Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

"The intervention was led by the UK and France - and in his interview, Mr Obama reflects on "what went wrong", saying: "There's room for criticism, because I had more faith in the Europeans, given Libya's proximity, being invested in the follow-up."

Mr Cameron, he said, became "distracted by a range of other things". He also criticised former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, saying he had tried to claim the spotlight.
The former French president, he said, "wanted to trumpet the flights he was taking in the air campaign, despite the fact that we had wiped out all the air defences and essentially set up the entire infrastructure" for the intervention.

President Obama said the intervention "averted large-scale civilian casualties (and) prevented what almost surely would have been a prolonged and bloody civil conflict". But he added: "And despite all that, Libya is a mess."

He also criticised what he called "free riders" in the interview, saying European and Gulf countries were calling for action against Gaddafi, adding: "But what has been a habit over the last several decades in these circumstances is people pushing us to act but then showing an unwillingness to put any skin in the game."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35777274



BTW, it turns out, the reports of Gaddafi murdering and slaughtering his people were false...a story planted by our, "allies," the rebels, to get us involved.

So what is Obama saying? "Hey, we took out their defenses, bombed their armed forces, and supplied weapons to the rebels, who then used them to open up a civil war with tens of thousands of casualties, and opened up the spigot of refugees, but it is Europe's fault that things didn't go well?"

And WTF does Obama mean that our actions prevented civilian casualties and a long drawn out conflict? the civil war has been going on for 5 years...with no end in sight. Is Obomba getting any updates on Libya these days?

Wow.

The Great Uniter

Repairing damaged relationships with our allies.

Europe. I'm not sure it matters what we do, they're going to be inclined to not like us. Now granted, they'll ask for our help whenever they need a military solution, but after that they won't like us again.

GannonFan wrote:Europe. I'm not sure it matters what we do, they're going to be inclined to not like us. Now granted, they'll ask for our help whenever they need a military solution, but after that they won't like us again.

Those guys would have German as a national language today if it hadn't been for us.

I don't really care if Europe likes us. Only uberliberal insecure clowns would care what Europe thinks about us. Those same people probably spend too much time looking into a mirror and wondering if people will like them today...or perhaps they won't like their outfit.

The funnier thing is that Obama pretty much admitted that we went into Benghazi...I mean, Libya, without any type of plan at all. Bomb the crap out of their defenses...arm the rebels...kill Ghaddafi...and then hope someone else manages the project.

Seriously...think about that. THAT is Obomba's foreign policy?

Hey, let's attack, based upon some damned shady information, and then sit back and watch the power vacuum get filled with...uh, what every single power vacuum gets filled with. Crap. Civil war. Deaths. And then Obama has the balls to say that it could have been worse...that a long civil war, and casualties, could have happened if we had not bombed the crap out of Libya. WHAT?

Who could not have predicted this?

Libya is a complete foreign policy disaster. It was totally unnecessary.

And Obama's comments? It is as if Obama isn't watching the news or getting any briefings. Hello...there is a civil war...and has been for 5 years. And a refugee tsunami.

And where is the media criticizing Obama and Hillary for their roles in this foolishness?

Obama lied and people died.

89Hen wrote:Obama lied and people died.

Funny how he follows the Bush playbook step by step, and liberals triumphantly say how he defends the oppressed and brings freedom all over the world.

DSUrocks07 wrote:

89Hen wrote:Obama lied and people died.

Funny how he follows the Bush playbook step by step, and liberals triumphantly say how he defends the oppressed and brings freedom all over the world.

Who's saying that..?
I mostly hear Liberals complain about the same things noted in this thread
Every Liberal I know is pissed off at the Obama Military and Global International bungling



Who are these Liberals you're talking about..?

Chizzang wrote:

DSUrocks07 wrote: Funny how he follows the Bush playbook step by step, and liberals triumphantly say how he defends the oppressed and brings freedom all over the world.

Who's saying that..?
I mostly hear Liberals complain about the same things noted in this thread
Every Liberal I know is pissed off at the Obama Military and Global International bungling



Who are these Liberals you're talking about..?

Those who use the but Bush did it too excuse?

Where are the massive protests? The antiwar crowd has been painfully silent the last 7+ years

DSUrocks07 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:

Who's saying that..?
I mostly hear Liberals complain about the same things noted in this thread
Every Liberal I know is pissed off at the Obama Military and Global International bungling



Who are these Liberals you're talking about..?

Those who use the but Bush did it too excuse?

Where are the massive protests? The antiwar crowd has been painfully silent the last 7+ years

So wait...
Is it silence from the Left you're complaining about..?
I'll give you an opportunity to explain exactly what's bugging you

1) Obama support from Liberals in foreign affairs
2) Silence from Liberals regarding foreign affairs
3) Other...

Chizzang wrote: Who are these Liberals you're talking about..?

Chizzang wrote:

DSUrocks07 wrote: Funny how he follows the Bush playbook step by step, and liberals triumphantly say how he defends the oppressed and brings freedom all over the world.

Who's saying that..?
I mostly hear Liberals complain about the same things noted in this thread
Every Liberal I know is pissed off at the Obama Military and Global International bungling



Who are these Liberals you're talking about..?

What in the fuck?

Cluck U wrote:"The intervention was led by the UK and France - and in his interview, Mr Obama reflects on "what went wrong", saying: "There's room for criticism, because I had more faith in the Europeans, given Libya's proximity, being invested in the follow-up."

Mr Cameron, he said, became "distracted by a range of other things". He also criticised former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, saying he had tried to claim the spotlight.
The former French president, he said, "wanted to trumpet the flights he was taking in the air campaign, despite the fact that we had wiped out all the air defences and essentially set up the entire infrastructure" for the intervention.

President Obama said the intervention "averted large-scale civilian casualties (and) prevented what almost surely would have been a prolonged and bloody civil conflict". But he added: "And despite all that, Libya is a mess."

He also criticised what he called "free riders" in the interview, saying European and Gulf countries were calling for action against Gaddafi, adding: "But what has been a habit over the last several decades in these circumstances is people pushing us to act but then showing an unwillingness to put any skin in the game."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35777274



BTW, it turns out, the reports of Gaddafi murdering and slaughtering his people were false...a story planted by our, "allies," the rebels, to get us involved.

So what is Obama saying? "Hey, we took out their defenses, bombed their armed forces, and supplied weapons to the rebels, who then used them to open up a civil war with tens of thousands of casualties, and opened up the spigot of refugees, but it is Europe's fault that things didn't go well?"

And WTF does Obama mean that our actions prevented civilian casualties and a long drawn out conflict? the civil war has been going on for 5 years...with no end in sight. Is Obomba getting any updates on Libya these days?

Wow.

Holy cow

There is some truly High Delusion going on here

for the next 30 years as Libya burns we will slowly be treated to this kind of Revisionism to the point that we were never really involved in Libya

well except Hillary
Hillary was involved in Libya

"we came we saw he Died"- Paul Wolfowi.... er I mean Hillary Clinton


BTW Clitz did I do that right with the Emphatic Capitalization

andy7171 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:

Who's saying that..?
I mostly hear Liberals complain about the same things noted in this thread
Every Liberal I know is pissed off at the Obama Military and Global International bungling



Who are these Liberals you're talking about..?

What in the fuck?

"Social movements (re: war protesting) collapse under Democrats".

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t--yF3GlzO0[/youtube]

Democrats aren't necessarily liberals. I can't think of a single liberal that supports Obama's war policies either. And liberal media like TYT and the Intercept, journalists like Jeremy Scahill, have been quite vocal in their criticism of it.

Bernie Sanders has already won 6 states and pretty much tied in two others and I guarantee you none of that support sees eye to eye with Obama's military policies.

kalm wrote:

andy7171 wrote: What in the fuck?

"Social movements (re: war protesting) collapse under Democrats".

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t--yF3GlzO0[/youtube]

Democrats aren't necessarily liberals. I can't think of a single liberal that supports Obama's war policies either. And liberal media like TYT and the Intercept, journalists like Jeremy Scahill, have been quite vocal in their criticism of it.

Bernie Sanders has already won 6 states and pretty much tied in two others and I guarantee you none of that support sees eye to eye with Obama's military policies.

Bernie doesn't have a chance in hell of winning the nomination. Should Hillary get indicted, which is extremely doubtful, Biden is going to jump in and be the next POTUS.

Also. Can you pronounce that guys name for me?

andy7171 wrote:

kalm wrote:
"Social movements (re: war protesting) collapse under Democrats".

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t--yF3GlzO0[/youtube]

Democrats aren't necessarily liberals. I can't think of a single liberal that supports Obama's war policies either. And liberal media like TYT and the Intercept, journalists like Jeremy Scahill, have been quite vocal in their criticism of it.

Bernie Sanders has already won 6 states and pretty much tied in two others and I guarantee you none of that support sees eye to eye with Obama's military policies.

Bernie doesn't have a chance in hell of winning the nomination. Should Hillary get indicted, which is extremely doubtful, Biden is going to jump in and be the next POTUS.

I didn't say he would, but his success already, running as a Democratic Socialist, shows a decent amount of establishment fatigue and a rejection of neo-con/neo-liberal (whatever we're calling it these days) foreign policy.

Just trying to help you understand.

andy7171 wrote: Bernie doesn't have a chance in hell of winning the nomination. Should Hillary get indicted, which is extremely doubtful, Biden is going to jump in and be the next POTUS.

Biden?

JFC, andy...there is NO WAY Biden gets elected. All they have to do is roll tape on his racist/idiotic rants and he'd be toast. 7-11s are all owned by Pakistanis? Fight the Taliban cowards like a man, hand to hand, mano-a-mano?