Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Obama's Libyan Disaster


According to his latest speech (stay tuned, he may change his mind), Obama's "Obama Doctrine" consists of: 1. "It's not my fault, the UN and International community ordered me to take action!"; 2. The US has a "Responsibility to Protect" (accepting that noxious doctrine) and MUST be the UN police force, we must do what the UN tells us, either refrain from intervening or intervening, particularly when populations are at risk. 3. See, #2, the US is the world's policemen, guided by the UN. This is disaster of the highest order, done by an Affirmative Action President who doesn't care and is way in over his head. Who is, lazy to boot.


Obama's Doctrine boils down to a re-run of Clinton's air power alone strategy, the usual Democratic tools (Bill Beckel in particular) were spouting off about this. Air power alone is going to "remove" Khadaffi by creating pressure. And when it fails, as it inevitably and rapidly will, well Obama has the important thing covered: he'll blame the US military (tasked with an impossible mission) and the UN, France, and others. The important thing is that Obama escape blame. His own air cover is the media, which is worshiping him as the God that Walks as usual. He expects them to run their own interference on the whole debacle.

The Clinton doctrine (use air power only) which was a variation of the Bush 1 Doctrine (eject Saddam from Kuwait, run a costly and failing 12 year air power alone effort to contain him) was focused on the "coalition." It did not solve the pressing US problem: how to keep the oil from the Middle East flowing at a price we could afford. All the air combat patrols did for 12 years was keep Saddam out of Kuwait. Bill Clinton could afford that, oil was around $17 a barrel in 1995. It is now upwards of $115 (and likely headed higher).

Obama's doctrine will fail, because it does not solve the problem: keep the Libyan (and other ME oil) flowing at a price we can afford. It is as simple as that. [George W. Bush never grasped this either, to be fair.]

Obama and Dems are allergic to taking any significant amount of US casualties, or killing civilians, or doing anything that would upset in significant ways the Arab Street, the Arab League, the UN, and the NYT. That's a recipe for defeat. Better to stay out, and tell the US to adopt a poverty-driven lifestyle at oil at $200 a barrel or more.

Now the US is headed in that direction, but first with a humiliating defeat in Libya. Air power cannot stop Khadaffi and his mercenaries, sitting on at least $135 billion in gold at the Bank of Libya in Tripoli [Bob Beckel is truly an idiot, he thinks freezing Libyan bank accounts "fixed" Khadaffi and means he has no money, as a Dem shill he reflects Obama thinking. They really are that stupid (and didn't read the Financial Times well). Every dictator now knows to have gold on hand, as a ready stash that Western institutions cannot freeze or seize short of boots on the ground, which they won't do.]

Khadaffi will send mortar and small arms teams, likely on foot or in small groups, to assault rebel strongholds. Probably co-ordinating as in Afghanistan to draw out limited US air assets to one place, and over-run another. Once in the rubble, all the air power cannot winkle troops out. Khadaffi only needs to hold what he has, and wage a war of attrition against the rebels. Who lack good order, any training, or any semblance of military knowledge. He has veterans of the Congo War, and elsewhere, with real first-hand experience, against none at all. He can buy arms and men for a decade or more. He will certainly blow up the oil fields he does not control, first chance. And continually destroy them whenever they are fixed (the rebels being unable to protect them and hold their territory, and the West being unwilling to put soldiers on the ground).

Khadaffi will also send Mariel boatlift waves to France and Italy. His way of saying thanks. A Camp of the Saints seems pretty close at hand, and neither nation has the will or the means to keep a million or five million Arab Muslims and Africans out of their country. This is entirely predictable.

There are two explanations for Obama's actions, neither flattering. The first is that Obama knows all this, and hates America so much (filled with White people … just like the mother than abandoned him) that he wants to destroy it as much as possible, figuring his position as President and First Rockstar is unassailable. This certainly fits the part of his doctrine that says that the UN, and international community, must OK US action, not Congress. That the Constitution is irrelevant (Candidate and Senator Obama said explicitly that Bush MUST notify Congress immediately on any military action per the War Powers Act).

The other is that Obama is profoundly stupid, and can't figure out that losing a Libyan War when George W. Bush won the Iraq War, means he loses the Presidency. That Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power, all ganged up on him, and a weak and uncaring and stupid President simply caved and gave them what they wanted. And has been dragged into a war in Libya with no end in sight, no goals, and no way to achieve victory because he was lazy, weak, and stupid.

My own view is that both explanations fit. Certainly Obama is weak, lazy, uncaring, and uninvolved in anything not related to campaigning, Black people (police acted stupidly, etc.) or corrupt Chicago style bargains (GE's taxes). Obama is not very smart, has outsourced ObamaCare to Nancy Pelosi, various other agendas like Cap and Trade, Amnesty, and so on to Harry Reid, and spent most of his time golfing, on vacation, or hobnobbing with big shots. He spent more time on his NCAA brackets than he did explaining to the American people why we needed to bomb Libya. Much less how that would get victory for the US and the ME oil flowing at a price we can afford.

But Obama also hates the United States. When it cost him considerable flack, he refused to wear a flag pin or stand at attention for the National Anthem. Even Hillary Clinton and Bill Richardson did so, at the same event (memorably caught on film and tape). What would it have cost to put his hand on his heart? Nothing. What would it have cost to fund, fully, missile defense, or the F-22 (costing 135,000 jobs), or a robust navy, when Obama cares nothing for deficits and military spending is a traditional, Chicago-way of building political support and alliances (not to mention employment)? Only reflexive dislike of the US and nearly all White military explain that choice.

Obama's hard-left, far-left, radical past, including Muslim upbringing, radical "hate Whitey" politics and alliances (including Louis Farrakhan and Rev. Wright), his hatred of his abandoning White mother, his idolizing of his anti-White, anti-American abandoning father, his embrace of folks like Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, and reflexive identification with enemies of the US (Iran's regime, Syria, Turkey) all point to at least in part, a large desire for Obama to "teach America a lesson" by inflicting a defeat.

Obama is stupid, arrogant, and racially motivated enough to think he can do just that, and get away with it. Defeat will be the military's fault. Or the UN's. Or the Arab League's. Or France's fault. The media will do its worshipful best, the way his high school teachers, and Occidental professors, and Columbia professors, and Harvard Professors, and various White corporate board members, to give him a pass for failure. Accounting him brilliant because he can string two words together without sounding like Bobby Rush or Jessie Jackson (both of whom need translators for average White Americans to understand).

Will Obama get away with it? Yes and no. Certainly the media will not change in their overt worship of him. But even media hype has its limits and backlash. Most men are thoroughly sick of Justin Bieber. All the hype led "Sucker Punch" to a failed, $19 million weekend opening. When, not if, Obama loses in Libya, with bloody chaos, stalemate, oil fields aflame, massacres galore (on both sides), Islamists and AQ on one side, Khadaffi on the other, and mass refugees turning Europe into a Muslim camp overnight, Obama will get the blame from ordinary Americans.

Now, he's not worried about that. Obama clearly plans to fraud his way to re-election, and then find some reason to rule forever, by decree. Eric Holder's dismissal of the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case, and his indignant reply that it was "an insult to my people" to think Whites had voting rights, was part of that. Obama plans massive, Franken-Gregoire style fraud. Coupled with Black Panther voter intimidation and suppression, violent beating of White voters by various Black Bloc/Anti-Fa thugs, SEIU thuggery, and so on, to keep the election close enough to simply "declare" victory (with the help of media biased exit polls and projections). The jihad against Clarence Thomas is to not accept any decision with him on the Supreme Court, and simply claim victory.

Let us consider Obama. Can anyone believe Obama will be what George W. Bush has become, a private citizen, living outside mostly the limelight? Of course not. Obama is not Obama if he is not President. Even should he win a second term, he cannot give it up. Why would he? Wasn't he sent by Allah to be First Rockstar, the International Playboy? Obama is who he is. A man who needs constant adulation, adoration, cheering crowds, celebrity perks, free goodies, and the power of being President and helicoptering and traveling in Air Force One. Obama is simply unable to be an ordinary person again. To be not President would be unthinkable. He'll never relinquish the office. Not ever.

Obama does not care about his approval ratings, or re-election chances. He has no real concerns about winning a second term because he plans to cheat. And stay and stay and stay. Obama is not like any other President. He's the only Black one (and filled with overt and undeniable hatred of Whites, which most Black people share), and the only one raised a Muslim. Obama neither knows nor cares about American traditions, and values. His own doctrine places the UN and international community not the Congress or even President in charge of the US military.

Obama does not care about Libyan defeat because he has no plans to ever give up the office. I supremely hope I am wrong on this account. Nothing would make me happier than eating my own words.

22 comments:

Stirner said...

Although I generally agree with you, I disagree on two specific points.

1) Obama no doubt has a certain base level of intelligence (literary skill, apparently not so much according to Jack Cashill), so I think it weakens your argument to call him stupid. He is not President Camacho by any means. What he is seems to be is lazy, combined with a strong dose of Narcissism that makes him think he is always the smartest guy in the room. He skated through school with his biracial identity and is glibness, and never could be bothered to actually achieve anything of note. Editor of the law review, but never bothers to publish an article, etc. Then he goes into politics, and gets taken under the wing of various insiders and his path is smoothed for him. As a legislator, he never had do to anything more demanding than vote yes or no, and still he managed to vote "present" dozens times. While he certainly is interested in power and influence, his complete lack of interest in nuts and bolts politics is astounding.

2) I think Obama HATES being President. Certainly he loves the trappings and the perks, but much of the day to day must be misery inducing for a guy like that. Obama's entire career has been spent passing the buck, claiming credit for the accomplishments of others, and trying to harvest the adulation of his audiences. Being responsible for decisions? Not so much.

The problem with Obama is that making decisions is job #1 for the President. Pre-president Obama probably thought he could just get all the smart guys in the room, and let them hash things out. The only problem now is that inevitably half the guys in the room want to do one thing, and the other half want to do something else. Both decisions have their own merits and costs, so there is no clear answer. Libya is a classic example of there being no easy answers for problems. Ignore? Intervene? Occupy? There are downsides in every direction. So all day, every day, it is these types of hard problems that get stuck on his desk, and he has to pick what flavor of unpleasant decision he prefers. You can see from how presidents age in office how utterly stressful the constant responsibility and accountability is.

Especially after the 2010 elections, I think he desperately wants to be a Clinton style ex-President. He gets to give the speeches, hector people on the world stage, and have much of the prestige without any of the accountability. It would also help if he was a Chicago-style behind the scenes "fixer" on a national level, to give him some real juice with movers and shakers (thus all the plutocratic deals). The only problem for Obama is that to be a popular ex-President you have to be a popular and successful President. So he can't quit, he can't be a pathetic one-termer, he has to go for broke, and hope that the media will provide him with a fig-leaf of respectability. Obama has only lasted at any job during his career for about two years, then he starts looking for the next opportunity. I don't think he is going to suddenly change his stripes and shoot for president-for-life.

Not that the alternative is going to be much better - he is going to keep doing whatever he can to boost that public image, which is dangerous enough. In any case, it is all a matter of speculation so only time is going to answer this one.

josh said...

The asshole was in Brazil while the whole Ghaddafi thing was taking shape. Interesting that while speaking to some young Brazilians of (no doubt)very mixed race,he made reference to the movie his dear mommy loved,Black Orpheus.Remember when Steve talked about Barry and Stanley going to see this and Barry getting a wee bit uncomfortable when his Univ of Chicago mom began drooling over the negro men. Weird that an old movie NOBODY in Brazil remembers should be talked about! (Its kind of like his Bill gates joke,when NO ONE in the room had a clue who Bill Gates WAS! ) I wonder what the sexual vibe was between Stanley and Barry;Recall how she suddenly got rid of him.Were they diddling and got caught?? That would make Barry a motha---SHUT YOUR MOUFF! ---But I'm talkin' bout Obama---THAN WE CAN DIG IT!!

Anonymous said...

Josh, You might want to check if you're taking the right pills.

Anonymous said...

Obama is plenty smart, and this is all going to work out very well, as Marxists would define "very well".

Gx1080 said...

I didn't thought that the guy would be stupid enough to declare another war, even if it will cost him re-election.

None of the massive media dick-sucking can hide that he's Bush the third.

Of course, none of that matter if he cheats. Is really not fun to have a "president" that does that, because when that line is crossed, many others will. Trust me on this.

YR said...

Agree 100%, he plans to cheat and cheat BIG in 2012. I don't know about president for life though.

IƱigo Montoya said...

All this issue could turn out to be useful and positive,after all.Remembering the arabs (both the men in the street and their dictators) that any western country might dispose of theirs with no more effort than a cow scaring flies away with her tail;ruling out the possibility of something akin to democracies in muslim countries (a mortal blow to the white guilt mantras);exposing both the european ship of fools and the Obama fiasco...Besides,to let the things take their natural course is usually healthy.If that has to happen,let the islamists take control over North Africa now,and not in twenty years,with Europe definitely turned into an old people´s home, unable to react.Let Gaddafi show us that a "green march" over Europe is a real threat.

Anonymous said...

The refuge wave has already started.

An Italian island has been overwhelmed by immigrants from north Africa who have more than doubled the island's population, prompting fierce protests from local people.

Thousands of Tunisians have flooded into Lampedusa, a tiny island south of Sicily, after the fall of their President - with a further influx feared from refugees fleeing violence in Libya.

The number of immigrants has been reported as being just over 5,500 today, with more than 3,000 coming in the last three days alone. The normal population of the quiet island, which relies on fishing and tourism, is around 5,300.


Follow to link to see pictures of the disgusting mess already created by this invasion of animale.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371204/Lampedusa-MORE-migrants-fleeing-Tunisia-Libya-inhabitants.html

Jesus Christ Supercop said...

I haven't been keeping up with Libya at all. Why is it so important to intervene there? Is the price of oil going to go up otherwise?

Anonymous said...

Two problems with this post, Whiskey:

1. Bush did not win the war in Iraq. Iran won the Iraq War. By spending a trillion dollars in Iraq, the U.S. managed to turn Iraq from a Sunni-ruled, Christian-tolerant secular state that was openly hostile to Iran into an Islamic Shiite satellite of Iran; one that takes pride in killing or humiliating Christians.

2. What you say about Obama never relinquishing the U.S. presidency is exactly what people said about Bill Clinton - a man who loved being President more than anyone since Franklin D. Yet, Clinton successfully made the transition to guest speaker at expensive dinners. Obama will most likely do the same. If he doesn't, the U.S. military will eject him.

Anonymous said...

Inigo Montoya -- there is no tilde over the "n" in Inigo.

YR said...

@ anon

A military coup! We can only hope we get so lucky

The Anti-Gnostic said...

I can see Obama being one and done. Oh sure he'll run for re-election but I think it's as simple as Stirner puts it: he hates his job, for which he was totally unqualified to begin with.

He'll muddle thru to 2012, hopefully without the world falling in, run a desultory campaign and get retired at the polls. Then he'll spend the rest of his life complaining about racist America.

2012, like 2008, is the Republicans' to lose but you can never underestimate the Stupid Party.

Polichinello said...

Then he'll spend the rest of his life complaining about racist America.

He's gonna have to pay off those divorce costs and alimony somehow. You know Michelle is going to go Tipper Gore on his ass once the adulation stops.

raliv said...

If you didn't see Donald Trump on Bill O'Reilly, he seems to agree with your ideas of keeping control of the oil fields and keeping China in check. I thought of your recent articles when watching.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=183376

josh said...

Re Michelle going "Tipper Gore" on his ass:Yes once barry has made his bones and gets ready to hit the $$$$ circuit,he will shed Michelle and begin to make up for lost time. He will feel secure enough to start banging young lib chicks. Michelle will become Kings wife and revert to a monastic life of absolutely no sex.(Like most middle aged black women,who enter a lifelong celibate existence once they put some years(and pounds)on.Dorothy Parker's refrain comes to mind about men available for older women:The odds are good but the goods are odd. In the case of black women,the goods can often be lethal.Michelle will live like Coretta Scott King (as opposed to Scott Caan)be revered and become a symbol of stuff.

sad face said...

None of this matters. Obama could start taking his morning shit on the white house lawn and he'd still win 2012.

He has proved beyond doubt that he hates the American NATION, and wishes its destruction, 44% of voters agree with him. The opposition vote will fracture when the inevitable RINO is offered up by the treasonous GOP.

Democracy has failed, as usual, only civil war and temporary military dictatorship can recover the Republic that no longer exists.

Where are you Cincinnatus?

Anonymous said...

Notice how Whiskey identifies Turkey has an enemy of the U.S. You see, Turkey isn't that much of a friend to Israel anymore. Therefore, Turkey is an enemy of the U.S.

Jesus Christ Supercop said...

Off-topic, but too funny.

In some sort of reality show about video game development, one team dreamed up the following idea for a game:

The clear winner in terms of possible embarrassment is Team Runt with its evil creation, Mistress Emasculate, an angry menopausal woman leading a feminist army in control of the European Union. Here's the description of their game, Feminist Apocalypse.

"Once nearly all of the men are subdued in labor camps, the world is out of control. Without the help of men, women can't handle nature and nature begins to over power them. Their biological clocks are ticking, afterall," the game concept reads. "Women launch nuclear weapons to destroy nature."

"They do what they're good at: they overreact," explains Team Runt, going on to say that the childless, man-hating dominatrix can only be defeated by convincing her to love men again.


Naturally, this is "misogyny."

Anonymous said...

raliv said...
"If you didn't see Donald Trump on Bill O'Reilly, ..."

I can't say I like Donald Trump's personality and I probably only agree with half of what he says, but I like the fact that he has a ***pro - American*** stance.

IMHO mainstream American society needs to get away from this Cosmopolitanism view that basically says we are all part of the same community, the global village.

I say BS. We need to put American interests first (yes even at the expense of other nations) unapologetically. Any society that does not defend its self interest will not survive.

Whiskey said...

I saw Trump and agreed with his contention that we should simply take the Iraq oil fields as payment for liberating Iraq. It is the only thing that will get oil prices down immediately. Drilling to production takes about 10 year min in the US.

Yes Turkey is an enemy of the US, because its population in the hinterlands has exploded, making it an Islamic state. Islamic states are hostile to the US, the best the US can do is sponsor client regimes that depend on US military protection. This has been US policy since FDR in 1943, continued by Truman, Ike, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, and notably, Carter with the Carter Doctrine (intervene militarily to preserve US dominance in the Gulf).

Blogger said...

Teeth Night Guard is providing precise fitting and high quality customized teeth guards.