Mar 31 2011

Emperor Obama’s War Is Killing Civilians

Published by at 8:34 am under All General Discussions,Obama's War In Libya

Air power cannot win wars, but it can rack up body bags full of innocent civilians:

At least 40 civilians have been killed in air strikes by Western forces on Tripoli, the top Vatican official in the Libyan capital told a Catholic news agency on Thursday, quoting witnesses.

At least 40. Using an illegal UN resolution to get us into an unconstitutional war to supposedly protect Libyans from mass murder Emperor Obama’s path to the dark side is now complete. He is willing to accept the deaths of innocents to salve his ego and prove he is butch enough to wield US military power.

We really have no option than to start impeachment – the gathering of evidence. Removal from office may not be required yet. But the investigations must begin.

25 responses so far

25 Responses to “Emperor Obama’s War Is Killing Civilians”

  1. dhunter says:

    The Repugnantcans are too scared of their shadows to Impeach the Usurper. He is in direct violation of a judges order on the drilling moratorium, OBlaBlahcare, and now is subjecting our military to the whims of the United nations and the Arab league without consent of congress, he has sued a soverign state for guarding its borders (AZ) and meddled in the financial affairs of another (WI), but the Repiugnantcans are too afraid of the race card being played to do a thing!

    The same party who cannot even cut 60 Billion dollars from a 1400 Billion Dollar deficit and leaves OBLhBLHcare implementation funded at 105 billion after being sent to cut spending and stop OBLahBLahcare is complicit in this Enemy Domestics trashing of the Constitution and as such both parties need to be voted out. Its time for true patriots to take back their country under the third party, Tea party umbrella!

    Any other action is aiding and abetting the now completely corrupted two party system that is tearing our country assunder!

  2. Wilbur Post says:

    I wonder about Hillary’s role in this. I wonder if she manipulated the Unbearable Being of Lightheadedness into getting into the war, knowing the fool would bungle it. This may be a cynical idea, but it wouldn’t be the first time in history that manipulative, back-stabbing games have taken place in government. It’s pretty well known that the Clintons don’t like Obama all that much and Barry and Moochy are not all that enamored of her. I wouldn’t be surprised if HRC had a plan to try and torpedo the fool’s reelection.

  3. KauaiBoy says:

    Further proof of what happens when we let foreigners control the outcome of our elections — Bobo has no practical or relevent job experience, let alone military training (unless you count the Saul Alinsky cowards approach to change what you don’t like).

    I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when he (or his designee) met with the Joint Chiefs to get this rolling. “Are you serious? No really, are you serious? What about the innocents in Iran or the Ivory Coast or Arizona for that matter? Do you mean to tell me we are following the lead of those brave people, the French, the UN and the Arab league? Sir, do you now understand why military coups are not all that bad a thing?”

    And I wouldn’t put it past the Clintonistas to harm our national interests to keep themselves front and center. Unless they have pissed off Uncle George that is.

    The only conclusion the Arab world has reached is that the President of the USA is a coward who hides behind women’s skirts. And we all know what they think of women.

  4. Highlander says:

    Neither Congress nor the American people have any stomach for impeachment – however much Obama may deserve it. It will not happen. If the Republicans in Congress were to take that step, they would lose much of their support from independents and endanger hopes for control of the Senate and the White House in 2012.

  5. kathie says:

    Imagine trying to impeach the first black President? AJ, have you gone off the deep end?

  6. WWS says:

    interesting interview with Michael Scheuer today; remember, he was the former CIA officer in charge of the anti Bin Laden unit. He resigned from the agency because of his opposition to the Iraq war, and for the last several years he has been one of the favorite go-to guys for CNN, arguably because he has always been so reliably anti-Bush.

    Watch what is probably his last CNN interview ever; note especially the way he gets chopped off and the interview terminated immediately.

    He dared to criticize The One. A mortal sin.

  7. lurker9876 says:

    So what do you think about the latest unemployment report? Do you think an improving unemployment report will help Obama get re-elected? Will this be just enough for his re-election?

  8. WWS says:

    the latest unemployment report is too little, too late, and ultimately irrelevant – because according to housing, consumer spending, industrial production, and pricing pressure, we are already starting in on the down leg of the second part of the double dip recession.

    Unemployment is a lagging indicator, so expect numbers to trend slightly better for a few more months before they turn around – ahem, “unexpectedly” – and start getting worse again.

    btw, “administration sources” according to the WaPo now view stalemate as the likely outcome.

    That was easy – we lost this war in record time!

    Obama has traded in the advice of Napoleon (If you’re going to take Vienna, Take Vienna!) for the words of Yogi Berra: “We’re completely lost, but we’re makin’ real good time!”

  9. crosspatch says:

    “Peace Strike” accidentally kills 13 rebels in latest action of NotWar I

  10. crosspatch says:

    Stalemate is the ultimate goal for liberals. It doesn’t reduce the death count, just slows down the rate. You only get 10 dead per week over decades rather than a couple thousand all at once and the issue is settled.

    Over those decades, liberals make a career out of managing that stalemate and maintaining it. Endless negotiations, frequent public speeches, regional “experts” will be needed. Events like this create a lot of jobs for liberals. If they had simply stayed out of it and let it come to its own conclusion, there’s no hay to be made.

    Mark my words, Obama hasn’t saved any lives. When all is said and done, there will be just as many dead. He has simply slowed down the daily rate of deaths and extended them over a longer period of time.

  11. WWS says:

    very good points, crosspatch – I would only make one minor correction. All military people know that the only guaranteed way to bring about the minimum casualties is to end the war as quickly as possible. By extending the conflict, a long drawn out war guarantees that the total death toll will be far greater than those which would have been caused by a short, decisive confrontation. And because of that, the most “humane” thing any war planner can do is to plan to use maximum force aimed at ending the war as quickly as possible.

    That’s what Sherman was getting at when he said “War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.”

    He also predicted that “Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster.”

    It’s not just the direct casualties, which are of course awful – an extended war is incredibly degrading to both the physical and the psycholgical infrastructure of the country. Nations that get accustomed to endless low lever warfare become failed states of permanent misery – Lebanon and Afghanistan are perfect examples.

    Starting a war that will never end, that is never intended to end is truly one of the most Evil things that any government – that any Man – can do.

    Evil – and I mean that in every sense of the word.

  12. crosspatch says:

    Actually, if Obama isn’t going in there with a clear objective then what he is doing is murder. He is simply killing people to prevent the killing of people which makes no sense.

    And in the end he will not actually prevent the killing of those people, just delay it.

    He should have kept his mouth shut and stayed out of it.

  13. crosspatch says:

    Either that, or invade the country, take it over, and turn it back over to them.

  14. WWS says:

    Which brings us back to the decisions Bush and his advisors had to make in Iraq.

    Now, there is plenty of room to debate and criticize the original decision to invade – could Saddam have been contained, was an invasion truly necessary, should we have had better intel, etc, etc?

    BUT – there is no doubt that *Once* the US attack and invasion had taken place, there was an absolute moral imperative to end the fighting and rebuild the place, the so-called “you broke it you bought it!” principle. Once in, we *had* to make it right – that’s the point that Bush’s critics refused to acknowledge, that walking out at any point before that process was over would have resulted in far worse consequences. Actually, I suspect that many of the Dems knew exactly that this would result in far worse consequences, and they wished for that because of their hatred of Bush. Now I’m thinking of that “evil” word again.

    The case against that latter view is one I find almost incomprehensible, but it may be true. The Dems as a group may actually believe that you can stroll into another country, lay waste to large parts of it at random, and then just casually walk away and everyone will forgive and forget because you’re overall such a great guy, that there’s no cost to be borne for letting your foreign policy be an endless sequence of Short Attention Span Theater performances.

    They don’t believe in Consequences. Doesn’t matter, since Consequences believe in them, and will seek them out no matter how far they try to run.

    Too bad those Consequences are now going to seek all of US out, too.

  15. kathie says:

    The Dems are proud of Obama because he is a reluctant warrior, Bush was a gun ho cowboy. So Libya is good, Iraq is bad. I have no idea why anybody would compare the two conflicts.

    Obama is good, though he has no idea who will be incharge if the rebels win, because they are still trying to find out who they are. Suppose they are al Queda and we just stopped Gadaffi from killing them?

    WWS do you really have any idea what the Dems think? I’m pretty sure that is a rhetorical question.

  16. WWS says:

    “do you really have any idea what the Dems think?”

    If we judge them by their results of their actions, their minds must be truly ugly places.

    Something like a pack of powerful, vicious, 2 year olds who believe they can do anything and get away with it, just because they want to.

  17. MerlinOS2 says:

    The percentage of the overall population that is employed in March 2010 was 58.6 percent. One year later, the total percentage of overall population employed is… 58.5 percent. Conclusion: In a growing population we have produced fewer jobs than the number that the population grew. (For the record, the number of Civilian non-institutionalized population was 237.2 million in March 2010, and is 239.00 million in March 2011.)

    The number of people who were “not in the labor force” In March 2010 was 83,264,000 (seasonally adjusted). In March 2011, it was 85,594,000 (seasonally adjusted). If you want to know how unemployment dropped a point, look no further than this statistic.

    Read more:

  18. lurker9876 says:

    All they want is that 174,000 salary with great benefits so they will fool us as much as they can. It is a great job security for them as long as they convince people to vote for them.

  19. crosspatch says:

    Which is yet another reason to end Congressional pensions.

    They can fund their own 401K/IRA just like the rest of us.

  20. MerlinOS2 says:

    Impeachment is a non starter unless he really goes off the rails. It would just take up time and effort which is better spent on other tasks.

    This whole thing is an effort pushed by Soros and Co to have us in yet another go in and at best hope for a stalemate or maybe regime change with a very uncertain future but more he wants it to fail and us to have our credibility and world standing kicked to the curb. It is the establishment of the principle of UN permission slip wars of humanitarian measures.

    He is starting his run for 2012 next week and seeking to raise a billion to make that happen.

    We have Gibbs possibly moving to Facebook to deal with that and maybe Samantha Power to Secretary of State or National Security Council and word Jamie Gorelick is on the short list to head up the FBI.

    His choices are consistent with his agenda including the anti gun Andrew Traver ,who worked with the anti gun Joyce Foundation Obama sat on the board for, to head of the ATF.