we got for the first few weeks was a whitewash job, or at best lazy reporting. I don’t trust the Libyan rebels, not any of them, from the top guy on down.
So if there war is kinetic where is it moving to, or is Newtonian inertia at work? This does fit right in with “man made disasters”, Fatty Napolitano’s invention. Both are bad, and both are yet better then The O’s stumbling evasions. In any case, I suppose it is stuff like this that keeps White House staff up till very late “brainstorming”. Which with this bunch is even more ludicrous then the “kinetic” thing.
Remember, we are supposed to be the stupid ones.
I am okay now. Other posters showed me that I was stupid for not understanding that the term ‘no-fly zone’ referred to every possible permutation and degree of military tactics and strategy that exists as long as military people are floating around in the water or air.
‘No-fly’ is a convenient catch-all phrase that is the Swiss Army Knife of semantics and is very good to have in a pinch. Now I say, “No harm, no fly” and at restaurants I say your ‘no-fly’ is undone and people laugh really a lot.
Shrinking the number of words in the English language is good and proper and right because words are dangerous and we might trip over them and fall down and hurt ourselves.
Besides, trading words is fun like trading baseball cards and anyway I get bored of using the same ones all the time.
I will be happy when we use real weapons that are based only on kinetic energy such as long metal rods which we could launch from near Earth orbit and save lots of people with; that will be fun.
The End.
You could at least bother to read the resolution before writing. It states “no-fly zone over Libya and ‘all necessary measures’ to protect civilians short of an occupation.” Notice the and after no-fly zone, and the phrase ‘all necessary measures.’
Ya see though I’m really worried because the F-16, which has a combined fuselage/wing area of roughly 670 square feet (62.2 square metres), and flying at 6,000 feet (1,829 metres) at night or above clouds that ground based non-guided antiaircraft guns firing randomly hoping to hit it, their maximum slant range being 10,000 feet (3,048 metres) and being that there are 20,626 square degrees in the visible sky hemisphere, assuming no horizon obstructions, the 670 square ft (≈62 m²) aircraft would subtend an angle of 0.24 degrees at 6,000 ft (≈1,800 m). Therefore the chance of a single randomly fired unguided shot hitting the aircraft would be one in 20626 / 0.24 / 0.24, or one in 358,090.
But since Prince Gaddafi might have some radar guided stuff, to be certain, I think we should just use giant kinetic crowbars we throw out of the space shuttle and mercilessly rain down on Libya in a meteoric firestorm of unprecedented proportions to save people lives.
I don’t think they can shoot down space shuttles and praying for them to fall out of the sky has been shown in lab tests to be ineffective although it IS possible the recent tsunami was created by too many people thinking mean things about the Japanese all at once or that Godzilla has re-awakened.
Anyway, once the giant crowbars have done their work we can sow the ground with salt and mines using remote control drones and walk away. Now THAT’S a ‘no-fly zone’. Kids are still pulling cluster bombs out of their ass in Cambodia.
Project “Thor.” Yeah, I always felt we’d missed the mark by not surreptitiously deploying a few hundred in orbit. What’s not to love? Supersonic flying crowbars raining down from orbit, each with the kinetic punch of a small explosion?
Imagine if we’d used a few hundred of those, rather than cruise missiles, when Clinton tried to snuff Bin-Laden back in ’98. No warning, no pesky ISI leaks to forewarn the enemy.
Done deal.
Anvils would be better…given our Wile E. Coyote of a utopianist president.
Lots of people in the 30′s praised the nazis for all the good work they were doing: they put the German people to work, living standards increased, the Autobahns were built, etc. etc.
Yet it was abundently clear that Hitler had extremely evil intentions. He wrote about them in a book he actually wrote himself. Virtually the entire country, and much of the world turned away from the awful truth.
I don’t support little lenin in anything that he does. On the surface, an action might look reasonable or even beneficial; but he always has an ulterior motive, always. Everything he has done in his entire life points to that. He told us in the autobiography he didn’t write, and in every unguarded moment.
This man’s number one priority is the fall of the US as the greatest power in the world. There can be no doubt. Everything he does is directed toward that goal.
Mark Levin probably has nailed why Obama went into Libya. His intent is to establish the precedent of US subservience to the UN.
I see your point about establishing UN precedence to US actions, but I have my doubts that this applies to Libya. After all, Bush’s Iraq coalition was twice the size of the Libyan coalition ..and Obama didn’t arrange this coalition; it was the work of the UK and France. And Bush went to the UN and Congress for approval. Obama ignored Congress – he always ignores Congress.
I think that the Libyan operation was the decision of the UK and France; they shamed Obama into agreeing to participate. And then, Obama’s Real Dominators moved in – his wife in particular.
Obama does not interact with the real world. He is unable to deal with non-people entities..such as policies and programs. He leaves that to others and he has always done so – whether as editor of the Harvard Law Review (left it all to others) or as community organizer or as a member of Senate.
Obama is capable of only one action: personal manipulation of people. Period. So, he’ll play ball with kids in Brazil, he’ll go on late night shows, he’ll campaign with his amorphous emotional and utterly meaningless rhetoric of hope/change..etc..He’ll party and smile and sing-along. All to get you to adore and swoon. He’ll give teleprompter speeches with his endless: ‘Let me be clear’. But he cannot, absolutely cannot, think about or talk about or deal with real events, policies, programs.
So, Obama is, himself, not interested in Libya. Or Egypt. Or Iran. He’s shown this by every action of his…dithering, ignoring..
He was shamed into agreeing to participate in Libya by the UK and France…and then, his dominators – probably his wife and others of his czar regime..moved in to get him out. Obama is ‘intellectually run’ by others. Not by himself.
And in particular by a dominant woman: his grandmother, mother and wife all think the same: anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-white, anti-democratic. Three clones. They intellectually run Obama.. Obama exists only within the personal charm and talk interactions.
I think they moved in to remove him/the US from Libya.
You can add Valerie Jarrett to the list. Susan Rice as well. A couple of women also were instrumental in his early political career. His grandmother was probably also influential. The grandfather was a loser, so it’s reasonable that she would have been the more important influence when his mother abandoned him in Hawaii to flit about the world. Strangely though, Ayers biography, based on Obama’s scribblings, hardly mentions his mother or grandmother. It’s like he can’t admit publically how dependent he is on women.
I believe he is either asexual or homosexual. There is no evidence whatsoever of any female relationship before Michelle appeared like a thunderbutt in his life. He was 31 when they got married. Rather strange for a charismatic guy who is attractive to women. Rumors of homosexuality are rampant…affairs with women, not much.
Maybe he gets his jollies by acquiescing to pushy females.
Kinetic Military Action leaves much to be desired. I’ve been working on improving Obama’s Euphemisms.
Remember Truman and Korea from your history books? That was a “police action” that lasted three years.
And I’d suggest you likewise check YOUR history books — that was an entirely UN operation, except that Truman/MacArthur/Ike maintained some degree of US autonomy with regards to troop leadership, planning, and deployment. But there were a significant number of other nations with troops in Korea.
Carry on.
I fear, what with all the weakness, the cluelessness, the outright bungling, that pretty soon “kinetic military action” is going to be taking place all over the world… including here.
Yeah, nothing says weakness like 110 tomahawk cruise missiles.
Right-o. I suspect this is the beginning of WWIII–and we’ll be fighting an Islamic middle east.
Dennis Kucinich makes more sense on this issue than President 0.0! You heard me correctly, Dennis Kucinich.
If the president’s office calls something that it is not, we all hold our noses and call it what it is: A LIE. We called it the Vietnam War, even though the presidents called it a “police action”. We called it the Iraq war, even though our president called it an “operation”.
Any time a president attempts to sugar coat a military action, we all lose faith in his abilities to lead.
The American People are not so stupid that we’ll actually believe twaddle like “kinetic military action.” Just as one is never a little bit pregnant, one does not get in to a “military action.” We have been at war with Libyans in the past, and it should come as no surprise that we’re at war with them again.
Either do it like you mean it, or don’t do it all. This half baked approach will get people killed for nothing. That is the ultimate evil.
This administration doesn’t have guts to say it’s going into combat. Instead it hides behind the fig leaf of politically correct non sequiturs.
“being volunteered” indeed.
From grade school on, my English teachers took points off for using the passive voice. Even the grammar-checker on my word processor objects to it!
How long will it take for half a million people to show up in DC asking for the fraud’s resignation?
If you think half a million is too many, what about 50,000?
Can this place wait till 2012?
This is begining to resemble that Woody Allen movie where the Dear Leader rolls out in his wheelchair for his evening showing as the tv music plays. (What was the title of that movie anyway?)
I’ve had enough of ths Halfrican, and I’ve had enough of the media’s complicity. Bloggers and news sites are the future of this Country. The election can’t come soon enough.
I believe the movie is, “Bananas.”
The linked article by Andrew McCarthy at NRO (“Decoding Libya”) is excellent. He explains why the only true power and driving force in the Muslim world is, as we might expect, Islam. The reports now being disseminated about connections between the Libyan “rebels” and al-Qaeda or the Muslim Brotherhood will no doubt multiply over the coming days and weeks.
This is the cause to which our president would have us rally. Why should anyone be surprised? The Kinetic Kenyan, on numerous occasions, has informed us of where his sympathies lie. His infamous Cairo speech, in which he apologized for the alleged sins of America vis-à-vis the Muslim world, was the opening shot across the bow of Western cultural integrity. Since then, we have constantly been reminded that he will spare no effort to advance the interests of Islam. The Libyan adventure is no exception.
Of course, the propaganda machine kicks in with Orwellian precision. Not only obfuscation of military reality, but perhaps more importantly the portrayal of the Arab protesters as hippies with kafiyyehs, rebels-without-a-cause who eat couscous. This strategy takes advantage of complete ignorance of the Middle East on the part of most Americans. They cannot grasp one of the key attributes of the region: The fact that democracy as a concept does not exist. This fact is so simple that most people cannot see it. Saying that democracy will break out in the Arab world is akin to claiming that America is about to express fealty to the monarchy of Great Britain, wanting Prince Charles to immediately arrive at our shores and install himself as King Charles of the United States.
I strongly disagree with McCarthy and your view that Ideology-Governs-All-Actions. Nope.
Ideology is the End Result, the articulation, of deep societal infrastructures. These infrastructures are: the population size, the economic mode and the political mode.
You – and McCarthy – ignore all three. It is equally illogical to state that because a ‘word’ does not exist in a society, then the ‘idea’ of that word cannot exist. Equally, it is illogical to declare that if a people do not have an ‘idea’ of a certain mode of behavior, then, they cannot DEVELOP such an idea.
Do you think that the notion of democracy is genetic? Innate? Did it always exist among mankind? And- what is the definition, by the way, of ‘democoracy’?
My definition of democracy is that it is a political mode that empowers the majority of the population. Again – that’s what politics is about: authority to rule. So, why have a political mode that empowers the majority? Are there other types of political modes?
Sure. Tribalism..is one that empowers a small set of Rulers..over the majority of the population who are ruled. It’s found in feudalism, absolute monarchies, dictatorships, totalitarianism.
But why have different modes of political authority? ALL political modes empower the most economically productive people. That’s why.
So – if you have tribalism, you are empowering the most economically productive set of people. The landowners; the owners of the state oil; the owners of all the money resources.
And if you have democracy, you are empowering..hmm..a middle class. A middle class engaged in private capitalist small and medium businesses. This is the most economically productive system for a large population. That’s why democracy emerged. Nothing to do with ‘having an idea’ or ‘a name’. But..an economic necessity to increase wealth production meant that you had to increase the number of people involved in wealth production. You had to move away from the landowners and lords…to developing a merchant and manufacturing class.
The ME population has exponentially increased in the last 40 years..beyond the carrying capacity of a two-class statist redistributive economy. It has to increase its capacity-to-create wealth. Oil and Suez tolls won’t support this massive new population. You have to create a merchant and manufacturing class: the middle class.
And then – empower them. By democracy.
THEN – you can start to chatter about and analyze ‘why we have a democracy’. The ideas and words come last…after the infrastructure. To suggest that these people, who are as human as we are, are incapable of thinking and working within a democratic system – is the height of ignorance. Never mind bigotry.
Oh – and then…yes, the current ideology will start to crumble and stretch and change its meanings and terms. Just watch.
ETAB – your discussion of democracy is missing 2 huge points, and sadly those two points make all the difference and make your reasoning completely off the mark. Not to mention, I love the whole you’re all bigots slander at the end. Nice touch that.
First, and this is crucial, we are a republic not a democracy. It’s amazing how many people throw around the word democracy for us and don’t have a clue. It’s not democracy that is innate to us, but our republican system of government enshrined in our constitution. Democracy, as you describe it and as the Muslim world seems to be enacting it, is nothing more than mob rule. It’s great to say the majority rules, hooray for democracy, but simple mob rule doesn’t guarantee anyone the freedoms that we enjoy here in our system.
Which leads nicely to my second and main point, which is that our republic is founded in part on a set of principles enumerated in the Bill of Rights, including the freedom of religion. Therein lies the difficulty with the Islamic world and democracy. Economics has got nothing to do with it.
What the left willfully chooses to ignore, and what you ignore in your post, is that Islam is not just a religion, but also a system of government. It has instructions on how to live almost every aspect of your life and punishments for failure to follow the laws of Islam. Yes I said and meant laws, and this is how strict adherents to Islam view their religion. It’s why they call it Sharia LAW. While we are founded on Judeo-Christian principles, there is nothing remotely like Sharia law to muddy the water. I encourage you to look at strict Sharia law closely. You cannot have the complete democratic freedoms we enjoy and Sharia law co-exist, as they are in direct contradiction in too many areas. Women’s rights? Alternate forms of religious worship? The power of Imams and fatwahs? Our government severely limits all religions’ influence in daily life, but simultaneously allows everyone to worship in their own way. Strict Islamists who live by Sharia law, just aren’t that flexible and infidels (anyone who disagrees with them) have ZERO rights.
Freedom and “democracy” go hand in hand to us here in the US. But for Islamic countries, how can your system of government override your religious beliefs? Of all the world’s major religions, aside from Islam, name another one that celebrates murdering those who disagree with your beliefs. It even includes killing your sister or daughter and other members of your own family with this honor killing nonsense. That kind of insane intolerance does not work with democracy and freedom. It represents the Lord of the Flies phenomenon, and leads to autocracies, theocracies, and secret police.
We rail against political correctness here, because it cuts off speech, and yet in the Islamic world, if you write a book or cartoon disparaging to Islam, an Imam can put a bounty on your head and no one does anything to stop that. I’m not a bigot and I know it’s not all Muslims. It is strict Islamists, and I don’t know exactly what percentage believe in the Koran as the direct will of God and jihad, but whether you put that number at 5% or 10% or some other number, that’s a ton of people running around who feel completely justified in killing those they disagree with. Which is not even remotely compatible with democracy as we understand it.
I’d feel a lot more comfortable if the “moderate” Muslim majority would stand up and fight for control of their religion. But so far it seems easier to keep their heads down and their mouths shut, which is not compatible with democracy either. Think about the Catholic reaction to the abuse scandal. Attendance and donations were decimated. What would happen if a Bishop put a bounty on someone? Picture that reaction in our world in contrast to the reaction to an Imam’s fatwah in the Muslim world.
We believe in every individual’s right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”, but Islamic radicals believe you should convert or die, live in compliance with Sharia law or forfeit your life. Am I being too harsh? A bigot? Look at what is happening to the small Christian community in Iraq. They are being slaughtered. Look at the plight of the Sikhs. It’s hard for democracy to take root, when your neighbor feels justified in killing you because your very existence is an offense to Allah.
Islam’s inherent intolerance just doesn’t jive with the freedom we all take for granted in modern democracies and the economy has nothing to do with it ETAB.
Nope – I disagree. You are making a common error which is to merge the format of a government with its mode of coming to decisions within that format.
The US’ format is: republic – which simply means that its authority to govern is vested in the citizens. Not in a class or monarch. Then, the republic must set up a governmental system that enables the government to represent the citizens: a legislature, an executive, an administration, a judicial system…the rule of law and a constitution. But this leaves a key question. HOW does one arrive at a decision? By lot? By total consensus? By a physical fight? How?
The mode of coming to decisions is: democratic, which means that a vote is taken, and the majority of that vote is ‘the winner’.
Don’t ignore these two systems: the format of a government and the method or mode of coming to decisions in that government. Again, the US is both: a republic and a democracy.
Could you provide some evidence that the Muslim democracy is ‘mob rule’? So far, the only democracies within Muslim nations are: Indonesia, Iraq, Turkey. And don’t think that it’s easy for the ME tribal nations to move from that tribalism (two-class, no middle class, socialist statist economy)…into a system that empowers a middle class and allows for a constitutional democracy. It took the West 400 years to make its own transition from feudalism. But – it has to happen. No choice. The population is too large for tribalist socialism.
I’ve been writing for months about the nature of Islam – which is, that it is primarily a political and economic system, whose axioms are removed from adaptive capacity by defining them as a ‘religion’. There is very little religious or metaphysical in Islam and most of it is simply copied from the Judaic. BUT – what you are ignoring is those economic and political infrastructures. They are tribal; 7th c tribal…and thus, functional only in non-industrial, nomadic, small populations. They are dysfunctional in large populations, industrial systems.
I agree: sharia and democratic laws can’t co-exist. So…Islam will have to change. There is no choice. Why? That brings me back to the triadic set of variables that form the basic infrastructure of a society:
Population size; economic mode; political mode. That’s the triad. These three systems form the structure of a society. And in the ME..the population has exponentially increased beyond the carrying capacity of its statist socialist economy. It has to move into a system that can generate more wealth. That system is: capitalism…a system of individual private small and medium businesses. These people form the middle class.
And..you must politically empower the most economically productive members of your society. If it’s a middle class – and they must be the most numerous in the society..then your political mode must be ‘constitutional democracy’. I don’t care whether it’s a constitutional monarchy (UK, Canada, Australia) or a republic. The means of coming to political decisions must be within the power of the most productive class – and that means..a constitutional democracy.
Get it? No? Ah well.
By democracy – I also mean a constitutional democracy. I’m sure you aren’t that naive that you think that I mean ‘primitive democracy’, a system only possible in a tiny population where ‘everyone votes’ and there is no rule of law or constitution. A constitutional democracy defines who is a citizen, who can vote, what that vote means. A constitutional democracy also means that one usually votes for a representative to make the vote/decision in a legislative body.
They are not scholars. They are stupid people who think the stupid public does not know highfalutin gibberish when they hear it. So far they are right.
Terry: You got it right! Obama and his elitist minions have a disdain for the common folk in America. It seems his opinion of us is that we are a unruly mass of fools who couldn’t possibly fathom the nuances of international diplomacy or kinetic military action.
To a degree, Obama is correct. Ellis Washington’s response (Jan. 27, 2010)to Obama’s State of the Union speech had the right perspective: “The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us — lack of common sense and good judgment. To paraphrase a comment on Reuters: Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who despite his promise to ‘fundamentally change America’ is, after all, merely a fool.”
What does the Democratic USURPER Presidents and his acolyte moonbats use of euphemisms and linguistic sleight of hand to try to fool people about Mohammedan Terrorism and to and divert attention from what they are really doing remind you of? To me nothing more than the NAZI’s with their ‘Final Solution’ ‘Resettlement in the East’ and worst of all the obscene sign over their Concentration Camp gates ‘Arbeit Macht Frei’ ‘Work gives Freedom’. Stack ‘Kinetic Military action’ and ‘Man caused disaster’and ‘overseas contingency operation’ and all the other pathetic word play attempts to divert attention being spewed out by Obambi and his REGIME against these and whats the difference nothing just another lot of extreme Left Wing SOCIALISTS just like that other Left Wing SOCIALIST movement the NAZI’s before them trying to hide what they really are and what they really mean.
Most moonbats and some RINO’s fall for it but then moonbats always do and RINO’s have no spino’s. The Obambi worshiping Racist Blacks of course see nothing wrong in it as Sharpton, Jackson et. al. have proved in their TV interviews.
I love Waugh’s title, “Black Mischief”, and “Emperor Seth” is reminiscent of “Emperor Jones”. Too bad they’re so un-PC.
The next sane person to occupy the White House will have to go on an apology tour of his/her own. This time it will be to apologize for the actions of Obama in foreign policy matters.
Not to mention the fact that “CNN Poll: Most Americans ‘OK’ with a Mosque in their community,” actually means…. nothing!
http://wwwtwosetsofbooks.blogspot.com/2011/03/is-cnn-mosque-poll-poll-doubtful-plus.html
I suppose that military uniforms, k-rations, weaponry, and machines will have to be purchased from, oh, letzsee, China? and on America’s dime.
What with no real jobs left in our nation, America has plenty of young men and women freed up for combat in another Islamic nation that hates us.
That way, the Arab immigrants in Europe can get on with the business of installing shariah law in the U.K. and elsewhere, and not be bothered with having to blow up anything other than Western infidels.
And who doesn’t want to see Arab monarchs and prime ministers zoom around in diamond encrusted cars to the next public stoning…do they still behead over there? I forget.
See? See? We’re all winners in this!
Obama paraphrase from 2002:
[I, Barack Obama am not] “opposed to all war,” only “dumb war, rash war.”
“I suffer no illusions about Moammar Gadhafi. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions. … He’s a bad guy. The world and the Libyan people would be better off without him.”
“Gadhafi poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors … the Libyan economy is in shambles … the Libyan military is a fraction of its former strength and … in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.”
A phrase from antiquity keeps popping to mind — the Rectification of Names. It’s from the Analects of Confucius, book 13, chapter 3.
Asked by a disciple how to rule a state properly, Confucius replies that it begins with rectifying the names:
“If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. If language be not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be conducted successfully. When affairs cannot be conducted successfully, propriety will not flourish. When propriety does not flourish, punishments will not be properly meted out. When punishments are not properly meted out, the people will not know how to conduct themselves.”
The phrasing varies slightly with different translations, but the meaning is pretty clear.
Much of Confucian thinking in regard to ordering society is far too static and class-ridden, but as a society we definitely need to start getting the names right and calling things what they are.
Ermm …
2 things;
1. ww3 started 9/11, imo
2. michael – what do you imagine will happen if we decimate Gaddafi & the “rebels” march to western Libya?
“1. ww3 started 9/11, imo”
One might stretch a bit, and say it began on June 5, 1968.
yes, it’s a generalization indeed – perhaps my only agreement with Petraeus, we are in a generational war. It’s the children who will suffer the most.
btw – our glorius rebels will soon be at Sirte, which will soon be a most peaceful town
Different kind of minor point:
“He who wills a certain end also wills the means to that end,” isn’t particularly Marxist. It’s pretty close to a direct quote from Kant (and the thought can be traced back to Machiavelli without problem).
Libs care. Libs are compassionate. (Did I say that with enough reverence?)
They care about underdogs, the oppressed, the poor, etc. etc. etc. It never has to make sense, as long as they care. And because “the military” seems just as much an abstraction, libs don’t seem to realize they are doing their caring with young men and women, not drawn from lib ranks, but OUR sons, daughters, friends relatives, husbands and wives. They do their caring with OUR tax money. And in this case, they do their caring without us even being informed, much less having representation or voice.
Sure, they care, they just don’t care about Americans, unless they fall into the appropriate demographics.
We must understand that the West must not defend Muslims from Muslims. We must defend the world from Muslims! This simple thought defines Iraq intrusion as necessary defence and Lybia intrusion as the dangerous international polisman action.
Thank you Mr. Kimball for a brilliant piece, you have succinctly and clearly stated the condition we find our country in. What intrigues me though is when the 306 million citizens will say ‘enough is enough’.
The hope may lie in ‘The Emperor’ sowing the seeds of his own demise.
We do not have the forces to take this new war (and those to follow shortly in Syria and Tunisia, etc, etc.) to the ground and ‘The Emperor’ will be forced to either withdraw from the region, a strategy that is counter to his fundamental agenda of created chaos or reintroduce the draft.
We currently live in a bubble where a volunteer military of brave, committed young men and women shield us from the horrors of the exploits of leaders who now declare wars from the comfort of sunny resorts.
Because these fine young people are volunteers from a small percentage of the households of this once great nation the rest of us coddled folk run about with the attitude; “Oh another war, I want the Marines to show them how tough we are, do you think this one will be televised?”
Reintroduce the draft and that brilliant observation will go something like; “…this idiot has declared another war and it says here that they are sending out draft reporting notices this week to 3 million men & WOMEN from 18 to 23 and all deferments have been made null and void.…they could take both our Peter and Patricia…call the Smiths, we have to organize a million person march on Washington to impeach this fool!”
Well, I can hope!!!!!!
G.Hugh Bodell
Author
Treachery In Turtle Bay Collection
You’re forgetting that the draft-dodgers-by-birth class (i.e. females) aren’t now and never have been subject to draft registration.
All the glib talk (from Democrats mostly, natch) about a draft is only aimed at the disposable sex (i.e. men and boys).
Geez Kimble! I go along, day by day immersed in the happy thought that this Obamaorgasm is one day closer to a possible end, a day when the great unwashed can once again rejoice and then you come along and remind me just how deep a craphole my fellow Americans have gotten us into. Even more disturbing is how popular this dunce with the silver tongue still is among the clueless “Dancing With the Stars, Bill Maher, David Letteman” crowd are! America is in deep doo doo but, I’ll feel better after contemplating my navel for a bit. Oh, look…..there’s a little bit of lint there. I’m feeling better already!
Sorry Kimball! I spelled your name wrong.
Not to be obnoxious, but the military has long talked about kinetic action versus cyber warfare. Note that Stuxnet is warfare, but not kinetic. When the Chinese attack DoD web sites that is warfare of the cyber variety.
One of the important controversies in military circles is how to do the cyber warfare equivalent of Bomb Damage Assessment. If you disable the enemies command and control by cyber warfare, it’s not as easy to see as the burnt out husk of a building.
All that is to say, that I don’t think Mr. Rhodes was trying to officially christen the Libyan operation, whatever we may think of its advisability, as the Libyan Kinetic Military Action. He was just making a common distinction between bombing and shooting on the one hand and propaganda and cyber warfare and intimidation by show of force on the other hand.
Are you not jumping forward a little fast. At the rate we are going there may be no future for humans. You give people way to much intelligence for not killing ourselves off!
The Newspeak backfires on the too clever weasels. Just like Global Warming has become a joke that never gets old, blamed with laughs when ponds freeze over in Dixie and Yankees deal with seven feet of snow.
Orwell said it best:
“The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect.”
— George Orwell (1984)
Kinetic military action is also potential military occupation like in Iraq.
Great post, shared it at a political information page I run at facebook and linked to it at my blog:
http://zillablog.marezilla.com/2011/04/libyan-lunacy-linkaround.htm
“Reintroduce the draft and that brilliant observation will go something like; “…this idiot has declared another war and it says here that they are sending out draft reporting notices this week to 3 million men & WOMEN from 18 to 23 and all deferments have been made null and void.…they could take both our Peter and Patricia…call the Smiths, we have to organize a million person march on Washington to impeach this fool!”
This is so true, but the republicans in Washington don’t care. There always warmongering, its not ever going to be there kids going to war. Its no surprise that recruiters specifically target inter city schools and minorities while leaving the suburbs and private schools of the right wing alone.