On Monday March 28, 2011 President Obama addressed the Nation on Primetime television on his Libya involvement. This comes nine days after the missile attacks on Col Muammar al-Gaddafi’s regime by the U.S. Military, France and the UK.
President Obama’s speech, presented as compassionate, left many questions, concerns, and contradictions.
Many key issues the President addressed are not fully answered; contradict the ‘UN Security Council resolution 1973’ (1) published by the United Nations Press center under: ‘SC/10200’ (2), as well as the ‘Geneva Convention from 1949’ (3).
Questions, such as the exegesis of the UN Resolution, continued involvement of the United States, the actual “American Interests” in that region, and the role of Al Qaeda in that conflict.
Not to forget the Constitutional Aspect of divided power and when the President is authorized to interfere in an armed conflict.
There is one thing I agree with the president on and that is that Muammar al-Gaddafi is a dictator, a terrorist, and needs to be removed. But let’s not forget who made Col. Gaddafi respectable in the world.
It was not the United States, but rather the European Union and the United Nations who actually lobbied to provide the very same dictator a seat on the UN Humans rights council.
The very same EU and UN who made Billions of Dollars profit from doing business with this dictator, while the pre-Obama U.S.A. had a ban on this country. And these countries now want Gaddafi to be removed and the United States should do the dirty work.
So the key question to be answered is who is President Obama really serving in this conflict?
The Key issues in a nutshell:
– President Obama declared that he has deployed American Forces after consulting the bipartisan Leadership of Congress.
But the truth of the Matter is that Congressman Boehner, speaker of the House, said on Sunday March 20, 2011 the President better explain what America’s role” is in the Libya offensive before further military action is taken, Politico.com reports (4).
Even his own partisan friends in the House were so surprised that the word impeachment was mentioned by VP Joe Biden and 8 other Democrats (5).
If Obama had really consulted bipartisan Leadership as he claimed in his speech, would the Speaker of the house and the Vice President not have been fully informed and why did the VP talk about impeachment over this action?
– President Obama points out over and over that the American involvement was to protect innocent Civilians, and painted a horrific picture of massacres and genocide.
But here is the thing. The Geneva Convention from 1949 (3) specifically spells out who is protected under their Charta and considered a “Civilian” (Part I, Article 3, (1) In case of conflict of not of an international character…persons taking NO active part in hostilities).
Therefore, armed Rebels fighting the current government in hostile actions are not to be considered Innocent Civilians and Obama’s proud announcement of destroying Tanks moving towards the rebels is NOT protecting civilians under the Geneva Convention, but rather supporting rebel forces.
And what about the civilians still committed to Gaddafi? Think about the Dictator what you want – the women and children still believing in him are still Civilians, are they not protected by the Geneva Convention?
– President Obama mentions several times how he is determined to fight Al Qaeda and he keeps mentioning Iraq.
Either the President is so badly informed or he purposely withholds vital information from the American people.
Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the leader of the Libyan rebels has confirmed and admitted in an interview with the UK Telegraph (6) on March 25, 2011 that jihadists who fought allied troops in Iraq are now on the front against Gaddafi. Mr. Hasidi himself is a member of Al Qaeda and fought against the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Washington Times on March 30, 2011 confirms that Jihadists join Libyan Rebel Forces (9).
Al Qaeda in Maghreb, the African side arm of Al Qaeda, has always been a strong force in that area. They usually move in the no-man’s land between Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt.
To finance their Terror attacks, primarily against the United States, they kidnap preferred European Tourists during a desert trip and demand ransom which is usually paid through Saif al-Islam Gaddafi’s Charity foundation. Another financial source for Al Qaeda in Maghreb is providing Terror camps (7).
– If President Obama is so determined to fight Al Qaeda “wherever they are found”, as he claimed in his speech on Monday why did he announce on Tuesday March 29, 2011 that he does not rule out arming Libyan Rebels (8)?
President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have not ruled out supporting Rebels with arms.
NATO General Secretary ‘Anders Fogh Rasmussen’ already rejected the idea with good reason.
Not only would this practically arm Al Qaeda Terrorists, but in fact this would violate the ‘UN Security Council resolution 1973’ (1).
Chapter 13 “Enforcement of Arms Embargo” does not specify between Rebel forces and Regular Government Forces. The mandate say’s clear to enforce an Arms embargo against the country.
Even if rebel forces prevail and overthrow Gaddafi, it is up to the United Nations first to remove the Arms embargo before any country can provide lethal weapons.
In addition, arming Rebels against the Government would provide a clear advantage over the Government forces and therefore be a direct interference in an inner conflict of a sovereign state, also known as civil War. And let’s be honest this conflict already is a civil war. And this is clearly not in the UN Mandate.
The mandate speaks exclusively about “providing a No-Fly Zone in order to protect Civilians” and rules out a direct interference.
– President Obama did not point out clearly the involvement of ground troops.
As a matter of fact, in several parts of his speech, the president mentioned so called “Search and seizure” as well as “Search and Rescue” operations.
Rescue who, who does the president want to rescue; all Americans are out of the country. Or does the president actually mean “Search and Destroy” missions?
This would make a lot more sense since the President has signed a “secret presidential finding authorizing covert operations in Libya” as U.S. officials confirmed to Fox News on March 31st 2011, only three days after the president announced there will be no ground troops in Libya (10).
There are only two facts that are undisputable and that is 1) Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi needs to go and 2) the conflict in Libya is a internal domestic Conflict also called ‘Civil War”.
No matter how compassionate or whiningly Obama presents the situation a military support is a clear interference in a inner conflict, arming rebels is a dangerous adventure because it also means for a fact arming Al Qaeda.
Again Gaddafi needs to go, but the way to get there is diplomacy and not military action.
If military action is really the answer why don’t we get involved against Ahmedinejad, who poses a way larger threat to the United States and our ally, Israel?
6) UK Telegraph
10) Fox News
The United States is at War again.
On March 7, 2011 – The French and the United Kingdom first pressured for the establishment of a No-Fly Zone over Libya, but backed down. As of this moment the military interference in an internal Conflict, commonly known as Civil War, was on the table.
The Arab league supported this Idea, but never intended to get involved by themselves just in case something went terribly wrong, and in a military conflict there is always a possibility to blame others.
On March 17, 2011 – the Unites Nations Security Council approved, from pressure of the French President Sarkozy, a military intervention in Libya.
“SC/10200 United Nations security council approves a ‘No-Fly Zone’ over Libya’ (1), authorizing ‘All measures’ to protect civilians.
This fungous declaration leaves a lot of room for interpretation and even more questions.
On March 19, 2011 – the First Air Strikes began in cooperation with Missile attacks from U.S. Battle ships.
President Obama has, illegally and without consent, sent U.S. Armed Forces into a conflict. Though he had plenty of time to consult with the Congress and call for an urgent emergency meeting getting Congressional Approval, President Obama decided to play Golf, pick his favorite NCAA team and travel to South America.
This action is not only highly illegal but also endangers American soldiers. Illegal because we have a constitution and the constitution is clear on when, where and how the president is authorized to engage the Armed Forces in a conflict without Congressional Approval.
The War Power Act from 1973 (2), established by the 93rd Congress after the Vietnam conflict was put in place exactly to prevent any U.S. President to engage the U.S. in a War without approval again.
More important than the Power Act is the United States constitution. Article I – Section VIII (3) rests the power to declare War solely to the United States Congress, and requires both the Commander-in-Chief AND the Congress to commit U.S. Troops; otherwise any Action would be unconstitutional.
Article II – Section II (3) of the U.S. Constitution sure identifies the U.S. President as the civilian oversight of the U.S. Military and Commander in chief, but does not allow him to use the Armed Forces to enforce its political will on foreign Nations.
March 22, 2011 – the first American Airplane, an F-15 Strike Eagle, crashes over Libya (4). And despite the statements from the Pentagon that this Jet was ‘Not’ shot down, but crashed due to technical failure the situation remains the same. According to UK Guardian the Pilots could not have known if the people who found them were friendly or non-friendly since they all were heavily armed.
Praise the Lord the Fighter Pilots are safe and well, but it could have been the other way around.
There are many questions that now rise from this situation. Speaker of the House John Boehner sent a few questions to President Obama concerning the American involvement in this “Action” I think he asked the wrong questions. So let me as ask a few here:
My first question concerns the UN Resolution – Gaddafi, Libya and the rebels
The UN Resolution declares “All necessary Measures to protect Civilians”. But what does that mean, who is a civilian in this case and who is a participant in an armed internal conflict.
In my understanding of the Geneva Convention (5) a person that is armed and participates in a violent action is not to be considered an unarmed unprotected Civilian and falls under the rules of Engagement.
Muammar al-Gaddafi should have been taken out 30 years ago. But it was the European Countries, especially France, Germany, Austria, Russia and so on who protected him and made him diplomatically eligible (6).
No matter what one thinks about Gaddafi he is the legal Head of Libya, his citizens have supported him for the past 30 years. Now the very same Citizens rebel against him.
I definitely agree and support the revolution, but this is an internal conflict and when the UN claims falsely that the western alliance is to protect “Civilians” this is a fraudulent inflammatory statement because as I mentioned above armed Civilians participating in a violent conflict are not protected under the Geneva Convention.
So here is my first question – why is the United Nations so eager to get involved in that conflict?
In my opinion the United Nations together with the French and the UK in cooperation with the European Union uses the U.S. Armed Forces to interfere illegally to overthrow a uncomfortable Dictator for economical (in favor of the European Union and NOT the U.S.) and political reasons (to strengthen Muslim radical groupings).
My next Questions go straight to the Situation of the American Soldiers.
The fact that we have never officially declared war on Libya raises many questions concerning the legal status of our Armed Forces.
Many Military experts and the NATO command already warn that, should the rebels not prevail, a Ground Force operation would be the next logical step. Taking a closer look at the fuzzy UN declaration the application of Ground Forces is not being ruled out. And that brings me to the point.
Since when – does the United Nations run our Armed Forces for their advantage? Since when is the UN in charge of our Soldiers? Ok you might say – sure since the UN puppet Obama is president – but where is the Congress on this?
What is the benefit – does that mean we now get access to the oil and gas of Libya or does that mean we spend American Tax Dollars (over 70 Million Dollars in the past 3 days in Tomahawk Missiles) to make sure the Arab league and the European Union gets the financial benefit?
What if – the fighter Jet Pilots would have been shot down, not in friendly but enemy territory? Since Gaddafi already declared that he does not accept the UN resolution, he could have considered the Pilots terrorists, spies, or God knows what and punished them at will, even execution.
What if – we send ground forces into Libya? What is the status of the conflict? Is this a Police Action, a war, an expedition – what?
And the question is not so far off because this question involves the treatment of the soldiers and their families when they come home according to the U.S. Veterans Affairs regulations.
Only Combat Veterans participating in an official declared War are eligible for the “War-veteran-Benefits” (7). Every military person knows that the benefits, retirement, and other social assistance for homecoming soldiers have a specific distinction – Soldiers in times of peace and soldiers in combat.
What happens – to the families of the fallen? Do they receive surviving dependents benefits of a soldier at war or the smaller benefits for a soldier in peace?
Remember we have never declared war officially on Libya.
Remember how long it took to accept the Vietnam Veterans legally as War Veterans? It took until 2003, under the Bush Administration to recognize veterans’ benefits for Soldiers exposed to Agent Orange (7). Or the legal battles on legally accepting the fact that Operation Desert Storm participants had been exposed to Chemical Weapons and grant the benefits for this. And it is confirmed that Gaddafi holds Mustard gas weapons.
What if – those F-15 Pilots would have been killed – what regulation would apply to them and their families left behind, since we are not at War with Libya?
Despite the legal constitutional aspect of Obama’s narcissist lone-ranger actions, where he thinks he can do whatever he feels like, once again I think he has confused his job description with that of a dictator. Here in America we have a democracy, a system with “Checks and Balances” a House body and a Senate body it is not a 1 man show; Apparently Harvard Law School no longer teaches the rules of our three branches of government.
I am sure there are tons of questions that can be asked but those are the ones that burn on my heart right now.
As far as I am concerned – all we can do is pray for our men and women in the Armed Forces for their safe return as they follow their loyal calling as Service members. God bless you and thank you for your service.
Pray that they all return home safe because our President in my opinion has not given any serious thought to this unauthorized action and its consequences.
Mr. President, Mr. Speaker of the House Boehner:
Would anybody please explain this to me or answer my questions? Since I am a citizen and a Taxpayer I am entitled to the answers.
1) United Nations.org Press Release
2) Almanac of Policy Issues
3) Cornell University Law School
4) L.A. Times
6) (The Hypocrisy of Europe…) tclehner.wordpress.com
7) United States Veterans Affairs Department
Before I get started I want to point out that this Column is not about Austria as a Country or the Austrian People. Austria itself is a beautiful country. It has tremendous historical sites to see, and the Austrian Citizens are good, friendly, and amazing people.
What this column is all about is the hypocritical brainwashing European and Austrian Governments who, just like the Obama administration, does not give a darn about the wish and desires of their citizens, but stubbornly defend, promote and indoctrinate their socialist/Marxist/already dead multiculturalism/terrorist loving politics.
These are the facts of European Hypocrisy and their desperate attempt to downplay their own failure on the Arabian politics and their desperate attempt to cover their fawning-over of Dictators even against the wish and will of the United States.
When Listening to European News Networks over Satellite such as N-24, or Austrian ORF, it is unbelievable how desperately they live in denial of their own responsibilities.
Listening to those European politicians, these days they sure admit that they might have “misinterpreted” the one or the other situation “but not without pointing the finger at the United States on all their alleged failures” instead of accepting responsibility.
The finger pointing against the United States has already started in order to cover up that the United States did not have any economical businesses in those areas nor did we have strong diplomatic relations in that region.
The entire cover-up is of course properly transported through Government owned propaganda TV stations such as ORF as well as ultra liberal newspapers (real honest and independent Newspapers are anyway not to be found except the FAZ in Germany).
And now, especially the left wing radical Newspapers and magazines such as NEWS and Österreich under the left wing radical owner Wolfgang Fellner, don’t want to hear anything about that. Now that Media act puffed up how official Austria could have ever talked to those dictators.
This is hypocrisy all the way, knowing that Egypt was armed and equipped with American Military technology because they were the only Arab country holding a military alliance with the United States.
The rest of those radical Arab nations with ties to Terrorist Networks have been under a ban by the United States, which gave the irresponsible European Union an opportunity to sell their weapons to them. And now they try to cover that up by blaming the United States.
Let’s get a few facts straight:
1) Weapons in that area
The weapon ban against Libya was lifted by the United Nations in 2004 against the will of the United States by pressure from the European Union.
Latest news reports that European Union Companies sold alone in 2009 weapons and technology to Libya, Bahrain, Palestine, Lebanon, Tunisia, and other radical Islam countries in a net worth of at least $ 474 Million Dollars U.S. Spiegel online reports (1).
Helicopters from Italy, Fighter jets from France and Germany, Communications technology such as Internet and telephone kill switches from Germany, side arms, assault rifles and unmanned drones from Austria, Tanks from France and the UK, Crowd control weapons (used against demonstrations and to repress opposition) from the UK and Kalashnikovs from Russia just to name a few. Russia alone has an ongoing Arms deals with that region in an amount of 40 Billion Dollar, in Libya itself, 2 Billion Dollars AHN News.com (2) reports.
As a matter of fact the standard assault rifle of the Tunisian Military is the Steyr AUG 77, reported among the top ten Assault rifles, and also used by the Australian Army and many special Forces in the world made in Austria.
1) Social Acceptance of Gaddafi and his offspring
Less than a month ago they have cheered to Saiif al-Islam Gaddafi as a reformer, they have fawned over him whenever he was in Austria, his mother and sister have been well liked shopping customers in Vienna. Aisha Gaddafi was cheered in the Austrian left wing media as the “Claudia Schiffer of the middle east. Pointing out how beautiful and intelligent she was, showing strength against America when defending Saddam Hussein”.
Meanwhile, it was confirmed last week that while Gaddafi’s wife Saifya and his daughter Aisha were shopping in Vienna thousands of Libyan protesters were gunned down by Gaddafi.
Gaddafi’s son Saaif al-Islam Gaddafi studied in Vienna at the IMADEC University and in the UK, and was a well liked guest in Austrian Society, praised as a reformer. And though left wing liberals now mock against the diseased former leader of the freedom party Jörg Haider for his visits to Libya and his friendship to Saaif al-Islam Gaddafi, it was actually the former Chancellor of Austria Bruno Kreisky (3) that brought the known Terrorist back into the international community.
Saaif Gaddafi visited the Vienna Opera ball, an officiell Event hosted by the Austrian Federal Government, and holds extreme close ties to the SPOE and the Austrian Government as well as to the German Sister SPD.
Spiegel Magazine in Germany says in an article from 2004 on Gaddafi: “After a Libyan court sentenced 5 Bulgarian Nurses and a Palestinian Doctor to death in a case of contaminated Blood preservation’s Brussels pressures the from Terror pope to Lord of Peace transformed President to stop the execution of the Nurses” (From Spiegel Magazine (4): Nachdem ein libysches Gericht in einem Prozess um verseuchte Blutkonserven fünf bulgarische Krankenschwestern und einen palästinensischen Arzt zum Tode verurteilt hat, setzt Brüssel den zum Friedensfürsten gewendeten Terrorpaten unter Druck, eine Vollstreckung des Urteils zu verhindern.)
1) Political acceptance
It was Bruno Kreisky (1911 to 1990), chancellor of Austria from 1970 to 1983 that first made Muammar al-Gaddafi eligible in the international community and held close relations with him. Gaddafi himself calls him “My good friend Bruno”. The very same Bruno Kreisky that also made Yasser Arafat, leader of the Terror organization PLO, eligible and organized him to speak in front of the United Nations.
And let’s not forget Libya’s seat on the United Nations Humans rights council. Because of the acceptance of Terrorist Countries in that council, the United States boycotted them during the Bush administration, but rejoined them with Barrack Obama Fox News reports (5).
So why else do you think that Europe managed to give the slave to the UN and European Socialist/Marxist Puppet Obama the Nobel Peace Prize?
Libya got that seat, against the will of the United States, by a simple blackmail trade designed by the European Union… In order to get weapons and arms deals as well as oil and gas drilling rights for European Companies, especially Austria who was the one supporting Libya.
1) Business connections
It is also confirmed since 2011/03/01 that the Gaddafi Clan has 1.25 Billion U.S. dollars parked in cash in Austrian banks. It is also confirmed that the “Libyan Investment Authority” holds several shareholdings of Austrian Companies such as Wienerberger bricks and more.
The Libyan Central bank holds 5 % shares on the UNICREDIT Bank group, one of the largest banks in Europe with headquarters in Italy and banks throughout Europe, including the largest bank in Austria called “Bank Austria” (another socialist affiliated bank).
The largest Oil drilling company in Libya is OMV. OMV is a former government owned oil and Gas Company partially privatized in the late 90’s keeping the vast majority (25% + 1 share) in the hands of the Austrian Government. OMV is also known as being extremely affiliated with SPOE, the socialist Party of Austria. Two of the past three chancellors from the SPOE started their careers in the OMV.
Austria retains 25% of its Oil and Gas from Libya, and more than 50% of the remaining 75% is coming from Russia.
Austria was never shy to decry human’s rights violations when it came to protesting against the treatment of those “poor misunderstood” Terrorists at Gitmo. In Libya on the other hand Austria kept silent in order not to endanger its economical interests… The Gaddafi’s were well liked business partners.
So it is not a miracle that the current SPOE leadership around SPOE chancellor Faymann took their sweet time to freeze Gaddafi’s accounts and business connections calling on the European Union for guidance.
Or was it the hope of the European Union, as usual, that they would find a consensus on how to deal with Libya and still keep Austria’s business interests? Maybe the EU was hoping to reach some sort of agreement where Austria could “officially” avoid having to freeze the money and properties of the Gaddafi’s and then somehow return it to them when the dust settled.
No matter who will follow Gaddafi or any of the fallen dictators, it will be infiltrated by radical America hating Muslim groups. History has shown us that the naive hope things will turn to the better and democracy will be established is a misjudgment.
The countries are poor and the people are now expecting manna to fall from heaven and that the western world will flood them with money, but as soon as that does not happen radical Muslim Terror organizations like Al Qaeda and their pied-piper’s are going to have a feast.
We are talking about the European Union members here. Al Qaeda in Maghreb makes a living of kidnapping European Tourists and dragging them through the uncontrolled desert between Tunisia and Libya. From the ransom money they finance their Terror attacks on America.
The European Union knows about that and though, officially not negotiating with Terrorists, they had no shame in using Saaif al-Islam Gaddafi’s alleged charity foundation and Saaif himself to negotiate and pay the ransom. The fact is that the European Union finances Terrorism through the backdoor, which they apparently consider the lesser evil.
And the European Union has now the impertinence to put the blame of the northern Africa situation on us the United States. A situation they caused, it was the European opportunists who accepted and snuggled the past centuries with those Terrorists and now when it comes to taking responsibility for their idiotic politics they want to point the finger at us.
But that is normal for them: They want us THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA to solve their problems and once we solve them we should get the hell out of Dodge and leave those Europeans the field of business.
Sure, with Obama that might work, but not with the rest of America. And Obama with the help of God Almighty will soon be history and a one-term president.
Did Obama screw the situation: Definitely.
When I asked on Facebook: Is Obama 1) way over his head on that situation, or b) incompetent or c) too dumb to handle it, well he is none of that.
He knows what he is doing. He is playing that regions economy right into the hands of the European Union and the radical Muslim Terrorists (see my previous column) (7).
May God have Mercy
May God Bless America
1) Spiegel Magazine Online
2) AHN “All Headline News”
4) Spiegel Magazine Online
5) Middle East Online
6) The Guardian