Friday, October 21, 2011

Best Left Unsaid

Adolf notes there appears to have been a US drone aircraft strike involved in the death of Libya's murderous tyrant Gaddafi. Hillary Clinton's crass reaction is as instructive as it is disgraceful.

'We came, we saw, he died'

Does she think she is participating in some damned theatrical piece?



I can't help having considerable qualms about the notion of the US military, on the whim of a president, wandering around the world knocking people off , no matter what despicable bastards they might be, without the prior approval of the Congress.

To the best of my knowledge, such conduct is unprecedented and is exceedingly dangerous. It is the need to gain Congressional approval which applies restraint to an otherwise capricious administration.

For example, does anyone know who or what is the REAL target given to the 100 special forces recently despatched to tropical east Africa? How will they tell the good black bastards waving Kalashnikovs from the real bad black bastards waving AK 47s?

Can anyone imagine the ballyhoo and uproar there would have been from the left and their vassal media if Dubbya had done anything remotely approaching the dubious legality of Obama's wild escapades?

Extremely troubling precedents are being set and I fear the consequences of them later may be seriously misunderestimated by these desperate and gleeful Democrats. For example, Iran may well argue successfully for sympathy from the UN next time it goes into the USA and actually knocks somebody off under the noses of the FBI.

If they were really smart, they's use a drone with a hellfire missile.

9 comments:

Pa Anoid said...

I think you will find Adolf, that Gaddafi was captured alive on the ground by Rebels, who dealt to him as was to be expected. To blame Obama and Co. for Gaddafi's death is akin to blaming Key for a ship running onto a reef.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Well, PaAnoid if you look around, you'll see Obama is claiming credit for it.

Anonymous said...

Locals shooting him I can understand but that the mob have to mutilate the body (apparently) leaves me cold - that is a pack mentality that does not progress civilisation. What replaces him may be no better if that's how they go about things.

The more things change the more they stay the same. The US hasn't backed a winner for a while now.

FAIRFACTS MEDIA said...

I noted one of the US blogs saying Obama seems to be quite active in the military sphere for someone who gained a Nobel Peace Prize.

Of course, the less said about domestic matters, the better.
I see that US living standards are falling sharply.

So much for Hope and Change.

Still, much of the US media continues to worship their fallen idol, along with the BBC.

Mort said...

all part of the shift from the republic to the empire.... just wait till the OWS start to get rancid, and then the violence starts. We've already seen arrests for wanting to take cash out of people's own accounts (see notPC's citibank link). next step will be onshore dissident arrests and/or executions Indo style (obama really does think he is the modern day equivalent of Caesar)

Psycho Milt said...

Can anyone imagine the ballyhoo and uproar there would have been from the left and their vassal media if Dubbya had done anything remotely approaching the dubious legality of Obama's wild escapades?

We don't have to imagine it. We saw the ballyhoo and uproar when Dubya committed the crime of waging aggressive war by invading Iraq. Presumably Obama would attract the same level of opprobrium if he were to commit a similar crime.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Milt, I thought you would say that. Of course Dubbya had the approval of Congress and much ALL the Democrat leaders of the time who were all for it before they were all against it.

Anonymous said...

I have no problem with killing the Colonel,he got what he deserved. War is ugly and brutal(says me sitting in an armchair).
My problem is with the lies and hypocracy of the ploiticians involved.
Libya has been attacked by the US,France and Britain under the guise of a UN sanction to protect civilians.There has been very little criticism of this in the international media etc (unlike the attack on Bush for Afghanistan/Iraq)
The west was not protecting civilians,it was ousting Gadafi,and that's fine by me,just don't lie.
The leaders of Fr,UK and US claim to uphold human rights.Gadafi was murdered following action by the French airforce.His killing and the killing of soldiers loyal to him on the face of it is a war crime. Obama,Cameron and particularly Sarkozy should now stand accused of complicity.
I don't really care that a war crime has been committed but these men should be measured by their own standards. As they claim to stand for human rights then let them be judged by their own standards.

Psycho Milt said...

...Dubbya had the approval of Congress...

In that case, the members of Congress get a place in the dock alongside him. It was the US govt that came up with the "crime" of waging aggressive war and decided to hang or jail people for committing it, so they can hardly claim to be exempt. These days we're too civilised to dangle Dubya from a gallows, but he certainly merits the kind of jail term that Hess got. Mind you, the members of Congress who voted in favour could probably plead diminished responsibility through being extensively lied to by Dubya's underlings.