WHERE, OH WHERE, HAS MISS LIBYA GONE…..(sung to the tune of Where, Oh Where Has My Little Dog Gone…accompanied by the mournful note of baying hounds in the background).
Barry Obama can’t win for losing, folks, just a few weeks ago, the MSM along with the Democrats who visualized side implications for ‘Obama 2012’, were semi-orgasmic when Barry unleashed those tomahawks upon Tripoli and parts thereabouts. The boy president intended the world at large to know that he could get tough when provoked by dire presentations of ‘humanitarian’ bloodbaths.
We shot off approximately $112 million of those missiles then, after we shot the load, pretended to step aside for NATO to continue the rape. NATO have some 195 aircraft at their disposal. Since March 31, its aircraft have flown 1,721 sorties, including 713 intended as “strike mission”. Yesterday, 154 sorties were made, including 70 strike sorties. 300 sorties since Saturday have destroyed 49 tanks.
18 vessels are patrolling the Mediterranean to enforce the arms embargo. Since the beginning of the arms embargo, a total of 240 vessels were hailed and 6 were boarded. Folks, I’ll give your three guesses whom is bearing the brunt of these costs.
All the experts assured the taxpayers that this incursion would cost little.
Rear Admiral Joseph Mulloy told trade publication Inside the Navy on March 21, “The incremental cost of use of the Navy and Marine Corps is low, because we’re already funded and we are trained and worked up.” He went on, “We don’t have to pay extra to be there.” As a result of such fiscal reassurances, Congress has focused mainly on the goals of the operation and what precedents military action might create, rather than the cost.
However, at a time when the federal government is borrowing about $4 billion per day from lenders like China, it might be worthwhile to focus some thought on what Admiral Mulloy was really saying. He didn’t say Libya was cheap, he said most of the bill had already been paid. And therein lies the crux of a fiscal dilemma that politicians and policymakers will face as they struggle to reduce the biggest budget deficit in the history of the world. Can America continue to sustain the kind of global military posture that enables it to simultaneously execute a no-fly zone in Libya, a counter-insurgency campaign in Afghanistan, disaster relief in Japan, and a host of other operations from the Balkans to the Persian Gulf to the Horn of Africa? While its European allies seem hard-pressed to cope with a modest military challenge on their own doorstep, America has embraced a global role that requires its forces to be pretty much everywhere there is a threat of instability. So what looks like an inexpensive military operation in Libya is actually costing taxpayers about $2 billion per day, because that’s what the Pentagon and other security agencies of the federal government spend to maintain a posture that allows the military to go anywhere and do anything on short notice.
The anchors on the Sunday talk shows exhibited their best ‘red-faced and breathless’ caricatures as they expounded upon that side of Obama that we didn’t know existed. Not everyone liked what they saw, though, particularly some Democrats and other notable liberals. Reps. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), Donna Edwards (Md.), Mike Capuano (Mass.), Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Maxine Waters (Calif.), Rob Andrews (N.J.), Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas), Barbara Lee (Calif.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.) “all strongly raised objections to the constitutionality of the president’s actions” during that call, said two Democratic lawmakers who took part. Old Dennis K was ready to impeach his man in the White House, but as usual Nancy P was , as ever, ready to kiss Obama’s behind when he needed it.
Even Barry’s man in the Pentagon stated on television that Libya posed no threat to the US and was of “no vital interest”, unfortunately his handler of the day happened to be Hillary Clinton and she shut him up before he could do further damage.
Barry had assured us all that Libya was not about a ‘regime change’, it was nothing more than a first strike to prevent Khadafy from going to door-to-door and killing the ‘civilians’ of Libya and creating that bloodbath the administration feared. What he neglected to note is that the MSM disagreed and put out the opinion that the ONLY way this operation will succeed is for “Khadafy to go.”
Well, folks, as of April 11, 2011, the ‘red-faced and breathless’ has dissipated from the MSM regarding Libya. Every ‘report’ coming out of Libya conflicts with the last, but the silence and coolness from the MSM is telling. “Let the Khadafy must go” refrain fade away, they say…focus on Obama 2012, and the budget fights, and maybe people will forget.
Khadafy ain’t going nowhere…..and I keep hearing in my head, “Money”, by Pink Floyd, with the cash registers baying in the background….
Steve,
Money is certainly tight and most certainly matters… But squandering our hard won military prestige in this manner while risking the blood of our service men and women in such a feckless manner concerns me far more.
As the Diplomad notes:
The Romans banished those failed in command of the Legions. Perhaps we should revive the tradition.
Rodney,
‘Banish’…..a most excellent idea.
Esdraelon: Your article is in the vanguard of articles that will question the wisdom and common sense of this man who has control of the greatest military in the world. The American public is now beginning to realize that popularity and meaningless platitudes are hardly qualifications for election to the presidency; unfortunately, this experience has been incredibly expensive, both in monetary terms and in international prestige.
The America of sloth and entitlement is an America doomed to failure; although, there are many politicians who are willing to ride the sentiments of entitlement straight to the gates of Hell and there is a large segment of America that feels entitled to basics of existence and even affluence because they are alive and still breathing. While they contribute nothing to society other than spending the free government money they are given, as Pelosi so in-graciously pointed out to us in her explanation of why the welfare state was good for the economy.
The Obama presidency is only an extension of the Welfare-Nanny State of governance. There are no decisions that are critical to the United States only decisions that advance the image of Obama; unfortunately, a man of such inferior foresight and with such sycophants for advisors cannot think these small trivial matters like war or kinetic military Bull Manure through to a logical conclusion. Therefore military adventurism becomes mere Vanity War meant to increase the Obama Myth; hopefully this one will end with a loss of America’s prestige and not American life, but the results will be felt for years if not decades and Americans will die almost assuredly because of these witless forays, that are designed only to increase Obama’s chances of reelection.
Libya for the Libs. Let Libya sort it out. Who gives a damn?
Rear Admiral Joseph Mulloy told trade publication Inside the Navy on March 21, “The incremental cost of use of the Navy and Marine Corps is low, because we’re already funded and we are trained and worked up.” He went on, “We don’t have to pay extra to be there…….
So it’s like we all ready pay the cops and judges to be there when needed so a 100% increase in rapes and beatings is a bargain??? OR is it like we pay these guys to live and die for us,but none have lately so lets get our money worth?? Maybe i misunderstood what a Admirals job was, I thought they were there to protect the men and women serving under them and not be a spokesman / cheerleader for the white house.
W
@MrBigW:
Well, I agree with your sentiments, but Barry IS the “Commander in Chief”, isn’t he, and the ‘lower Chief’s’ have to suck up to him…..
@oil guy from alberta:
Well, I guess the American taxpayer cares about it after already paying over $600 million and going to approach $1 billion very soon…….
@Skookum:
Watch the tube tonight….there you’ll see a politician who could care less that he is Already Taking us to the gates of hell.
Thanks for the comments!
Skooks If you think our international prestige is lower now than under “w” you haven’t travelled much internationally in the last 10 years.
@rich wheeler:
Really? Explain…..
Why the hell should we worry about ‘international prestige’? All they do is bite the hand that feeds them, besides if you think all of Barry’s bowing and kowtowing to every ‘international’ tinhorn he comes before, then we know your definition of ‘prestige’….
Bet it was you who clicked my note to Skookum….
Esdraelon If we’re at the gates of hell,which I’d dispute,they were opened before BHO took office.
Importance of international prestige, brought up by Skooks,can be debated another time.
I ‘ve been in Europe, Asia and South America during “W”s admin. and back to Europe in 2009.IMHO our government is held in MUCH higher regard by our allies than it was in 2003-2007.
Libya is a Civil War. Period. Lets move along. Anyone Who believes otherwise is exercising a Fool’s Logic.
US influence should be withdrawn as should be US Forces. The US Clearly has No dog in that Fight. Period.
There is No Clear Mission there and no justification for expense of US Blood or Treasure in Libya.
Rich, prestige was a poor choice of words that were written during a meal while traveling. Respect for our leadership and its ability to make intelligent decisions deploying our troops and our CiC’s judgement concerning the exercising our military at strategic times, should have been used. The “War” games in Libya are a perfect example. A rabble of an army has outwitted our president’s best intentions: a dubious group of rebels some of whom are our enemies are using the president for their own objectives. To the world and more importantly to our enemies, this appears to be weakness and confusion on the part of our leadership. This is what I mistakenly termed prestige, but more precisely should be called respect. Regardless, our enemies have been treated to a seminar of how to use and outwit the American military and our leadership. A tremendous weakness can now be exploited in the future and probably will be used to our enemies’ advantage.
I travel in Canada and Europe. I’d say in Canada and Europe we have an evolving opinion towards the US. During the Bush years there was derision and anger towards the US. At the present, there is concern of what the world and their future will be like with weak leadership and a bankrupt US. It’s true that they are exposed to the constant covert Marxist messaging by the MSM of their respective countries, but for the first time in my life they are beginning to question the absurdity of the continuous Leftist propaganda and reflect on the prospect of life with a weak United States.
I quit working the Middle East during the first Gulf War and I have turned down jobs in Zimbabwe and South Africa. So yes, I have traveled more than the average American. Most of my customers are dedicated Lefties who are beginning to doubt the wisdom of a Leftist president who is intent on bankrupting the US. These customers are in both North America and Europe and they are primarily wealthy, intelligent people.
I am traveling now, so my correspondence is sporadic and infrequent. When I use Skookum 2, I am using someone else’s computer and I am not as comfortable as when I use my own. There are also more typos and other mistakes due to the unique properties of another computer with different procedures. i am learning all the time. The point is that I won’t have timely responses due to reception, work, and travel.
@rich wheeler:
I did not say we are at the gates, I said he’s taking us there.
Are you any good at mathematics at all? Economics? The deficit has shot up near 16% the first half of this fiscal year…..and as to that happening before your man took office….let me explain something to you: George Bush attempted SIX times to persuade the controlling Democrats to change their banking stipulations and their running Fannie and Freddie as their own personal re-election fund. Barney Frank took his finger out of his butt long enough to flip it at Bush.
The banks did not fail upon themselves, they whole system failed due to practices of giving millions of people loans that they did not have a snowballs chance in hell of repaying, courtesy of Democrats who saw them as ‘cheap’ votes. The banks failed, then the backers of the banks who insured the loans failed, then everything else came tumbling down. What was so convenient for your boy was all this happened just a couple of months before the November elections. Curious….
Both the Republicans and Democrats were responsible , so don’t try to let your boy walk for continuing the practices in general…the deficits under Barry have already gone up in two years what it took Bush to match in two terms.
@Skookum:
You’re doing a great job, man! No worries!