So, Why Are We Bombing Libya?

By now everyone knows that our kinetic act of stupidity in Libya is just a larger representation of what pResident Pampers does on a regular basis: flail around like a screaming infant whose binky fell out of his mouth while he was napping. Only this kinetic act of stupidity supports al-qaeda factions operating in the Libyan resistance. And American military analysts are well aware of the long-standing and growing connection between leading Libyan rebel factions and al-qaeda.

Amazingly, this current operation makes Shrub II's Iraq invasion, whose primary goal was to bleed taxpayer dollars to line the pockets of Halliburton with billions in no-bid contracts, while attempting to cement western control of Iraqi oil fields (with ShrubII just thinking he would finally take out the man who threatened to kill his daddy), look like a really good idea.

But just like Iraq, it is a very very bad idea. Why? Primarily because we are once again putting our servicemen and womens' lives at risk in an operation that could very likely put into a power a government that will ally itself with Iran and/or al-qaeda.

Ah, remember those halcyon days when Don Rumsfeld compared invading Iraq to invading the moon?

Sure, we could machinate a conspiracy theory about the seizing of Libyan oil assets, but rest assured that probably won't happen the way you think it will. This is a screw up from the beginning. So what's really happening here? I think the answer lies in what Pampers said to the American people last night.

Now before we step into the swirling cesspool of lies that is Juan Peron Obambi Jr. Jr.'s mouth, keep this very important fact in mind: the current administration's Middle East policy is predicated on accomplishing one goal...the demise of Israel. Got it? Good. Here we go.

There is a lot of the usual drivel and meaningless rhetoric, preceded by his shameless thanking of our servicemen and women risking their lives for no reason, which should make every man and woman in uniform vomit. But let's get to the heart of the matter. The lynchpin of this whole S.N.A.F.U. is this:

To brush aside America's responsibility as a leader and - more profoundly - our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as President, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.

Keep in mind that a few weeks ago UNSG Ban Ki-Moon called for international action to stop government attacks on civilians in Libya. This of course comes under the banner of what is commonly referred to as R2P, the UN's "Responsibility to Protect" Doctrine, which supposedly means that multinationalist forces should intervene militarily to protect civilians when a sovereign state cannot or will not do so. Presumably this could mean a government bombing its own people with chemical weapons, protecting civilians caught in a war zone, whatever they decided it means in order to have a pretext to take action against a sovereign state.

Ironically, this R2P was being developed in response to the Arab perpetrated massacres in Darfur. Ask a Darfurian how well that worked out.

I also snarf a bit when I see the same people who attacked the ShrubII for Iraq defend Pampers' Libyan kinetic escapade. They must think it's some kind of Martha Graham performance.

And how interesting that those who were cheerleading for the Iraq invasion are so against the Libya fiasco. What a strange disease we are afflicted with. It's like what HaShem did at Babel, only worse, because the stakes are so much higher now.

But let's get back to Pampers.

Pampers says America is different because we don't turn a blind eye to human atrocities. What a load of crap. America is always turning a blind eye. We did it in World War II when the tracks to concentration camps were not bombed, in spite of the fact that allied bombing missions flew right over them. We turned a blind eye in Cambodia, Rwanda, Tibet, Bosnia...only taking action when it was politically expedient to do so. In her first diplomatic mission, Secretary of Hate Clinton shat all over her 1995 Beijing speech by going to China and telling them not to worry about American pressure on human rights issues because the global economy (our credit line with China) is more important. So turn down the rhetoric, Barry. You don't care about mass graves. You don't care about protecting anyone. You let Iranian protestors get slaughtered in the streets and didn't so much as say "boo." It's bad enough that you insult the living by being pResident. Don't mock the dead, especially when you have now placed that blood on your own hands.

Now, keeping in mind that Pampers' Mideast policy is predicated on ending Israel, how would R2P help him there? Allow me to paint the picture for you.

Since the "revolution" in Egypt, Hamas has not only gained recognition from the new regime, it has escalated its rocket attacks against Israel, in spite of Israeli military responses that have claimed the lives of Hamas terrorists and leaders. Hamas is attempting to goad Israel into a full scale military conflict, for a number of reasons. As always, one of the primary reasons is to have the chance to paint Israel as a bloody imperialist aggressor, in spite of the fact that Israel withdrew from Gaza instead of committing genocide, which everyone from Code Pink to Samantha Power would like you to believe is happening right now. Too bad all those pictures of the Gaza luxury mall and beach resorts went viral all over the internet. So much for genocide and the humanitarian crisis.

But it wouldn't take much to convince the UN, which is controlled by the Arab League/OPEC/Islamists to use R2P to protect civilians in Gaza...I mean Hamas' human shields...from "Zionist aggression." And what might happen in Judea and Samaria if the Arabs launched a third intifada? We already have Dayton's Heros trained to kill Israelis with American tax dollars, some of whom have been involved in the murders of Israeli civilians.

So while the story of seizing Libyan oil fields in the name of the NWO sounds like a scary bedtime story, and certainly oil is a part of the picture, helping support an al-qaeda backed resistance that could be easily co-opted by Iran serves the Barry's objectives in the Middle East quite nicely. But regime change isn't a goal in Libya. Pampers said so, so it must be true.

Ultimately, the Barry would like to see Israel destroyed by Iranian proxies. The current list includes Lebanon, Hamas and Syria, with a Muslim Brotherhood controlled Egypt potentially waiting in the wings. But using R2P to attempt to force a final solution on Israel is a good plan B for the Barry, and the UN. Libya is the proving ground for the doctrine.

Next time: Why aren't we bombing the crap out of Syria?