"The Libya Gamble"

 

Two part series.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/hillary-clinton-libya.html?_r=1

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/libya-isis-hillary-clinton.html

Excerpts:

 

The Times interviewed more than 50 American, Libyan and European officials, including many of the principal actors. Virtually all agreed to comment on the record. They expressed regret, frustration and in some cases bewilderment about what went wrong and what might have been done differently.

...

 

Now Libya, with a population smaller than that of Tennessee, poses an outsize security threat to the region and beyond, calling into question whether the intervention prevented a humanitarian catastrophe or merely helped create one of a different kind.

 

...

Some senior intelligence officials had deep misgivings about what would happen if Colonel Qaddafi lost control. In recent years, the Libyan dictator had begun aiding the United States in its fight against Al Qaeda in North Africa.

“He was a thug in a dangerous neighborhood,” said Michael T. Flynn, a retired Army lieutenant general who headed the Defense Intelligence Agency at the time. “But he was keeping order.”

 

...

“I think at one point I said, ‘Can I finish the two wars I’m already in before you guys go looking for a third one?’” Mr. Gates recalled. Colonel Qaddafi, he said, “was not a threat to us anywhere. He was a threat to his own people, and that was about it.”

 

...

 

President Obama ultimately took her side, according to the administration officials who described the debate. After he signed a secret document called a presidential finding, approving a covert operation, a list of approved weaponry was drawn up. The shipments arranged by the United States and other Western countries generally arrived through the port of Benghazi and airports in eastern Libya, a Libyan rebel commander said.

“Humvees, counterbattery radar, TOW missiles was the highest end we talked about,” one State Department official recalled. “We were definitely giving them lethal assistance. We’d crossed that line.”

 

 

I think we have seen enough examples to start recognizing a pattern. Removing a bad guy is not always a good thing in the grand scheme of things.

Hillary should be wrapped in a bow and sent to Libya to be drug down the street and stoned to death.

She is a war criminal and traitor.

I think we have seen enough examples to start recognizing a pattern. Removing a bad guy is not always a good thing in the grand scheme of things.

 

Remove the evil dictators and adjust, or let dictators continue to rule as they wish and kill their own people as they wish.

 

I'll go with option A.

Remove the evil dictators and adjust, or let dictators continue to rule as they wish and kill their own people as they wish.

 

I'll go with option A.

 

So you're in agreement with Secretary Clinton that he needed to be removed but that the ultimate the execution of that plan was flawed?

So you're in agreement with Secretary Clinton that he needed to be removed but that the ultimate the execution of that plan was flawed?

 

Every dictator from Hitler to Saddam had to go. However, the left wing plan of pretending ISIS wasn't a threat proved to be a major mistake when removing leaders in the region.

Remove the evil dictators and adjust, or let dictators continue to rule as they wish and kill their own people as they wish.

 

I'll go with option A.

 

Why do dictators kill 'their own people'? A - they are threat to the dictator.

 

Why are they a threat? Because they are armed and taking up rebellion.

 

Why are they are armed? Because foreign governments gave them arms.

 

Gaddafi was far more of an economic threat instead of a military threat. So he had to go one way or the other.

Hillary should be wrapped in a bow and sent to Libya to be drug down the street and stoned to death.

She is a war criminal and traitor.

 

:ohbrother:

 

H-Y-P-E-R-B-O-L-E