The AP is fact-checking Obama’s Libya speech. I’ll say that again, because I know you are in shock: The AP is fact-checking Obama’s Libya speech and they find that his claims were not so true.
In another article about Sarah Palin’s video response to Obama’s address to the Nation last night, I quoted AP writer Ann Gearan:
Trouble is, the war he described Monday doesn’t quite match the fight the United States is in.
It also doesn’t line up with the conflict Obama himself had seemed to presage, when he expressly called for Moammar Gadhafi’s overthrow or resignation. Obama’s stated goals stop well short of that. And although Obama talked of the risks of a long war, he did not say just when or on what terms the United States would leave Libya.
In this article, two AP writers say 1) the Libyan rebels are benefitting from the multinational force, allowing them to mount an offensive to Gaddafi, rather than providing a “defensive crouch.” In other words, the air strikes are clearing the path for a rebel victory and the demise of Gaddafi in some fashion – the plight of civilians not being the only reason for our presence.
2) The Canadian NATO general in charge of the mission reports directly to an American admiral who reports to the supreme allied commander Europe, an American. The implication? Libya is an American-led mission even with NATO supposedly in the lead.
3) The AP takes Obama to task for refusing Congress it’s duty to sanction any American action, and points out Defense Secretary Robert Gates saying the U.S. has no national interest in Libya.
4) Obama’s claim that we have “stopped Gaddafi’s deadly advance” is not true (Obama’s own ‘Mission Accomplished‘ – couldn’t have happened to a more deserving guy than our Barack) is not true:
Army Gen. Carter Ham, the top American officer overseeing the mission, told The New York Times on Monday that “the regime still overmatches opposition forces militarily. The regime possesses the capability to roll them back very quickly. Coalition air power is the major reason that has not happened.”
5) The irony of Obama saying other countries may be content with sitting by and letting citizens be massacred around the world, but not America – we are “different,” doesn’t sit well with the AP, and they mention the atrocities current now and past that the U.S. has ignored.
The bottom line of the article is that the U.S. will lead this conflict, even though we are told command and control will be transferred to NATO.
Da Tech Guy wades into the revelation that rebel leaders admittedly have al-Qaeda fighting on their front lines, and the incorrigible New York Times attitude toward that fact:
“No one seems all that frightened by him,” the New York Times wrote of al-Hasidi after a visit to Darnah in early March.”
Not in the equation above is this morning’s revelation that we are considering arming the anti-government rebels with everything they need: tanks, personnel carriers, guns and ammo (see that story linked below). The AP actually DOES fact-check Obama, but the NYT hangs in tight with their guy. More conversation at Memorandum and I thank them for linking this post, with many related sources:
Related and Background: