How we know HRH Obama is not serious about regime change in Libya

Obama has told the world (and the US Congress via the newspapers), that “regime change” in Libya is the policy of the US, that Qaddafi “must go,” etc., etc., blah blah blah.

Really?

Nahh… He’s just kidding. Really.

Here’s what we are doing in Libya: Creating and enforcing a no-fly zone by launching 110 (to-date), $569,000 cruise missiles at sand dunes, AA radar sites and various Command and Control sites.  So that’s about $62.5M in cruise missiles so far…. (This is actually a deal; the FY11 price for the next block is $1.066M per copy. Maybe using these up lets the Navy increase its unit buy on the new ones? At any rate, replacement cost for these $62.5M of Tomahwaks will be $117M+. Your tax dollars at work.)

Sure, we’ve degraded his AA capability. We’ve whacked a few tanks to ensure they never fly again. Evidently we’ve sent a few B2s from Missouri to bomb an airfield. That probably cost several million all by itself.)

But that’s not “regime change.”

We’ve lost an F-15E costing upwards of $35M. The E-version is a ground-attack model. So it was pounding ground targets, not shooting-down fighters or choppers in the event Libya A) has any left and B) they come up to play.

That’s not “regime change,” either.

We’ve spent millions deploying ships to the theater of operations. None of these ships can effect “regime change.”

But that’s all anecdotal evidence that we really aren’t interested in the removal of Qaddafi. Want to know how you can really tell we don’t care?

Putting two Special Forces sniper teams in on the ground a week ago or a few weeks ago, or whenever it became the ‘policy of the US’ that Qaddafi go, letting them stalk Qaddafi and then put a bullet in his head from a mile away and exfil the sand trap would have accomplished regime change in arguably under $2M, and we’d be done. Quietly, effectively, quickly.

How many civilian lives would this have saved in Libya? Thousands. If Saddam’s reaction to the marsh Arabs after Kuwait (killing upwards of 30,000) is any indication, once Obama gets tired of this – or his base forces him to quit – Qaddafi will remain in-place and kill tens of thousands more. These people ALL would have been saved had Obama acted the grown-up.

How much money would it have saved a fiscally-challenged America? Millions to billions, depending on how long HRH Obama keeps this up.

And it would have accomplished the “regime change” Obama pretends he wants.

Why don’t we do it?

Carter issued an Executive Order against it. Nothing in the world is stopping Obama from rescinding that, even momentarily, to get the job done – or just ignoring it as he ignores every other law and precedent he dislikes. Like asking Congress if it’s OK to send American forces to war.

In fact, nothing is stopping Obama from going to the CIA or Delta Force, asking for the best sniper (contractor in the case of the CIA, or seconded-to the CIA from Delta, or just sending Delta) to go in with a small (2-man? 4-man?) team to get the job done. Or two teams just in-case.

(And if you don’t want the US military assassinating the clown, “retire” the best team, hire them as civilian contractors at CIA, do the job and then either re-hire them to the military, or give them a few million each (the cost of under a day of the current OpTempo) to retire somewhere nice and warm and quiet.)

Instead, we are wasting billions of dollars and thousands, or tens of thousands, of lives to do the same thing while pretending it’s not our goal – and we’ll probably fail.

Is there a particular reason we can’t all be grown-ups and choose the best available means to get the job done?

If not, there is no reason to think that we actually believe in the job. In fact, it would be foolish in the extreme to actually believe this is our goal when we choose the worst possible method of achieving it, the one sure to cost the most in lives and dollars.

It really is that simple.

If we wanted Qaddafi out, we’d silently put a bullet in his head and never take credit or blame. Instead we are doing about the noisiest, most expensive alternative which, more than likely, will fail.

Obama is SUCH a loser.

Liberals – destroying lives wherever they go.

About Alex Scipio

About Alex Scipio: Alex moved out of the People's Republic of California to the Free State of Arizona, finally tiring of the lack of the Bill of Rights, the overgrown idiocracy, and the catering to non-Americans & welfare recipients. He still wonders how America got from Truman, Eisenhower, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan to the Liberal and Conservative extremes so badly managing America today. And, yes, islam DOES need to be annihilated. And doing what he can to get folks away from the extremes of political life.
This entry was posted in Foreign Policy and International, War and Terrorism. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to How we know HRH Obama is not serious about regime change in Libya

  1. Radium says:

    Discussion over at “Belmont Club” suggests (unconfirmed) that the more commi end of the dems are toihwrng their toys out of the pram in protest.They can still console themselves by imagining how much worse this would have been if Dubya were still commi in chief…How long before the MSM revert to type, and start showing pictures of blown up children, killed by rich and eevil white/racist folks in the west?Saddam managed to kill Kurds and Shia, despite a no fly and despite almost daily bombing. I don’t think that Ghedaffi Duck is any less murderous, and I don’t think his country is any less tribal, or less prone to insurrection after he’s set fire to the oilfields and disappeared off to live with Chavez.In short, this is going to get very messy,But, let’s not let anyone forget about “Gunwalker”…

  2. Pingback: Inconsistency, Questionable Morality Mark War in Libya « Cynical Synapse

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *