What senator stood up to more than 90 countries, successfully defending U.S. sovereignty before the Supreme Court? Answer.

Please use the PayPal button above to donate to The US Report.

Subscribe with Kindle

Search the US Report. 

Please visit The US Report bookstore!

Need a speaker for your next event? Contact us.



 The US Report, an indie publisher, features stories about politics, public figures and government. Learn more about The US Report  and the credentials of our contributorsHelp us keep TUSR online; use the PayPal link in the right column.



Obama’s war in Libya: Once again, Michael Scheuer’s words prove prophetic

Photo: CIA World Fact BookIn March, 2011, after President Barack Obama decided to engage in the war that would ultimately see Muammar Gaddafi  removed from power, one expert didn’t mince words. Michael Scheuer, who headed up the first bin Laden unit for the CIA, said Obama’s decision neutered the U.S. Constitution. Democrats, of course, have no regard for that document anyway, so most media followed Obama’s lead.

The U.S. was liberating another country! Good on Obama.

Scheuer didn’t see it that way, rightly asserting that Libya posed no threat to the U.S., and he labeled the action a “neo-colonial military intervention.”

Scheuer wrote this in March, 2011, as I pointed out in a column at that time, and he even noted indirectly the pitfalls of Benghazi:

Up to the last moment, Obama disingenuously played the part of a shy and unwilling bride, determined to protect her virtue to the last. The credibility of his demeanor was, of course, made mock of by Secretary Clinton’s relentless call for “bombings of Libyan military assets,” and the wild-eyed and not-far-short-of-crazed U.S. UN ambassador, Susan Rice. Ms. Rice’s war lust ought to be sated by the gift of an AK-47, a box of granola bars, and one-way ticket to Benghazi. (NB: Beware also of the lie told by Obama, Clinton, and Rice; Senators McCain and Graham; and much of the media that because Qatar and the UAE are involved in the military mission, and because the UK and France led at the UN, the Libyan intervention will not be seen as a U.S.-led invasion by the Muslim world. Horse hockey! Muslims are not as naive as the bulk of Americans and far better able to see reality through the fog of their leaders’ lies. The Islamic world will see the Libyan action for what it will be: A U.S.-led intervention in yet another Muslim land.)

The end result of our Libya engagement, other than the fact our engagement is technically illegal because Congress didn’t declare war (Obama did), is that Libya now spills into neighboring countries with “militants” (Islamists of various ilk) pushing their own brand of imperialism to  wreak havoc in North Africa and the Mideast.

It was ironic that some Democrats began to rant about the Iraq War and weapons of mass destruction during the Benghazi-Clinton hearings on Wednesday.

Libya held no pretense of WMDs. Obama pitched the war as a “humanitarian” effort.

Scheuer was prophetic, evidenced by unrest and strife around the globe and a U.S. image that continues to erode. Anyone who believes this administration has improved America’s image is buying a fantasy. Read news distributed from other countries, not from state-controlled U.S. media, and you’ll see what I mean.

In the present time, Scheuer puts the Obama-Clinton interventionist policy in context:

When the relentless, war-causing interventionists in those places decided to remove Gadhafi in favor of a “democratic revolution” that did not exist in Libya, or in Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia, Pakistan, Syria or anywhere else in the Arab world, they ushered in everything that has happened since, and if they knew anything about history, the region, and the Islamist movement they would have known it.

If you think Scheuer isn’t worth listening to, consider this. Had President Bill Clinton listened to him about bin Laden, September 11, 2001 might never have happened because Clinton's successor, President George W. Bush, followed the Democrats' policy on the al Qaeda leader. Schuer, in a column for The Washington Times, said this in 2006 as alphabet network ABC announced a mini-series on September 11:

If true, and if ABC’s fact-checkers are not diligent in verifying Mr. Clarke’s stories and claims, the mini-series will be the September 11 commission’s dream come true: The Bush administration will be blamed for September 11, the feckless moral cowardice of the Clinton administration will be disguised and Mr. Clarke and Mr. O’Neill — in my view, two principal authors of September 11 — will be beatified.

(Commentary by Kay B. Day/Jan. 24, 2013)


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

« Clinton theatrics aside, five reasons the truth about Benghazi does make a difference | Main | Durbin uses tirade about Iraq WMDs to run interference for Clinton »