I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi. I think there are a lot of other allies in the region we could have worked with. I would not have used American and European forces.

Here’s the problem with this statement.
I saw and listen to this clip, Newt was cut off mid sentence.

“I would not have used American and European forces” is not the end of the sentence, they just cut off what ever was said after “forces”.

I need the complete sentence to know what the complete sentence was.

The other problem with these 2 statements are apples and oranges. One statement is in reference to removing Daffy from power, using the military, Newt clearly says yes to this.

The other statement is to use our military for some undefined humanitarian effort that leaves Daffy in power. Not sure exactly how Newt answered this cuz they cut his reply off.

Personally I’m for removing Daffy from power, using the military and against using our military for some undefined humanitarian effort that leaves Daffy in power.

Don’t know why that would somehow be UN-clear.

This is why he shouldn’t be in charge, and he should never work alone.

And exactly why is that news worthy?

He supported the “no fly zone” action, stuck his finger in the air after Friday’s U.N. vote and decided the hard-core on the right would be mostly against Obama’s late agreement on the “no fly zone” and decided getting in shots at Obama trumped any ideological policy consistency. And while he may be right that most on the right aren’t backing Obama’s move, Newt’s history of these strategic pivots makes you think if he’ll do it here, he might do an even worse pivot as president if the polling data came back the wrong way.

And they talk about Mitt Romney being a flip flopper? With THIS flip flop (within the space of less than two weeks) Newt Gingrich has supersized it. The sad thing is: people who do such a craven flip flop even this age of Googling and Yahoo tend to get…

Exit question: Is this anti-Obama pandering or just a big misunderstanding?

With Newt, it’s probably both.

Today it will be a big misunderstanding before it was anti-Obama pandering.

Tomorrow it will be anti-Obama pandering before it was a big misunderstanding.

No to Newt.

He’ll change his mind again as soon as Congress passes an AUMF.

canopfor on March 23, 2011 at 7:41 PM

apparently the lsm has no problem with it…can you imagine if W did not address the nation prior to iraq or afghanistan?

I really don’t think you can imagine how little I give a damn what the Arab League says or does.

sharrukin on March 23, 2011 at 7:38 PM

You couldn’t possibly care about them less than I do. But that doesn’t matter. Not a single pol from either party would make a move to piss them off. That’s why I say, it is not and has never been option.

unstinkingbelievable

cmsinaz on March 23, 2011 at 7:20 PM

cmsinaz: Transparency alright!!:)

What would the Arab League say to another “occupation” of a Muslim nation in the ME?

MJBrutus on March 23, 2011 at 7:32 PM

I really don’t think you can imagine how little I give a damn what the Arab League says or does. They can prance about shrieking ‘Crusader’ and ‘colonialism’ all they want. They are not our friends and they are not our allies, and only a fool would take counsel from those who have nothing but hostile intentions towards them.

I want them to fear what we might do and the worse motives they think we posses the better. They are not motivated by friendship and they respond to kindness with contempt and murder.

Let them fear.

Update: Newt elaborates on his team’s defense in a Facebook post, stressing that Obama’s dithering and the UN’s weak mandate (humanitarian, not regime change) changed the calculus of the decision to intervene by March 23.

Facebook? He can’t be a serious candidate if he uses Facebook…..

sharrukin on March 23, 2011 at 7:28 PM

You’re right, it would be short weekend’s work if we put our soldiers in there. But you know that was never going to happen. What would the Arab League say to another “occupation” of a Muslim nation in the ME?

The only way he’s going is if we take him out and that was not an option then and it isn’t an option now.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Yes actually it is an option. You may feel the Great and Glorious Peoples Army of Libya is unbeatable but I suspect it would be a weekends worth of effort.

With Obama in charge? The US military would probably lose if it tried to take on the Girl Scouts!

The same nasty government with Qaddafi dead is a win for us and weeks ago could have been done easily.

We all watched as they dithered and wasted time and Qaddafi advanced and literally days if not hours before the end… then they decide to intervene?

I will come clean that we cannot win with this clown posse in charge.

sharrukin on March 23, 2011 at 7:03 PM

No sale. The rebels are a rabble. If we set up an NFZ 3 weeks ago Momo would still be in place. The only way he’s going is if we take him out and that was not an option then and it isn’t an option now.

unstinkingbelievable