Amid a solid stream of bad news for President Obama comes the unwelcome revelation that he has now won the war in Libya, routing despised international despot and Lockerbie terrorist Moammar Gaddafi and allowing the Libyan people a chance to determine their own future while sustaining no American casualties and spending a minimum of American dollars.
"An unqualified disaster," was a Republican Party spokesman's assessment of America's impending low-cost military victory on behalf of freedom-seeking Libyans. "More proof that Obama doesn't believe in American exceptionalism. He actually waited until the Libyans were screaming for military assistance before mobilizing NATO. Waiting until people begged for help to keep a heartless dictator from murdering them, instead of assuming they loved the US automatically and sending in the tanks without being invited, clearly shows how weak America has become under this President.
"If Obama really believed in America, he would have sent troops in without being asked, like we did in Iraq, and expected people to throw flowers at them. Of course in Iraq they started an eight-year insurgency instead, but that was their idea, not ours. What Obama did shows a total lack of American hubris, and Americans love their hubris. Besides, is anybody throwing flowers yet?"
It's tough to throw flowers at airplanes. Isn't the fact that Gaddafi is spider-hole shopping in the Libyan desert a victory for America?
"Sure, if you just count the fact that his oppressive regime was defeated handily by the US and our allies. But let's look at the big picture. Not a single American life was lost in the Libyan conflict, just like that last war the Democrats had, in Kosovo. Nobody even remembers that one. Running a war without a lot of bloody miscalculation means it's over before the next election. We Republicans learned our lesson there after Bush Sr. beat Saddam Hussein like a gong and lost the election anyway. No more short wars, says the GOP. Too bad those Dems won't learn the lessons of history."
Wasn't the fact that Obama didn't have to throw together a makeshift "coalition of the willing" to conceal the fact that America was essentially going it alone, and used an existing military alliance, NATO, whose French and British services performed most of the actual combat sorties, in a clear demonstration of internationalism, a diplomatic and military triumph?
"What have you been inhaling? Americans hate internationalism, especially when it involves helping the French to their first undisputed military victory since the eighteenth century. America doesn't need anybody's help to win wars. Obama will pay for not letting us crush Gaddafi on our own come 2012."
Are you sure the American voters will completely forget Obama has the scalps of both Gaddafi and bin Laden hanging from his belt in 2012?
"Oh, he'll probably try to remind them. Maybe he can stand on an aircraft carrier. How do you say 'Mission Accomplished' in French?"
"An unqualified disaster," was a Republican Party spokesman's assessment of America's impending low-cost military victory on behalf of freedom-seeking Libyans. "More proof that Obama doesn't believe in American exceptionalism. He actually waited until the Libyans were screaming for military assistance before mobilizing NATO. Waiting until people begged for help to keep a heartless dictator from murdering them, instead of assuming they loved the US automatically and sending in the tanks without being invited, clearly shows how weak America has become under this President.
"If Obama really believed in America, he would have sent troops in without being asked, like we did in Iraq, and expected people to throw flowers at them. Of course in Iraq they started an eight-year insurgency instead, but that was their idea, not ours. What Obama did shows a total lack of American hubris, and Americans love their hubris. Besides, is anybody throwing flowers yet?"
It's tough to throw flowers at airplanes. Isn't the fact that Gaddafi is spider-hole shopping in the Libyan desert a victory for America?
"Sure, if you just count the fact that his oppressive regime was defeated handily by the US and our allies. But let's look at the big picture. Not a single American life was lost in the Libyan conflict, just like that last war the Democrats had, in Kosovo. Nobody even remembers that one. Running a war without a lot of bloody miscalculation means it's over before the next election. We Republicans learned our lesson there after Bush Sr. beat Saddam Hussein like a gong and lost the election anyway. No more short wars, says the GOP. Too bad those Dems won't learn the lessons of history."
Wasn't the fact that Obama didn't have to throw together a makeshift "coalition of the willing" to conceal the fact that America was essentially going it alone, and used an existing military alliance, NATO, whose French and British services performed most of the actual combat sorties, in a clear demonstration of internationalism, a diplomatic and military triumph?
"What have you been inhaling? Americans hate internationalism, especially when it involves helping the French to their first undisputed military victory since the eighteenth century. America doesn't need anybody's help to win wars. Obama will pay for not letting us crush Gaddafi on our own come 2012."
Are you sure the American voters will completely forget Obama has the scalps of both Gaddafi and bin Laden hanging from his belt in 2012?
"Oh, he'll probably try to remind them. Maybe he can stand on an aircraft carrier. How do you say 'Mission Accomplished' in French?"
RSS Feed
