You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Africa North
Obama: Can't back Libyan rebels "with both feet"
2011-03-30
Rebel troops were losing more ground in Libya Wednesday as forces loyal to Muammar Qaddafi launched a series of new attacks. This, as NATO was assuming full-control from the United States of allied military efforts in Libya, and the U.S. and other nations agreed at a summit in London that Qaddafi must give up power - but couldn't agree on how to make it happen.

And in an interview with "Early Show" co-anchor Erica Hill in New York Tuesday, President Obama conceded that, "Among all the people who (are) opposed (to) Qaddafi, there might not be elements that are unfriendly to the United States and our interests. ... And that's why I think it's important for us not to -- jump in with both feet" with all of them.
Guess he's got to wait for riding instructions from the Arab League on what to do next.
Posted by:tipper

#7  OTOH FREEREPUBLIC > TREASURY SELLS US$29.0BILYUHN IN BONDS, BRINGING TOTAL SETTLED US DEBT TO US$14.311 TRILYUHN | ... MORE THAN THE DEBT CEILING.

and

* PEOPLE'S DAILY FORUM > GREENSPAN WARNS DODD-FRANK REFORMS RISKS [super-Regulation led] "MARKET DISTORTIONS".

Will be impossible to implement, + degradeor lower US Living Standards.

IOW, "DODD-FRANK" NEW REGULATIONS = MORE CONFUSION NOT SOLUTION, DETRIMENT NOT LERIMENT.

Posted by: JosephMendiola   2011-03-30 22:40  

#6  "TWO FEET"

versus

* CBS EVENING NEWS > looks like the Libyan Rebels are complaining about so-called "WAR/COMBAT TOURISTS", i.e. mostly local Libyan civilians whom base themselves close or right next to a potential battlefield to watch the deadly combat between Gaddafi's Boyz + Rebels, clogging up all the roads + gener getting in the way of everybody, but then skedaddling like Speed Racer when the combat gets too close to their six.

* Also, WAFF > [Pentagon]LIBYAN WAR COSTS US$550.0MILYUHN SO FAR: US LAWMAKER. Will cost another US$40.0 Milyuhn by April 18th [US$590.0 = under US$600.0 Milyuhn], + then US$40.0Milyuhn every month after that until further notice..
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2011-03-30 22:32  

#5  But don't tell nobody, see, because it's a secret.
Posted by: Steve White   2011-03-30 19:55  

#4  Reuters reports Barack Obama has signed a secret order (a presidential "finding") authorizing covert U.S. support for rebel forces.

Al
Posted by: Frozen Al   2011-03-30 17:05  

#3  Obama has one foot in his mouth, so he can't use both feet to back the rebels. Not that they much deserve it.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2011-03-30 14:48  

#2  AAA, as it reads it comes across to me that all the Daffy opposition the default opinion of the USA is unfriendly but some minds might change to something better if we go all in, which is why we should not go all in (because it would change minds?).

Explain Libya in 5 minutes or less: C- for clarity (or lack of), dropped to D+ for putting the struggle in the past tense...or is the editing wrong? Probaly drop it anothe point if I had to actually listen to this.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2011-03-30 12:19  

#1  Love the double/triple negative Bammerspeak:

"Let me be clear:"
"There may not be non-existent elements that are not non-unfriendly with the anti-non-enemies of the United States and our interests".

Perhaps some Princetown educated Lawyers could expound on the meanings of "might", "not" & "unfriendly", as it appears that what he was saying was that the chances are that there are no enemies - so why the caution? Or am I misinterpreting the legal character of the word "in"???
Posted by: Admiral Allan Ackbar   2011-03-30 08:37  

00:01