I don’t mourn for Muammar Qaddafi. Not at all. He was at least a nutjob and at most an evil dictator. But, he was under control. Much like Hosni Mubarak was in Egypt. We hear out administration go on and on about how we’re seeing freedom and democracy land in places like Egypt and Libya and, if you’re not paying attention, you might actually believe it. I guess John Stewart isn’t paying attention very well. It seems as though the host of the Daily Show is cool with us going where ever we want whenever we want with no authority from our representatives in congress and taking out whatever world leader we think we can defeat. Here’s a quote from his show reacting to republicans questioning the killing of Qaddafi:
”Is there no republican that can be gracious and statesman-like in this situation? We removed a dictator in six months, losing no American soldiers, spending like a billions dollars rather than a trillion dollars, and engendering what appears to be goodwill to people who now have a prideful story of their own independence to tell — (softly) not to mention oil, they have oil. Anybody wanna give credit?…(After showing clips of key GOP Senators crediting Britain and France) What the f&^k is wrong with you people? Honestly, what is wrong with you? Are you that small? (Taking on their voice) ‘You know what else, we really gotta give credit to the Chinese. Without the invention of gunpowder…’”
Unfortunately, what Stewart either purposely omits or has just not studied the topic enough to know is we a. had no business taking sides in Libya and b. the rebels the Obama administration chose to support are known to have ties to Al Qaeda. You remember them right? They attacked us on a beautiful summer day in 2001? There are tons of news stories about the links. Here’s just one. I guess that didn’t matter. Qaddafi was bad, right? Who cares about congressional approval or that we were becoming bedfellows with terrorists. Whatever it takes to get the job done right? Why Qaddafi? Why now? Much like those who ousted Mubarak, these rebels do not have freedom and liberty and democracy in mind. They are people who have ties to radical Islam (see Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt) and are seeking to force Islamic law on their country. How’s that “freedom” we supported by the ouster of Mubarak working out in Egypt? Last I checked, there are tanks and armed military keeping an eye on the protests there and the Muslim Brotherhood expected to play a large role in forming the new government there. And, remember that peace accord between Egypt and Israel? Those in Egypt now say that went away with Mubarak.
The president, you and I agree on one thing for sure. We do NOT like dictators and they should all fall. But, if the Obama Doctrine is to take out all of the evil dictators around the world, why not start with the really bad guys. When he had an opportunity to intervene in Iran as the rulers of that country were killing civilians in the street after stealing an election, our president said “It’s not productive, given the history of U.S.-Iranian relations, to be seen as meddling – the U.S. president meddling in Iranian elections.” Help me understand how the Libyan dictator was more appropriate to take action against than the crazy man in Iran. How did it make more sense to take out Mubarak or Qaddafi (who we had control over) than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or the mullahs in Iran?
How was our support for the “rebels” in Libya better for the world or OUR interests than going after the Castro brothers in Cuba who are 90 miles from out coast and have oppressed millions for nearly 60 years now? Why not go after Kim Jong Il who’s people have zero human or civil rights — much less much electricity? Have you seen this picture? Why not go after Hugo Chavez who is becoming Castro Jr by the day? Why not go after China where 1.6 billion people don’t have as much as drinkable water in their taps and where you’re imprisoned or killed if you disagree with the government.
Give me a break, Jon Stewart. Get a clue. You want to celebrate this administration’s circumventing of congress and much of the world to take sides in a civil war? I think you’re the one who has something wrong with you.
By the way, what do you think the new Libya will look like? Just like what we see unfolding in Egypt, here’s what Libyans can expect. Can you say Sharia Law? Click Here.
Thoughts? Shoot me an email or a message on Facebook.
Pags
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
15 Responses
You mad bro?
I find it odd that you’re so against the Libya scenario yet remain in support of military action against Iran. It seems like you only support an unconstitutional war when its promoted by the GOP establishment and not the Obama administration.
Quit being a Neo-Con and think this foreign policy issue entirely through. The United States has no business engaging in foreign wars and nation building unless there is a legitimate threat. We should’ve never been involved in Iraq, Libya, or any other nation and we should’ve been in Afghanistan just enough to retaliate against Al Qaeda, not build a democracy.
You didn’t read very well, huh? I am not advocating military action against anyone. I simply questioned why Qaddafi and NOT Iran or North Korea, et al. Thanks for playing.
Pags
agree with you on this one joe. i heard today they are instituting sharia law, and that usually means a regime not very favorable to us. can anyone say jihad? all we can do is see how things play out, but it seems to me this administration only wants to get rid of some of the ones we have some control over.gdaffi was was a bad man, lockerbee plane bombing for one, but he was able to be reasoned with. scary times ahead for us.
Yeah.. I linked to the story of Sharia Law being the law of the land at the end of the article.
Pags
Funny you are talking about this. You seemed to have missed the point of the video. He was calling out conservatives for being ridiculous about this. Obama gets no love from conservatives. You know John is Jewish and he is still okay with the possibility of what may happen in Libya. You say we didn’t have the right to chose sides in Libya. However we have an obligation to help citizens who are being attacked by a dictator.
We got involved in Libya because (a) it looked like an easy victory, so Obama would look good and could claim victory going into an election cycle, and (b) because France and England and Nato would take the forefront, and we could gain worldly PR points by being seen as just another team member, playing nice with all the other kids. You know, because we don’t need to be a world leader or anything, we just need to be liked. :^/
Yup.. mad this president thinks the people of this country and what we want don’t matter.
Pags
Does anyone else think its strange that all of a sudden the link to the Libyan talking about Sharia law is now gone? Covering something up, are we???
And now its back, lol….
I agree with you entirely on this one. It’s really scary to watch the president pick and choose which war to start, almost at random. Getting involved in civil wars like this, in nations where there is little, if any, American interest, helps to give the world a negative impression of the United States. This is why they fear the U.S. as imperialistic. We meddle in everyone’s business when we should keep ourselves out of it. America used to do what it had to to stay neutral in foreign wars whenever possible, but now we seem to think its our job to stick our nose in it wherever we can.
“Yup.. mad this president thinks the people of this country and what we want don’t matter.
Pags”
I tried Google, didn’t work – can someone translate this into English?
Joe its tough – trying to explain in a secular way the difference between Good and Evil. Thank goodness, I received the answer to this very situation 18 years ago from a Pastor in San Antonio that you have had on your show. The answer he gave still holds true today – this situation in the Middle East is not Political, it is Theological. The Bible clearly states how Sharia Law came in to existence and their plan for World dominance and the destruction of Israel. The Bible also states who wins when the dust settles.
George Bush had congressional approval for what he did. Check voting records. This is more political posturing. The Democrats’ favorite tactic,deflection. Try to make people think about something else. His failures are mounting and successes are few. He has violated the constitution,plans on doing so again and maybe broke a few laws. Is it legal for the govt. to seize stock? Did so in the GM bailout. Gave the UAW a nice chunk of it too. This guy needs to go. I’ll stop before the left starts calling me a racist,another deflection tactic.
I don’t think it’s random. I think he is just as they said in the beginning, a manchurrian president. Whatever dictator they are ousting they are replacing with ties to terrorism and the most backward rule of law, sharia. Get several countries strong with this doctrine and now they start taking over others.
You are right Joe why not take out the real bad guys? John Stewart is a surface thinker, only looking for a laugh. No one really takes him serious.