E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIn an interview with NBC's Brian Williams, President Obama didn't rule out the U.S. would give arms to the Libyan opposition.
"I'm not ruling it out," the president said. "But I'm also not ruling it in. We're still making an assessment partly about what Khaddafy's forces are going to be doing. Keep in mind, we've been at this now for nine days. And the degree to which we've degraded Khadaffy's forces in those nine days has been significant."
The president continued, "Operations to protect civilians continue to take out Khadaffy's forces, his tanks, his artillery on the ground, and that will continue for some time. And so one of the questions that we want to answer is: Do we start getting to a stage where Khadaffy's forces are sufficiently degraded, where it may not be necessary to arm opposition groups? But we're not taking anything off the table at this point."
Also in the interview, Obama commented on the end game in Libya: "What we've also done is put Khaddafy back on his heels -- at this point. In addition to maintaining a no-fly zone, protecting civilian populations, we also have political tools, diplomatic tools, sanctions, freezing his assets, all of which continue to tighten the noose. And so our expectation is that as we continue to apply steady pressure, not only militarily but also through these other means, that Khaddafy will ultimately step down."
And he discussed if the U.S. intervention in Libya applies to other countries as well. "I think it's important not to take this particular situation and then try to project some sort of Obama Doctrine that we're going to apply in a cookie-cutter fashion across the board. Each country in this region is different. Our principles remain the same. We want to make sure that governments are not attacking their own citizens. We believe in core, fundamental human rights, like freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. We want governments that are responsive to their people. And so we'll use all our tools to try to accomplish that. But Libya was a unique situation where a limited military intervention that had a strong international mandate and strong international participation could make the difference -- life or death difference -- for a lot of people."
Leave a Comment:
I'm Shocked, shocked I say!...:)
Hillary said that hours ago...
Have not heard that arming them is part of the UN resolution. Mark Murray - what you got? {have you even read the resolution Murray? Come on be honest].
Query for the Libbies: have yu had enough cowboy-ism yet?
Oh and when will that bill go out? You know the one for our acting as the Renta-cop?
And said it better on Meet the Press
Wait a minute!! Not long ago he blocked a load of old Army surplus M1 Garand rifles from WW2 from coming into the country for collectors, but now he wants to arm rebels in another country. Hypocrisy at it's best. He wants more gun control here to disarm law abiding citizens but we want to arm rebels in another country. This administration just don't get it.
Now what could possibly go wrong with that?
These are the fine fellow that chopped the black Africans to pieces with machetes. This should really facilitate that process.
Smart Power!
i know, right! It'll be just like the good old days of "contra" involvement... hopefully it ends as well as it did in Iran.
One of these days a US President will realize that it's called the Department of Defense, as in "DEFENSE!".
Indy - there ain't no O in defense.
But there is an O on Obama. And Cowboy.
Yeeeee-Haaaaaw you peace loving libbies,this is getting ridiculous!
We just changed it from "dept. of WAR"...it was just a name change...See Orwell, George...
Who would have Thought giving Arms to Al Qeada......... so they could kill more Black Africans before they start Targeting Americans Again..... Not sure why they are waiting so long to make the Decision..
You righties see Al Qeada everywhere. At least be reasonable in your dissent.
Indy,
they know they are there, Even some in the Liberal Media are reporting the Fact. When do we say NO we will not give them More Weapons ?
So do tell Indy, just who are the rebels?
No Al Qeada, just a bunch of USA loving freedom fighters eh?
So many articles today from our guys saying they really have no idea who they are or what they stand for.
But sure, and what the heck let's arm them to the teeth.
Don't know who they are and don't care either. Let'em fight their own fight.
That sure doesn't seem to be the road Obama's on, now does it?
we have been arming and financing the some members of the Taliban and AQ since we first invaded Afghanistan, nice of you to notice, but a little late to the party, like 9 years or so..
The selective outrage of the partisan is a sight to behold...
Spanky, that's why I've been bitchin' since last week. Well, actually since 2003.
Hiya Indy!
No day would be complete here @ First Read, without the usual Fox Noise 'fertilizer salesman' spreading their wares!
Wouldn't the logical question be, how MANY? 5? 10? 50?
Anyone want to take a guess? Or would you rather stick to your boogeyman 'theory'?
Howdy Feisty.
Obviously I have no problem with folks being against this action, I just wish the dissent could be thoughtful and not some knee-jerk reaction to hypothetical "boogeymen". There are legitimate reasons to be against US involvement in Libya without having to make crap up.
Sadly, it's never stopped them in the past...
They're void of critical thinking skils, all they've got left in their bag of dirty tricks is to fall back on the bullsh!t and pray no one calls them on it! ;o)
Oh how sweet Indy and Feisty are cool with giving arms to just a few from Al Qeada.
So Fiesty old gal, be a dear and tell us how many Al Qeada ould be an acceptable amount to arm.
Cause I was kinda thinking anything other than ZERO would be bad.
You obviously disagree. You too Indy? You good with anything under a 100 or so?
And what do you suppose the numbers will be next week, or the week after, you know once Obama start handing out them weapons?
Again, what could go wrong?
Spanky, what part of anything I've said leads you to believe I'm for giving any of them arms? Let me be clear in my beliefs here. I am against any and all US involvement in Libya! I think it is a terrible idea. There, I believe I've left you no ambiguity at all.
Feisty, The question is not how many are there now but how many are on the way. I am sure Iran is sending a boatload of instigators from Hamas there as we speak. We will probably see a downturn in violence in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq since Al Queda will now be sending thugs to Libya instead. Al Queda will have sacks full of money to bribe the rebels like they did in Iraq and Yemen. Your post cites a source that basically says they have no clue and yet you call it as a boogeyman theory? Remember the libs complaint that Al Queda was not in Iraq until we ousted Saddam. Any reason to think they will not be in Libya once Daffi is gone?
Yeah - I guess you threw me with your comment about hypothetical bogeymen Indy
Cause there is not a lot hypothetical -ness about Al Qeada.
Oh yeah there is also your statement that there are legitimate reasons to be in Libya. So which is it? Either there are legitimate reasons, or there is not. If there are then why would you be against involvement? Legitimate, yeah or nay.
Or were you just getting all chummy with Feisty? She is all good with Libya, and apparently war for oil [i.e. a legitimate interest].
Now insn't that right Feisty?
Spanky, reread my previous post, I said there are legitimate reasons to be "against" US involvement in Libya.
Gee I don't know - my crystal ball is in the shop for repairs...
All I'm saying is at this point we don't know for a FACT that Al Qaeda is IN Libya, and, all this chest thumping & fear mongering isn't going to change that!
It's nothing more than the dog whistle to whip up the righties...
How about everyone taking a deep breath until the facts are on the table? I realize it's a lot to ask from the shoot first and ask questions later crowd...
As someone mentioned earlier - don't bother Indy - trying to converse withlittle Spanky is comparable to trying to teach your cat fractions... lol
If you quit feeding the trolls sooner or later they'll starve...
Hope they fix your ball soon. I am not sure how we will survive without your ballful insights.
I'm starting to get that idea Feisty. It's a shame; I've had decent back and forths with some of those on the right lately. Those that actually read my posts.
There my Feisty - so quick with the insults.
So sad that all you have Feisty.
keep on keepin' on, cause we are soon to get to the budget, you know where you will need to remind us daily the Boehner is an orange weeper and all.
We are counting on you Feisty.
Feisty perhaps you can define troll for us.
I would love for you to distinguish me from you - as in I am a troll, but you are not.
Go head, what you got?
Steve, a fact is defined by a mutual agreement to discontinue debate.
These are the fine fellow that chopped the black Africans to pieces with machetes
Who would have Thought giving Arms to Al Qeada......... so they could kill more Black Africans
Two voices with the same song means talking points, so I guess this will be the pro-forma from the right...can't wait for the equally well-thought-out deflection/rebuttal from the left...
Danger - please explain the distinction between talking points and facts.
The last thing I want to continue with Libya, Iraq, or Afghanistan. Not very "right" is it?
In fact I'm pretty sure they'd want me out of the club.
ohhh...you have FACTS! That's great! How would you like to parse them?
There is casual relationship between "facts" and "truth" that is manipulated by the contending partisan media outlets to suit their chosen narrative, like debate teams and litigators do. The truth is often more nuanced than either side is able to, or frankly cares to admit.
Don't your opposites here constantly hold up their "facts"?
As to "clubs", I'm with Groucho on that topic...
Sorry Danger - I don't know anything about parsing the facts.
Black or white only.
And sadly my "opposites" don't generally hold up facts. Have you seen a lot of facts from the likes of Feisty, Bev. Drive By? How about Amy or Jody?
Mixed Bag and 3 Wolves, yeAnd of course Anna M, but we seem to be mostly on the same page for now. But we do have budget fun to look forward to.
Or is there never one correct answer in your world? Only "talking points?"
For instance did the rebels not choppy, choppy black Africans? Is that a talking point?
I tried...
which "rebels"?
where are your sources for the atrocities? I like to read...
there are probably 10's of thousands of rebels, right? Did they all commit atrocities? In every part of the country, or only some parts?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Again, complex, multiplex issues with life and death consequences often evidence incongruities in practical implementation and are therefore subject to the criticism of black and white thinkers on both sides of the political divide.
And that you do not see the similarities between you and those you named...speaks for itself...:)
To elaborate on the above; Posted this in reply to MB on the preceding thread
MB-
Honestly, (and sorry if I hurt your feelings, but trolling does seem to be apropos to your "theme", no?) when have we ever actually known or really cared who our allies ARE? We always work from looking at who they''re NOT.
How many bloodthirsty madmen have we supported and do we NOW support because they weren't COMMIES, or because they are "Allies in the WOT"?
We armed bin laden
We armed the taliban
Of course, they were "freedom fighters" then and all they had to do was want to kill soviet soldiers to gain our support.
This is called "breaking eggs to make an omelet" or the Machiavellian "the enemy of my enemy is my (default) friend.
You are too smart for me to believe that you aren't being disingenuous when you gently query the President's strategy?doctrine/rhetoric.
We have crossed the Rubicon and MuMu is a goner. You know it, I know it and believe me he does too. We will arm the "rebels" because of who they aren't and that's just the way it is. They aren't Khadaffy and that's all that matters in the moment. Just my opinion of course...
Oh my Danger. I love Nuance. I suspect my bud Anna M does too - occupational hazard.
And similarities are fun, but some are not too forthcoming with support or cites. Well escept my girl Bev, but ThinkProgress and Media Matters is a little light for my tastes.
But that's why they are fun.
As I recall the choppy-choppy article was on MSNBC, or maybe FireDogLake.
Oh and as to the last post - are these not suppose to be the smart guys? You know the Hope and the Change.
Not so much change.
dangerfield-
President Obama says his coalition is not about regime change...Libya is all about humanitarianism.
And you suggest that I'm being disengenuous?
Your analysis of the Libyan adventure is likely correct, of course.
But President Obama is too cute by half.
I prefer my Realpolitik straight up, thanks.
The troll thing?
Don't give it a second thought.
Wow,dangerfield- pulled out the Chomsky?
I was all for helping the rebels- not sure no fly was the way to go, but we are in it, now, and can accept nothing less than removing Qaddafi and his sons from planet earth. If we stop short of that outcome, Qaddafi WILL exact revenge, as he has in the past. One can only hope that Professor Obama has factored that into his theory.
I'm sure that is not quite nuanced enough for you. So be it.
No Jo,
We are in it now, as you state, but your conclusion is suspect in my mind. Given the fragility of the "coalition", what possibly makes you think that we will actually go so far as to eliminate Qaddafi? You've already got Russia claiming that the authorization from the U.N. has been exceeded, and that this is the new crusades. You've also got Turkey, who is a member of NATO, resisting attacks on Libyan ground forces, and as a member of NATO, Turkey has the ability to impede NATO's proposed takeover of the command and control of the "no-fly zone". How much longer do you think it will be before Russia brings a motion to the Security Council to put a halt to "offensive" actions, and insist that the "coalition" return to it's "humanitarian" mission of protecting civilians? Once that, or anything similar happens, the U.S. under President Obama will fold, and Qaddafi will survive, and probably thrive, given that he has the army and the mercenaries on his side. If we really want regime change, then the President better send in a suicide sniper team, they may get Qaddafi, but I doubt they would get out after the shot.
No Mr. President this is not a good idaa at all. Too much of anything or doing to much in changing situations is not a good political position to be in. The role of the US should remain limited, and the US should remain off the ground completely. Arming one side over the another complicates the situation. If there is no type of genocide occuring. The US must let political, social, economic, diplomatic, and military situations take their natural paths. Iraq and Afganistan should have taught our nation lessons to learn from. These lessons are as follows. 1. We need to know our limitations. 2. We need to stay true to our values of humanity. 3. Every nation must decide its own destiny. 4. Every nation has protests by it people however, a genocide is a very different humanitarian story completely. Remember Mr. President to do keep all political policy practical, and with a positive goal.
Perhaps I misunderstood last night but I thought President said NO troops on the ground. If you type in Camp Lejeune, Libya, you read that thousands of troops from Camp Lejeune,Cherry point and New River are deploying to waters off Libya. If I had a child in the Marines I would not have a real warm and fuzzy feeling right now. Is there anyone who will tell what is going on straight up?
sorry, national security won't allow it and obama and company are winging it.
Wow the righties are really whipped up over this one. All three of them.. I wonder are they on the GOP Payroll? They sure have the soundbites and catch phrases down pat.
Feisty Redhead,stay feisty...
Always & Forever Navy! ;o)
3 clowns aren't going to bring me down! lol
Darkness falls across the land, and the tea bagging idiots are playing their hands!
Gahdafi was directly responsible for the Lockerby bombing. He has openly supported several terrorist groups, He has directly participated in acts of violence against Americans around the world. So 'Spanky and Your Gang' I take it you seem to think that was okay. I support the rebels for now, and if they turn out as bad as the Col. then we will just have to fix that later. I don't think that is the case. One of the 'rebels " is one of our economics professors from UW and he is actually a pretty straight up guy. You trolls are just amazing with the crap you spout. Do you ever get a twinge of concience?
navy - of course we have a conscience and we are reveling in the political turnabout for the obama war supporters here on FR and the bush2 war detractors on FR. Amusing about their constant spin, unfortunately nothing amusing about death.
It has been years (if ever) that the US has had any type of viable mideast foreign policy other than what was brokered with regards to the state of Israel and their neighbors.
I won't miss qaddafi or his regime. As for the rebels, we are buying a pig in a poke. As for fixing things latter, I am sure we will have to. My conscience is clear and I sleep very well at night.
You can go back to your trolling.
 BTW the cost of iraq and afghanistan is between 2 and 3 trillion dollars. you would have to be truly niave to believe that there are no al qaida mixed in with these" rebel freedom fighters". we have already spent close to one billion in munitions in the libya conflict. now please remember that before bin laden was a bad guy, he was one of our "freedom fighters". we armed him and his merry band. these are the facts folks and I cannot support these actions, and the arrogance of obama,gibbs and company has cost us the house, mass. senate seat, penn. senate seat, and others. he had all the potential in the world but he catered to big business instead of helping out joe middle class. even liberals are now calling this bush's third term.
First it's Khaddafy,
And next it's Khadaffy.
Once more Khaddafy,
Then back to Khadaffy.
Let's spell the whole name off.
Listen up people; the manufacture and sale of weapons is big business, and chances are, weapons makers could be part of your 401k.
It's all about oil, oil, and more oil ! Why don't politicians just say so? Left, right , I'm sick of them all. Give them weapons, just not good ones. They might one day use them (GASP!) against us ! Anyone got a sling-shot laying around?
The military action is not initiated by U.S. of A. and it is quite different from the previous administrations.
It is neither provoked by any terrorist attacks nor by any invading our foreign interests.
But, it is the humanitarian mission for the people are fighting for the universal basic human rights for which nations have been overlooked. And, now, people are crying out and are willing to fight for their human rights and rights for the next generations. And, they need humanitarian aids, such as arms for protecting themselves.
The military action is more pro-democratic reform of government and it is going to lead a big change of the political climates, such as women rights. And, it is going to be pro-education, pro-environmental, and pro-technologies.
It is also going to change the stagnant regimes for they have been for so long of corruption and suppression of human rights.
It is glad that the people have finally crying out for we may never know what it is really going in those nations. We may not be able to help all; but, we can help as we can. And, it is a good investment for our nation and the other nations.
Billie - You got to be kidding. pro-education, pro-environmental, and pro-technologies - how about pro-bullsh*t. BTY how is your brother - the bleading heart idiot Jimmy C?
As long as they are still on board American vessels no boots on the ground is still in effect. If they really want to get rid of Daffy supply their best marksman with a spotter and a Barrett.
Obama will give them arms or alms.
I'd just like to say Mr. Obama is right track. History tells us that no fly zones work in Civil wars. Look hardly any one died in Iraq after the "no fly zone". In fact look at the American Civil War barley any casualties of course that no fly zone was more the result of no air planes being invented yet. If you want to stop innocents being killed in civil wars it does not take troops on the ground.... Give this man some credit he won the Nobel Peace Prize for God's Sake! Forget all those reports of calls for Suicide Bombers, IED builders etc. None of that will happen in Libya because there is a "No Fly Zone"..... Get it? Got it? Good......... :)~
You should check the news every day. Then avoid drawing conclusions before this "thing" is over. Also it seems you know very little on how a war is fought and ultimately won. Problem is, Obama doesn't know much either.
Hot Air: Obamateurism of the Day
Off hand I 'd say it's a sneaky attempt to get the NRA vote. How canr Republicans be agaist giving people guns to defend their liberties? Staight out of theNRA playbook if you ask me.
I can just hear it in the campaign "And I helped the Rebels help themselves by giving them guns to defend themselves against a dictator who promised no mercy. I didn't give them a handout..I gave them a hand up..up to fredom"
Karl Rove's gonna go bannas because Obama is taking away Iis best lines and using them against him.
I can't wait for the campaign to begin.
Obama as Dick Cheney: "We don't have to wait for the musrhr oom Cloud..we already have radioactive material in the water and in the air...
Obama on global warming.."our opponent don't believe in global warming..With radioactive materials That last thousand of years..unless we end pollution..radioactive polluti on will end us. Radioactive materials are veryhot.."
Our oponents are very dumb.
Get ready to revise your dictionary. The meaning of "Humanitarian" now included arming rebels to kill people. Next will come advisors to train the rebels on the use of the weapons. Where is Yogi Berra when you need him. This Obama guy evidently needs to touch fire to know it burns. Good speeches, I guess he can read, but not very bright
LBJ lives !!!
First the arms, then the advisers, then the troups, then the crazy hippies at Kent State
What we need is a naval action to close the coastal roads. Particularily after the green force commits reserves to the east. Then let the rebels chew them to pieces: Patton would approve...
And Obama had congressional approval for all his actions weeks before he used them.
-morbas-
There is no freakin' way we need to arm those people. Yes, I believe in freedom for all, but you must earn freedom. You can't respect something that is just handed to you, earn it. If that is the case, then me and a sh!tload of Americans need to be armed to fight off the tyranny of our own countrymen who wish to disban the US Constitution. Give us some guns and I'll meet you all on the grassy knoll.
Spanky bite my ass Boyoh how's that for a reasoned response. You do not deserve a reasoned response you damn imbecile. Young men who bought their own weapons and do not know how to load them, Shopkeepers armed with knives, men with plastic guns and you support Gahdaffy. You should be tied up and taken to Tripoli and dropped from a plane if you live too bad. How is that for how liberals feel?? No damn political correctness no punches pulled you are an ass a total ass and that is that. You are so ignorant as to support an imbecile who holds an elected position in Congress and yet does not know how a bill becomes a law and he is one of your idols you damn freak. You and Canter and people like you are what is wrong with this country and more and more are becoming aware of it.