Just Don't Say "Boots On The Ground"

The US and allies will complete the burial of Hillary's plan for a bootless intervention in Libya sometime soon:

U.S. and Allies Weigh Military Action Against ISIS in Libya

By ERIC SCHMITT and HELENE COOPER  JAN. 22, 2016

WASHINGTON — Worried about a growing threat from the Islamic State in Libya, the United States and its allies are increasing reconnaissance flights and intelligence collecting there and preparing for possible airstrikes and commando raids, senior American policy makers, commanders and intelligence officials said this week.

While no decision has been finalized about when the United States and its allies will formally expand action in Libya against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, administration officials indicated that it might be very soon. A decision will probably come in “weeks” but “not hours,” Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Friday.

“It’s fair to say that we’re looking to take decisive military action against ISIL in conjunction with the political process” in Libya, General Dunford said. “The president has made clear that we have the authority to use military force.”

Presumably Obama will want to coordinate this escalation with the Iowa / New Hampshire political calendar.

The article includes a reminder of the scope of the Mid East debacle:

“There is a concern about Libya,” Gen. Joseph L. Votel, the head of the military’s Special Operations Command, said at a conference in Washington this week. “It can’t all be about Iraq and Syria.”

And Iran. And Yemen. And whatever.

Libya could present the West with challenges equal to those an American-led coalition faces in fighting the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. In those two countries, the Islamic State is hemmed in by a host of armed groups with international backing and is being pummeled by American, British and other allied airstrikes.

Right. Bombing a conventional government into submission rarely works. So what are the prospects for bombing a terrorist group holding the civilian population hostage?

Comments

[Marlene]

There is a wine/coffee bar in Venice that has lots of gourmet type food. I noticed yesterday they have Tate's Cookies. I'm going to have to have to buy some,they sound delicious.

Go Pats!

[henry]

Clarice, those boys out smug a Prius! Yet Trump is too extreme for them. Perhaps they get lamppost priority ahead of the Obamites.

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

I think it will be worth it to vote for Trump just to PO Garrison Keillor. It would be a nice retirement present for that gasbag.

That wheezing doofus once promised to leave the country and then came back like a bounced check. There are lots of words for vermin like him; none of them positive. The poster boy for everything wrong with state media.

[anonamom]

Tate's recipe is the identical one from the back of the Nestle package, minus 4T flour plus one teaspoon water.

Little things mean a lot!

[Cecil Turner]

Yeah, but she uses national power for her own or just plain idiotic ends rather than the nation's;

Yep, she's worse on that than almost everybody else.

From Reuters 5-day rolling average poll of Republican primary voters:

Tells exactly the same story as at RCP: he's winning in the primary, loses the general.

1st blood, Denver!

Uncharacteristic breakdown in the Pats' secondary. Good drive by Denver--except running game not yet established.

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

The Clintons as we now know them were not known to the country then.

I pegged Slick instantly as a liar, bullshitter and a cheat. Maybe it was growing up below the Mason Dixon line.

[henry]

Missed extra point? Karma.

[Porchlight]

Well, yeah, Cap'n. He was a Dem, after all. We just didn't yet know the full depths of their mendacity. And we still don't.

[MaryD]

anonamon, you're right about the little things. I notice four in the Tate's recipe;
salted butter
ONLY dark brown sugar
the water
less flour.

I also always use a small melon scoop to measure out the cookies

BACK TO THE GAME!

[Porchlight]

Hooray for salted butter!

[daddy]

Jack,

Best of luck on the knee. Really pulling for you.

On the quake and since I'm a Darwin nut, I recall that when he undergoes that huge quake in Chile in 1834 he notes how walls oriented in 1 direction were totally demolished, whereas walls perpendicular to those destroyed walls held out fine, thus figuring out how these shakes can or do occur in a particular orientation.

I notice that all the bookshelves and kitchen cabinets on the starboard side of our house, in a north to south orientation, were flung open and tossed around whereas everything else on all our other walls remained solidly in place. May just be a function of poor construction on the starboard side of our house, as there's been some sinking of an outdoor porch we've had to shore up before, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit to find out from chatting with the neighbors if they experienced the same directional chaos.

If anyone cares, here's a long paste from "The Voyage Of The Beagle":

The town of Concepcion was built in the usual Spanish fashion, with all the streets running at right angles to each other; one set ranging S.W. by W., and the other set N.W. by N. The walls in the former direction certainly stood better than those in the latter; the greater number of the masses of brickwork were thrown down towards the N.E. Both these circumstances perfectly agree with the general idea, of the undulations having come from the S.W., in which quarter subterranean noises were also heard; for it is evident that the walls running S.W. and N.E. which presented their ends to the point whence the undulations came, would be much less likely to fall than those walls which, running N.W. and S.E., must in their whole lengths have been at the same instant thrown out of the perpendicular; for the undulations, coming from the S.W., must have extended in N.W. and S.E. waves, as they passed under the foundations. This may be illustrated by placing books edgeways on a carpet, and then, after the manner suggested by Michell, imitating the undulations of an earthquake: it will be found that they fall with more or less readiness, according as their direction more or less nearly coincides with the line of the waves. The fissures in the ground generally, though not uniformly, extended in a S.E. and N.W. direction, and therefore corresponded to the lines of undulation or of principal flexure. Bearing in mind all these circumstances, which so clearly point to the S.W. as the chief focus of disturbance, it is a very interesting fact that the island of S. Maria, situated in that quarter, was, during the general uplifting of the land, raised to nearly three times the height of any other part of the coast...

The different resistance offered by the walls, according to their direction, was well exemplified in the case of the Cathedral.

The side which fronted the N.E. presented a grand pile of ruins, in the midst of which door-cases and masses of timber stood up, as if floating in a stream. Some of the angular blocks of brickwork were of great dimensions; and they were rolled to a distance on the level plaza, like fragments of rock at the base of some high mountain. The side walls (running S.W. and N.E.), though exceedingly fractured, yet remained standing; but the vast buttresses (at right angles to them, and therefore parallel to the walls that fell) were in many cases cut clean off, as if by a chisel, and hurled to the ground. Some square ornaments on the coping of these same walls, were moved by the earthquake into a diagonal position. A similar circumstance was observed after an earthquake at Valparaiso, Calabria, and other places, including some of the ancient Greek temples. 1 This twisting displacement, at first appears to indicate a vorticose movement beneath each point thus affected; but this is highly improbable. May it not be caused by a tendency in each stone to arrange itself in some particular position, with respect to the lines of vibration,—in a manner somewhat similar to pins on a sheet of paper when shaken? Generally speaking, arched doorways or windows stood much better than any other part of the buildings. Nevertheless, a poor lame old man, who had been in the habit, during trifling shocks, of crawling to a certain doorway, was this time crushed to pieces.

[Porchlight]

Fascinating, daddy. It doesn't seem like it could be the house causing that directional effect.

New thread.

[MaryD]

LOL,Porch! me too

[Porchlight]

The fahhhncy gourmets got everyone off it, MaryD, but I think it's the only way to go, esp. in baking.

[derwill]

Trouble is, Cecil, it doesn't matter how electable you're supposed to be in the general, if you can't get elected--i.e. nominated--within your own party in the first place.

This year not one of the supposedly electable tomato cans (okay, 2008 and 2012 didn't pan out like they promised us, but this time it will be different, for sure), can't even get into double digit support within their own primary. The closest is Rubio, and Jeb! and the GOPe in their infinite wisdom have decided to take him out, because he cut ahead in line.

Ironically, the way things are shaping up, I think this time it (the election) really will be different--just not in the way the GOPe, and the pundits could ever imagine or want.

Would anyone ever have predicted that Donald Trump of all people would be where he is today in the race? Hell, if I was a betting person, last Spring I would have put money on Walker winning the nomination.

[Porchlight]

Good points, derwill. Predictions are usually bunk. Especially about the future.

[Threadkiller]

I predicted Cruz's eligibility problems would be used against him.

;-)

[Truthbetold]

Derwill

That's because you could not have forecasted the help Trump would receive from the media

[derwill]

I'll tell you what I did predict in the early days and on this very blog--that we didn't need to worry about Trump, because he would eventually say something so outrageous that he would blow himself up, and his support would be tumble.

Well, since then, he's said all kinds of things that have sent the GOP, and the Dems/media into hysterics, and his support has only increased.

And I don't know what you mean about the "help" he's received from the media. They gleefully report on everything he says because they think it hurts the Republican "brand," and they also gleefully report every time some GOP office holder or conservative pundit denigrates him because it furthers the Dem meme that the GOP is divided and in disarray.

So if the media is "helping" him, that certainly has not been their intention. I think the media is as baffled as everyone else by whatever is going on with Trump.

[Cecil Turner]

Trouble is, Cecil, it doesn't matter how electable you're supposed to be in the general, if you can't get elected--i.e. nominated--within your own party in the first place.

We're in the middle of the primary season. The objective is to nominate somebody that can win. At present, the list looks like: Rubio, Cruz, Carson, Christie, Bush . . . and Trump (yeah, in that order).

[henry]

Derwill, tbt's boss Axelrod is unnerved by Trump's media hold -- it threatens Hilligula. We saw Trump shut down the "war on women" thing already. Thus tbt's dispatched to sow anti Trump dissent. I think Trump's showmanship is an all around threat. I wish I knew what Trump really cared about (beyond getting his name in big plastic gold colored letters more places than Senator Byrd). It is fascinating, except it may happen.

[Truthbetold]

Derwill

take a closer look at what the media is really doing.

Henry, do you even have a clue who Axelrod is and what he is about?

[derwill]

The reason I don't put much stock today in which of the Republican candidates has the best chance to win in the general is because none of them have yet to be subjected to the total character assassination by the Dems/MSM that we know is coming. For instance, what if Rubio really does have a bimbo problem? And I know from my ultra-liberal sister who frequents the sewers like DU and Daily Kos that they think they have proof of some dirty financial dealings in his past. We certainly know for sure that even if those allegations are not true, the MSM will report on them anyway. And that's just Rubio--who today is supposed to be the most electable of them all.

Trump is not my first choice either--at least yet--but at this point electability in the general while something to consider, is not going to be the driving force behind my vote.

[henry]

Axelrod, the bald dbag political fixer in Chicago that recently shaved his porn staches and pays you?

[Truthbetold]

Yes, he is a dirtbag that Trump gives money to.

[henry]

And Trumps money is used to pay you to troll here.

[Truthbetold]

Henry

Do you realize how stupid that assertion is?

[derwill]

Here's what I see: Trump says something that no one else has dared to say out loud before. The media reports on what he says. The Dems, the GOPe, the talking heads and pundits on both sides of the aisle all react in horror to what he says. They denigrate him for saying what he said, and his supporters for agreeing with what he said.

But for the first time everyone is talking about the something that no one else has dare to talk about out loud before, because the Dems/MSM didn't want it talked about.

And every time that happens he edges that much closer to winning the nomination.

[henry]

No stupider than any assertion you have made towards other commenters here. In fact, given your reaction to it... I am almost to the point of believing it is factually true.

[Truthbetold]

Derwill

The media ignores the fact that candidates have talked about those things.

Talk about building a wall has been going on for eons. Trump not to long ago was accusing Romney of being to tough on illegals.

Just one of the recent flops the media is ignoring.

[Truthbetold]

Henry

You continue to embarrass yourself

[henry]

So Axelrod pays for broken records...

[derwill]

--The media ignores the fact that candidates have talked about those things.--

Proving my point. The media didn't report on what those other candidates said, because theose were subjects that the Dems didn't want talked about. Now, because of Trump, they're being talked about. Case in point: The Clintons' own war on the women Bill sexually molested.

[Buckeye]

Rubio would wilt once subjected to the full onslaught of the progs and their media cohorts.

Under pressure he starts sweating like a pig. You can bet there will be split screens showing him beside Nixon from the debate with Kennedy.

Won't be pretty, won't get elected.

[Truthbetold]

Wrong, the media is giving Trump credit for issues others have been fighting. Why is that? look past the BS

[Truthbetold]

Derwill

Look deeper and you'll find manipulation the likes of 2008

[henry]

Ah, Hillary got robbed in 2008 as well. Coincidence? Not to tbt's boss Axelrod.

[derwill]

So the media--who we all know are simply propaganda organs for the liberal narrative--are now giving Trump credit for talking about things that neither they nor the Democrats have ever wanted to talk about before, because those things hurt the precious Liberal narrative and we couldn't have that.

But now even though Trump is hurting the Dems by attacking and undermining the Liberal narrative, the media has decided to report on what he's saying because . . . why? They love him more than they love the Democrat Party and the Liberal Narrative.

Yeah, right.

[Truthbetold]

Has anyone ever heard Trump talk about the constitution?

Does he think the right to bare arms is the "Two Amendment"?

[henry]

Tbt, Trump has a carry permit and speaks highly of the eminent domain clause. So yes, he technically knows the Constitution and at least takes advantage of the 2nd Amendment in a place unfriendly to it. Biblical garbling has been noted. Cmon man, Axelrod deserves better for his pieces of silver.

[Dave (in MA)]

In the last couple of minutes Nantz has called Brady "Manning" and Edelman "Amendola", but Phil Simmms gets all the criticism.

[Truthbetold]

You are taking to simplistic of a view.

[Truthbetold]

Henry

Bloomberg and Obama are surrounded by people who carry guns.
Are they defenders of the 2nd amendment. Go back to sleep.

[henry]

Ooooooh! It's too complicated for my poor little Ivy League / PhD brain. Not. Try again to earn Axelrod's silver.

[Cecil Turner]

You can bet there will be split screens showing him beside Nixon from the debate with Kennedy.

Imagine, for just a moment, a Rubio vs Hillary debate. He won't even have to open his mouth. Normally I'm all about substance over form, but in this case . . .

OTOH, if Trump is the nominee, the split screens will be him vs himself.

[henry]

BTW, bloomy and the bamster, or Rosie O'Donnell aside. I carry. Trump has a license to carry. That Trump can afford armed guards or qualifies for secret service protection is fine -- he is not the hypocrite the ones you note are. He exercises his 2nd amendment rights directly.

Note: so does Gov Perry, who I preferred over Trump.

[Truthbetold]

PhD in what?

[Truthbetold]

Then why are you defending Trump?

[Porchlight]

derwill upthread - I love what Trump did to Hillary. Her: "You're sexist." Him: "FU, you covered for your husband the rapist." That set her right back on her granny heels. Bill pretty much disappeared after that. And then, grudgingly, the media had to talk about it.

That's the way to deal with Democrats.

[henry]

I'm not defending Trump... I'm attacking your boss Axelrod through you.

[Truthbetold]

No. Your just making a fool of youself.

[henry]

Back to the broken record then...

[Truthbetold]

You mean the Axelrod broken record?

[Porchlight]

What a joke. My hat is off to you, henry.

[henry]

PhD in IT / Management of Technology. Consider a different Axelrod than your boss, and repetitive prisoners dilemma. Tit for tat. Simplest form of game theory.

[derwill]

Cecil, I agree that on paper Rubio looks like a good match up against Hillary, but I keep hearing rumblings that the Dems have dirt on Rubio. And if they do, we can count on the MSM making it stick.

With Trump, we already know that when he's attacked, he comes out swinging. Will Rubio be that aggressive on the counterattack? I have my doubts.

Which is why I'm not putting a lot of stock in who appears the most electable today. Not after I saw what the MSM did to those two most electable candidates McCain and Romney, once they had the nomination in hand.

[Truthbetold]

Porchlight

Are you a Trump defender?

[henry]

ROFL