Another Obama War

[Free]

Another Obama War

Lew Rockwell
March 19, 2011

Following the US-lobbied UN authorization of military murder in Libya, the death-dealing regime of Colonel Gaddafi said immediately that it would stop all killing. That put Obama’s war on hold, for a little while. The crazy Colonel has learned a thing or two about American foreign policy. If you pretend to favor the stated goals of the empire and comply with its stated dictates, you can otherwise do what every government in the world is structured to do: stay in power at all costs.

Gaddafi learned this lesson about a decade ago, when, with much fanfare, he announced that he would stop his nuclear weapons program and join the war on terror. The US then decided to rank him and his regime among the world’s good guys, and proceeded to hold him up as an example of wise statesmanship. Then he proceeded to dig in more deeply and tighten his despotic control over his citizens, all with the implied blessing of the US.

But this time it may not work. For weeks, American officials have been decrying Gaddafi’s bloody attacks on his people, but does the US really have a problem with dictatorship of his sort? This fact is unknown to Americans, but in the Middle East, and in Arab nations in particular, American commercial interests are regarded as a force for liberation but not the US government. The US has been the key to the power of Middle East dictatorships for decades, among which are Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Yemen. I leave aside the killing of hundreds of thousands of Iaqi civilians to liberate them.

So it is something of a joke that the US would push a war against Libya in order to save that country from dictatorship. More likely, the real issue here is the same one that inspired the wars against Iraq: the ownership and control of the oil. And even if freedom were the driving motivation, when in modern history has war ever actually brought that to people? All war by nation states today ends in massive civilian deaths, destruction of infrastructure, political upheaval without end (see Afghanistan and Iraq), vast expense, and bitterness all around.

War will not achieve its claimed objective. It might even end up entrenching Gaddafi’s power. But let’s say that he ends up dead, like Saddam Hussein. What then? The new government will be handpicked by the victor, and never gain any credibility, just as in Iraq. People resent foreign conquerors even more than local despots, and this resentment is not a good foundation for a future of liberty.

President Obama probably looks at the prospect of war rather lustily, just as Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, et al. did before him. But this time, there is a problem. The US simply cannot afford to be seen as attacking yet another Muslim country, though that is what it is doing, at a time when all the world knows that US foreign policy is primarily based on whipping up anti-Islamic feelings the world over, and taking over the oil.

For this reason, the Obama administration must seek the cover of the UN and the cooperation of other Arab states. England and France have been reliable, but not Germany and not other Arab states, so the operation could end up more tricky than he initially supposed.

Let’s just pretend for a moment that the US government really does want to free the people of Libya from a wicked man. What is the right way to go about it? There is the assassination option, which I oppose but which would nonetheless be a much better choice than war. What of the US’s legendary CIA hitmen that can take down anyone on the planet following a few orders from on high? Where are they now?

Recall that in the last days before the last war on Iraq, a spokesman for Saddam actually did propose a duel between Bush or Cheney and Saddam or his vice president. It was not an unserious suggestion. This would have been a much better option for both Iraq and America, but then the government doesn’t really get what it wants out of war, which is a chance to blow things up, spend gobs of money, whip up the population in war frenzy, and inspire another bout of nationalistic hysteria that helps consolidate power for the war-making regime.

Is it possible to both oppose Gaddafi and oppose a war on Gaddafi? Absolutely. This is a position that all Americans should adopt. In the same way, it is possible to oppose the Obama administration but also oppose having a foreign army oust him in order to liberate us.

In the early days of the protests in Libya against Gaddafi, the protesters help up signs opposing any foreign intervention. This is still the right approach. There should be no war, no blockades, no impositions of a “no-fly zone,” or anything else. The US has been a supporter and backer of Gaddafi for a decade. That damage is already done. Going to war would only compound it.

For the sake of freedom and human rights, we must say no to war. We must also say no to all forms of foreign intervention that support dictatorships until they become too politically embarrassing to Washington, D.C.

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., former editorial assistant to Ludwig von Mises and congressional chief of staff to Ron Paul, is founder and chairman of the Mises Institute, executor for the estate of Murray N. Rothbard, and editor of LewRockwell.com.


http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/another-obama-war173.html

[Free]

King Hypocrite Obama: There Will be Blood in Libya

Kurt Nimmo
March 19, 2011

On Friday, the teleprompter reader in chief and NCAA basketball picker Obama bellied up to the podium in the East Room of the White House and read his script. He said Libyan thug Moammar Gadhafi has to stop attacking civilians or face military retaliation.

“Left unchecked, we have every reason to believe that Gadhafi would commit atrocities against his people. Many thousands could die. A humanitarian crisis would ensue. The entire region could be destabilized, endangering many of our allies and partners,” Obama read from the teleprompter.

“These terms are not subject to negotiation,” said Barry, sounding like a Mafia don in a back room meeting between crime families. “If Gadhafi does not comply with the resolution, the international community will impose consequences, and the resolution will be enforced through military action.”

In other words, there will be blood.

Meanwhile, the wife of the man who bombed civilians in Serbia and Iraq with depleted uranium said nothing short of a “decision by Colonel Gadhafi to leave” will prevent cruise missiles from raining down on Libya. The Voice of America – otherwise known as the voice of the U.S. government and the CIA – said Madame Clinton was skeptical of any attempt by Gadhafi and crew to avoid shock and awe.

Translation: the Europeans and their quisling Arab partners will attack Libya no matter what its thug leader in designer Bedouin clothes does.

Obama’s pretend concern for Libyan civilians is especially disgusting considering his inheritance of the neocon campaign to slaughter Iraqi and Afghan civilians.

Barry Obama oversaw the expansion of this organized serial murder effort aimed at the tribal areas of Pakistan where we are told the intelligence asset al-Qaeda has settled (as the showtime terror group invariably settles in places on the bombing schedule).

In an absurd and completely transparent half-ass effort to mask the truth about the Pentagon’s killing sprees, the United Nations claimed that only 80 Afghan civilians were killed last year in U.S. military operations in Afghanistan.

In fact, 2010 was the deadliest year to date for civilians in the Afghan “war” with 2,777 killed, a figure that represents a 15 percent jump in the death toll over the previous year. Large numbers of children and women were among the dead — 1,175 and 555 respectively, the AFP reported last week.

In an especially embarrassing incident, nine young boys were killed recently while out collecting firewood in an air strike in eastern Afghanistan. U.S. installed president Hamid Karzai rejected a rare public apology in response to the incident from General David Petraeus. Bush era retread and current Defense Secretary Robert Gates also said he was sorry during a visit to the country.

In an ongoing nightmare for the people of Pakistan that will apparently not end until the U.S. empire collapses – an event also on the itinerary of the globalists – commander in chief and head basketball fan Obama dispatched drones this week that killed 44 people.

An unmanned aircraft fired four missiles at dozens of tribesmen, who were meeting to settle a dispute over hills containing reserves of chromite, in the Datta Khel area of North Waziristan district on Thursday. At least 47 people were wounded, according to Deutsche Presse-Agentur.

Last year it was estimated that for every CIA patsy-jihadist killed by Lockheed Martin Hellfire missile, 140 innocent Pakistanis were slaughtered. Over 90 per cent of those killed in the deadly missile strikes were civilians, Pakistani officials claim.

Soon after assuming office, Barry Obama put “yes we can” to work killing Pakistani children. Missiles fired from CIA drones killed at least 15 people inside Pakistan on January 23, 2009. The strikes came a mere day after Obama appointed the late Richard Holbrooke – a Bilderberger and globalist mucky-muck with experience as a functionary in Clinton’s killing spree in Serbia over a decade ago – as a special envoy for the region.

It is said Obama is very enthusiastic about killing Pakistan tribesmen and their women and children. Mass murder has become an everyday event in North and South Waziristan along the “troubled” – or maybe that should be cratered and grave strewn – Afghan border.

No doubt he will also be enthusiastic about killing average Libyans. The twin invasions of Iraq by Bush Senior and his son specifically targeted civilians. Bush I and II were the frontmen for an effort to reduce Iraq to a preindustrial condition and that mission was accomplished, as Bush the Lesser announced from the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln.

Now it is Libya’s turn as the globalists crank up the heat under the fake rubric of humanitarianism.

http://www.infowars.com/king-hypocrite- ... -in-libya/