Here are ten missing elements from the President’s address to the nation about his decision to go to war:
- Why no Oval Office Address? This was not a somber war speech. You looked goofy jaunting up the steps and smiling in your opening remarks. It looked and felt like a campaign speech.
- What happened to Congress? Not a peep about notifying or securing consent from Congress. The War Powers Act disappeared into thin air.
- How long will U.S. forces continue combat missions? Whether under the NATO or U.S. flag, is this still a war for weeks, months or longer?
- What does success look like? What is the end game? If regime change is not the measure for success, what is? And what if Moammar Qaddafi doesn’t relinquish power?
- What will be the financial cost ? He warned about the $1 trillion for eight years in Iraq. Afghanistan now costs $3 billion each week. Any guesstimates on what this will cost the taxpayer?
- Why no mention of allies Germany or Brazil? Germany pulled all military units out the coalition. Brazil, where he toured last week, has not endorsed the action either.
- Why no dire warnings to Qaddafi? What if he turns to retaliatory terrorist attacks or really burns Tripoli and Benghazi as he goes down?
- Why no recognition of the rebels as the legitimate Libyan government? Other countries have recognized the rebels as the legitimate governing authority. Why didn’t Obama endorse them tonight? Does the CIA or the State Department have a firm grip of who are the rebels?
- Why didn’t he call Qaddafi a war criminal? Whatever happened to the international war crimes proceedings?
- No coherent Obama Doctrine. Libya was a “one off,” as the Brits would say. So tonight, what are Middle East tyrants thinking ? From Tehran to Casablanca they realize Obama is politically spent on overseas ventures. Time to break out the champagne bottles.
In a word, he is a putz.
His casual approach to committing American lives (and resources) to a ridiculous war and then jetting off to Brazil to cement an American-betraying, puppetmaster-Soros-pleasing deal is despicable. His sudden pride in America’s previously-denied exceptionalism when saying we won’t turn a blind eye in Libya is manipulative hypocrisy. His words are lies and his deceit and arrogant are without limit or shame.
Anyone who believes one word he says is either a racist, a self-serving politician, or an idiot. He was hand-picked by America-hating Soros to destroy America and every decision he makes is toward that end. He is Soros’s useful idiot.
So, in all of this of yours, you haven’t noticed any fault in the USA citizen for putting him there—or, if as you say, allowing Soros to put him there?
I think my last paragraph says it all except for one omission: ACORN. Which is one of Soros’s babies. Have you ever researched Soros?
- No coherent Obama Doctrine. Libya was a “one off,” as the Brits would say. So tonight, what are Middle East tyrants thinking ?
So maybe this was a test run on employing the UN and Soros’ “responsibility to protect” ideology” that they can use to protect the Palestinians against Israel securing its survival?
There is something here that we do not see–and you may just pointed it out.
Where is Congress in all of this? Yes, it is fair to say that Obama should have sought Congressional authorization before using force. But why isn’t Congress asserting itself, either for or against. It’s one thing for Congress to be caught off guard, but at some point, it must either get in the game or we have to put some share of the blame on Congress for taking such a lackadaisical attitude towards its responsibilities.
Congressional reps (Dems and Repubs alike) are afraid to go against the Annointed One. The “old media”–that once correctly called itself the main stream media–makes this so by ignoring or downplaying stories of any real value. I had thought fraudulent votes were our worst problem. Recently, I’ve decided the “old media” is. The new media is the one we are reading right now. Time for America to say “out with the old and in with the new.”
How long will US forces continue combat missions? “I’ve also asked my administration to prepare the full range of options that we have to respond to this crisis. This includes those actions we may take and those we will coordinate with our allies and partners, or those that we’ll carry out through multilateral institutions.”
It sounds more like ‘hope’ than ‘change’.
What it does NOT sound like anyone who knows flip about military matters. Commander-in-Defeat.
“I’ve also asked my administration to prepare the full range of options that we have to respond to this crisis. This includes those actions we may take and those we will coordinate with our allies and partners, or those that we’ll carry out through multilateral institutions.”
He forgot to make himself clear. We have the notion that he was supposed to.
Harvard Men At War
From up upon the podium in tailored suit and tie,
Between the flags of freedom crossed, and in the public eye,
The Harvard man made his address to critics, in reply,
And laid out for the audience his modern battle cry.
Recall that other Harvard man, who at the San Juan Hill,
Did call ‘Rough Riders, follow me!’ and led the charge until
The foot soldiers and cavalry were summoned by his will,
And overcame the enemy with valor and with skill.
Not for our modern Crimson man do words like those resound,
For in their stark grave melody is heroism found.
Instead we hear of diplomats who finally come around,
And handing off the fighting with no boots upon the ground.
So rally ’round the UN flag: we fight for powder blue!
Leave well behind the stars and stripes, and patriotic hue.
We’ll fight for days or weeks for sure, and then we’ll say adieu,
And hope our allies have resolve and heart to follow through.