Amazing video of the Japanese tidal wave

March 27, 2011

I may have seen this one before, but, still, this is just incredible:

via Verum Serum


Sunday funnies: NewsBusted

March 27, 2011

The latest edition, starring Jodi Miller:


Gates: No vital US interests at stake in Libya

March 27, 2011

I’m not averse to the use of force in foreign affairs, in cases where it’s the best available option and clearly seen American interests are at stake.  I also am not against going “John Wayne” on a maniac dictator and helping his people be free of him when, again, demonstrable American interests align with the desire to give said maniac what he deserves. I argued, and still do, that Iraq presented such a case in 2002-2003.

Otherwise, in the absence of vital American interests, there seems little reason to commit American blood and treasure.

So what am I to think when, on national television, the Secretary of Defense says he can’t think of any vital American interests in Libya, where we’ve just gone to war?

As the war in Libya moves into its second week, tag-team Sunday talk show appearances by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State suggest the Obama administration remains divided over the fundamental question of whether the war is in the United States’ national interest.

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Gates was asked, “Is Libya in our vital interest as a country?”  He answered, “No, I don’t think it’s a vital interest for the U.S., but we clearly have interests there, and it’s a part of the region which is a vital interest for the U.S.”  Gates’ statement wasn’t an entirely convincing rationale for a major military commitment, and moderator David Gregory responded by saying, “I think a lot of people would hear that and say well, that’s quite striking — not in our vital interests and yet we’re committing military resources.”

Emphasis added.

In that case, Mr. Secretary, let me ask a question: In a time of national fiscal distress when we’re borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend and when we already have major commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, the latter involving frequent combat, why in Heaven’s name are we attacking Libya? If you and your boss can’t articulate a coherent reason for starting a war, what possessed you (and him) to think this would be a good idea?

And, no, “I dunno” doesn’t cut it.

Oh, but then acting-President and Secretary of State Clinton jumped in to offer a reason:

At that point, Clinton suggested that the U.S. went to war to repay NATO allies for support in Afghanistan.  “We asked our NATO allies to go into Afghanistan with us ten years ago,” she said.  “They have been there, and a lot of them have been there despite the fact that they were not attacked.  The attack came on us…They stuck with us.  When it comes to Libya, we started hearing from the UK, France, Italy, other of our NATO allies…This was in their vital national interest…

Emphasis added.

So, our European allies asked us to attack Libya because they went to war when we were attacked, so we agreed to bomb Libya because they were… Wait. Did I miss a Libyan raid on Naples or something??

Hey, I can see a vital interest for some European countries in Libya — they get quite a bit of oil from there, much more than we do. But that’s their vital interest, not ours. And al Qaeda’s attack on the US triggered the Article V mutual defense clause of the NATO treaty, which is in play in Libya… how, exactly?

Clinton’s “explanation” reminds me of this corker from her boss:

And that’s why building this international coalition has been so important because it means that the United States is not bearing all the cost.  It means that we have confidence that we are not going in alone, and it is our military that is being volunteered by others to carry out missions that are important not only to us, but are important internationally.  And we will accomplish that in a relatively short period of time.

And again, emphasis added.

What, did this all start because of a phone call from Europe? “Congratulations! We’ve just volunteered your military for a little war in Libya! And, hey, Barry, you owe us.”

I’m all for allies sticking together, but, if intervening in Libya is a vital European interest, maybe the European states should start spending the money to create the forces they would need to defend those vital interests and not “volunteer” us.

Meanwhile, someone needs to give the administration lessons in not sounding like clueless idiots.

LINKS: More at Hot Air

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Tough-talking Libyan psycho-family looking for a deal?

March 27, 2011

Remember, Dad promised to crush the rebels’ army, while his son (supposedly the reasonable one) said it would all be over in 48 hours.

So, why am I not surprised when news comes this morning that the lions of North Africa are secretly looking for a way out?

Independent Arab and Libyan sources have informed Asharq Al-Awsat that Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi is seeking to convince the coalition forces to accept a deal that is being secretly discussed between Gaddafi delegates and a number of Arab and American parties. This deal would see Gaddafi stepping down from power, only to be replaced by his son Saif al-Islam, with a deadline being put in place for a peaceful transition of power.

A well-informed Libyan source told Asharq Al-Awsat that Saif al-Islam Gaddafi has held a number of secret meetings with officials in the French and British governments, discussing the idea of his replacing his father for a transitional period of between 2 – 3 years, in return for a comprehensive ceasefire and negotiating with the anti-Gaddafi rebels.

The sources also revealed that Saif al-Islam Gaddafi is pushing for assurances that Colonel Gaddafi and his family will be granted immunity from prosecution, and will not be legally punished in any manner.

The sources revealed that Saif al-Islam Gaddafi’s plan would see him take over control of Libya from his father during a transitional period during which Libya would transform from a revolutionary state to a democratic state that enjoys public and economic freedoms.

How convenient: “Sure, Dad will go, you leave me in charge, no prosecution for any of us for anything we did and, okay, I promise democracy and all that stuff. What do ya say?” And I’m sure this offer has nothing to do with the rebels regaining momentum and retaking towns under cover of NATO airstrikes.

Lest anyone be of a mind to grant these thugs immunity, here’s a reminder of how they treat their own people.

Sorry, Saif. The only deal you and your crackhead-in-drag father deserve is a choice of which lampposts the rebels hang you from.

Like I said before, once this action started there was no way these goons could be left anywhere near power.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Uncommon Knowledge: Stanley Kurtz

March 27, 2011

A while back I reviewed Stanley Kurtz’s latest book, Radical in Chief, a political biography of Barack Obama and a history of the evolution of American Socialism since the 1970s. It’s an important book, crucial to any real understanding both of the President, himself, and, indirectly, of how derelict the media was in their coverage of Obama’s background†.

Kurtz was recently interviewed by Peter Robinson of the Hoover Institution for their web program, Uncommon Knowledge. Here’s what they have to say about the subject:

Recent guest  Stanley Kurtz decided to do what the press failed to do – take an honest look at Obama’s politics.   His investigation resulted in Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism. In this episode, Kurtz discusses the many socialist influences in Obama’s life, from his college years to his time as a community organizer, with men such as Bill Ayers, Frank Marshal Davis, and Jeremiah Wright.

In examining Obama’s main mentors, Kurtz begins to see a clear ideology that motivates the President’s disdain for the middle class, take-no-prisoners approach to passing socialized healthcare, reluctance to discuss political theory and desire for, ultimately, a socialist revolution.

The interview is a little over 30 minutes long. Get a cup of tea or coffee, sit back, and relax. I think you’ll find it worthwhile:

†Yeah, I know. They had much more important, world-shaking issues to deal with. Like Sarah Palin’s tanning bed.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Obama’s base awaits

March 27, 2011

Via The DiploMad:

Click to enlarge.

Y’know, I thought I saw a lot of these around the polling booth on election day in 2008. Hmm…


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 12,899 other followers