Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Brits agree with Beldar: Don't rule out regime decapitation
According to quotations in the Daily Mail, the British government agrees with me, and therefore disagrees with the Obama Administration, that western governments should refuse "to rule out targeting Gaddafi." No. 10 has rebuked a British general who said precisely the same thing U.S. Adm. Bill Gortney was quoted as saying in Sunday's WaPo, and that SecDef Gates has since repeated.
Regime decapitation could indeed fall within the plain language of UNSC Resolution 1973, which —
Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory ....
(Boldface mine.) We could certainly kill Kadafi without imposing a "foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory." And once he's gone, so's the entire "threat of attack." So isn't the most effective, least bloody way of protecting civilians necessarily at least a part of the "all necessary measures" we could take?
(This whole discussion about whether regime decapitation would or wouldn't be within the scope of the current "mission" assumes, of course, that you need or even want the U.N.'s blessing anyway, which are questionable premises at best.)
Again, I'm not saying this should be announced as a policy goal. I'm saying we shouldn't rule it out in public statements. Because only some damn fool at his first damn rodeo would fail to seize the opportunity if it presented itself.
Note: Trackbacks are moderated and do not appear automatically. They're also spam-filtered. Feel free to email me if yours didn't go through. Trackbacks must contain a link to this post. TrackBack URL for this entry:
Other weblog posts, if any, whose authors have linked to Brits agree with Beldar: Don't rule out regime decapitation and sent a trackback ping are listed here:
(1) Gregory Koster made the following comment | Mar 22, 2011 5:37:53 PM | Permalink
Dear Mr. Dyer: I think I've figured out The One's strategy: he's playing a version of Obama Poker. In OP, the cards are dealt as in five card stud. The One's opponents pick their cards as in five card stud. The One picks his cards up face out. Thus, he can't see what's in his hand. Of course that's fair, because he can't see what's in anyone else's hand, either. Besides America -the-raaaaaacist has for too long exploited its unfair advantages over everyone. After playing and losing, losing and playing, losing, losing, losing, borrowing his stakes all the while (his losses aren't coming out of HIS wallet!),he gets up from the table, excusing himself saying he has to go the men's room. Fine, Barry, say the other players, at last you'll know what's in your hand...
Try a thought experiment: suppose Geo. W. was still in office and was sending the US services to Libya. Can you imagine Jimmy Bumpkin keeping still about this? Nor I. It's a sign of Geo. W's decency that he has been keeping still during this trying time. Now imagine The One keeping a similar silence. Nope, can't do it. That is the sole reason I can think of for voting for him in 2012: it reduce by four years his career as an ex-Prez. As an ex-Prez, he will demand all the perks to which he's entitled, which will doubtless be as enormous an expense as the Air Force One "date night" trips, the now-radioactive wagyu beef meals, Michelle's endless trips back to the chow line etc etc etc are to us today. Remember, canning The One in 2013 will leave an underemployed 52 year old, good for 30+ years of "It's all raaaaaaacist America's fault," books that Bill Ayers will knock out for him, enormous speech fees that the Saudis will pay, smirking at this cheap (to them) way to spit in America's eye. The only compensation I can imagine is Jimmy Bumpkin's rage at being displaced as the most obnoxious ex-Prez. Somehow that doesn't balance the scales.
(2) DRJ made the following comment | Mar 24, 2011 9:03:03 PM | Permalink
How many layers of legal review do you think the Obama Administration makes the U.S. military go through before authorizing a target?
The comments to this entry are closed.