| Submit your comments on this article |
| Africa North |
| U.S. intel chief says Gadhafi will prevail |
| 2011-03-11 |
| This is beginning to sound like comedy central. Anyone know who's in charge at national security? |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #20 DNI Clapper is my kinda guy. He has the unfortunate (to his career) habit of saying politically-incorrect truths. For instance, he said that Russia and China, not Iran and North Korea, are mortal threats to the US*. For this truism, he was criticized by Carl Levin, Lindsay Graham and Joe Manchin. Graham even demanded his resignation. * China and Russia are why we need F-22's, the next generation stealth bomber, a dozen carriers and the nuclear triad, not North Korea and Iran. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2011-03-11 23:41 |
| #19 Anyone know who's in charge at national security? Apparently not someone who made 'happy' statements that D.C. wanted to hear. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2011-03-11 22:50 |
| #18 "I'm surprised he let it get this out of hand." He was too busy believing his own PR, Zhang. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2011-03-11 20:08 |
| #17 The news from the front is encouraging. It looks like Gaddafi will prevail over rebels whose every other utterance is "Allah Akbar". I'm surprised he let it get this out of hand. Decades ago, Hafez Assad of Syria showed the way with his partial leveling of the city of Hama, the city that Syria's Ikhwan chose for its redoubt. Thanks to Assad's decisive actions, Christianity continues to thrive in Syria (and in Hama itself), where it comprises a bigger percentage of the population than in our Iraqi protectorate. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2011-03-11 19:46 |
| #16 Obama, what the F is next, Double Secret Probation? What an asswipe we have as a commander in chief. Drop dead you useless socialist slug. |
| Posted by: No I am The Other Beldar 2011-03-11 18:47 |
| #15 So Obama on the one hand literally expresses his wish to kill Gaddafi by stringing him up and on the other hand signals military passivity. If Obama wanted to provoke Gaddafi to attack Americans and allies what would he do differently? |
| Posted by: Angusort Hatrack4648 2011-03-11 18:07 |
| #14 Clapper to Napolitano: "I'll see your stupid and raise you dumbass." Holder: "Fold" |
| Posted by: regular joe 2011-03-11 17:58 |
| #13 "The Resistance" are clowns. On the other hand, Egyptians wanted Libyan oil fields for a long time. Also no regime/constitution/etc... changes can address their basic problem---not enough money to buy food. So a war could be a G*d-sent. Of course, I'm assuming the Junta are smart enough to realize that this time around, a war with Israel would be their last war ever. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2011-03-11 16:42 |
| #12 Why is this headline remotely surprising? Rebellions without foreign support (i.e. training, weaponry, food, water, etc) need to win quickly, before the government gets organized. Most successful rebellions owe their victory to a rotted state apparatus that is incapable of responding to internal challenges or is unwilling to escalate to the level of force necessary to quell the rebellion. Gaddafi is many things, but he is neither a time-server nor a soft touch. He is similar to Saddam in one way - unlike Mubarak - Gaddafi was appointed to nothing. He organized a band of followers that helped him kill his way to the top. Gaddafi has one further advantage - unity of command. The rebels don't have a single leader and are undoubtedly engaging in duplicated efforts and not backing each other up when necessary. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2011-03-11 16:37 |
| #11 Nah. He's "tightening the noose"... President Barack Obama declared Friday that a no-fly zone over Libya to keep Col. Moammar Gadhafi from attacking rebels in his country remains a possibility as "we are slowly tightening the noose" around the Libyan leader. But Obama stopped short of moving toward military action. "The bottom line is that I have not taken any options off the table at this point," Obama told a White House news conference. "I think it is important to understand that we have moved about as swiftly as an international coalition has ever moved to impose sanctions on Gadhafi." He cited actions already taken, including getting American citizens and embassy workers out of the country, slapping tough United Nations sanctions on Libya and seizing $30 billion in Gadhafi's assets. "I am absolutely clear that it is in the interests of the United States, and more importantly in the interests of the Libyan people, for Mr. Gadhafi to leave," Obama said. "And we're going to take a wide range of actions to try to bring about that outcome." He said he wanted to make it clear to the longtime Libyan leader "that the world is watching" his brutal response to the rebellions in his country. The president brushed off a comment on Thursday in congressional testimony by U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper that Gadhafi's military was stronger than has been described and that "in the longer term ... the regime will prevail." "He was making a hard-headed assessment about military capability," Obama said. "I don't think anybody disputes that Gadhafi has more firepower than the opposition. He wasn't making a statement of policy." Obama added: "I believe Gadhafi is on the wrong side of history. I believe the Libyan people are anxious for freedom. We are going to be in contact with the opposition as well as in consultation with the international community" in an effort to pressure Gadhafi to leave. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2011-03-11 16:35 |
| #10 Project weakness and reap the whirlwind. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2011-03-11 16:22 |
| #9 Another factor in Gaddafi's favor is that there are many regimes in the world who are scared of the Arab upheaval and would like nothing more than the precedent of an anti-western totalitarian government defending and reasserting itself in the face of armed rebellion. The Russians, Chinese, Syrians, Iranians, etc might or might not like Gaddafi personally. But they have a very selfish reason to wish for his survival. Hence they will assist him, and the 'Arab Spring' will turn into an anti-western rout. After the next 2 or 3 Lockerbies the West might have no choice but to destroy the Gaddafi regime, but for the time being Gaddafi is very very safe and many many people in Cyrenica will be very very dead soon. Europeans and Americans will be targets a bit later. |
| Posted by: Big Spusoter2654 2011-03-11 15:39 |
| #8 He is correct unless the eu or nato get off there ass. Momo has all the tanks, planes, and heavy weapons. It's only a matter of time before he kicks the crap out of them. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2011-03-11 15:24 |
| #7 With luck, bot Gadhafi and Clapper will be gone in a few months. |
| Posted by: Lord Garth 2011-03-11 14:06 |
| #6 Clapper has been wrong or out of the loop on everything lately. Unfortunately he reflects the the administration. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2011-03-11 12:57 |
| #5 Clapper's view that Gadhafi's forces had the upper hand and looked set to prevail led to renewed calls for Obama to take swift action to help the rebels. Unfortunately, this is what is about to happen. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2011-03-11 12:40 |
| #4 I think the key words here are "left alone" Gadhafi has lots of money to finance a war, the rebels don't. |
| Posted by: flash91 2011-03-11 11:32 |
| #3 Actually Clapper is correct given Obama's propensity to dither on any decision. And the Arab States, the EU and NATO are following suit. |
| Posted by: tipover 2011-03-11 10:59 |
| #2 ...actually that would be noman. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2011-03-11 10:56 |
| #1 ...technically, that would be a community organizer. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2011-03-11 08:48 |