Trump flip-flops on Libyan intervention

[sinkspur]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-flip-flops-on-libyan-intervention/article/2593041#.V1RNSnbmGe8.twitter

Trump flip-flops on Libyan intervention

By GABBY MORRONGIELLO (@GABRIELLAHOPE_) • 6/5/16 11:51 AM

Months after saying the U.S. would be "much better off" if Moammar Gadhafi were still the prime minister of Libya, Donald Trump reversed course on Sunday and said he would have approved a "surgical shot" to take him out.

"We would be so much better off if Gadhafi would be in charge right now," Trump told the moderators during a GOP primary debate in late February.

"I didn't mind surgical. And I said surgical," Trump said Sunday morning during an appearance on CBS. "You do a surgical shot and you take him out."

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee, who previously opposed the U.S. intervention in Libya, and has long criticized Hillary Clinton for it, told CBS he "wasn't for what he have right now.


"I was for something, but I wasn't for what we have right now," Trump said. "I wasn't for what happened."

He continued, "I mean look at with Benghazi and all of the problems that we've had. It was handled horribly. I was never for strong intervention. I could have seen surgical where you take out Gadhafi and his group."

 

[sinkspur]

[sinkspur]

[ABX]

He flip flopped on this again?
He has taken pretty much every conceivable position on this. All things to all people. No matter what you believe, you can find words from Trump on it.

[sinkspur]

Trump lies and lies and lies and, even when caught in his lies, he lies more.

And yet the Trumpkins will  come on here and,yes, lie too in defense of their liar.

Astounding.

[Mesaclone]

There's no need for us to lie. We just lay out the actual events and context and the truth clarifies itself.  The fact that you don't understand policy and strategy is entirely on you.

He didn't flip flop on anything. He WAS against intervention there in the way we did it, and he IS against intervention there in the way we did it. All he said was that if you needed to change regimes there you do so in a surgical strike sort of way. As that is nothing like what we actually did, and since he was critical of the WAY in which we reacted to the Libyan situation...he is precisely on his original point.

I realize nuance can be difficult for some like yourself to fully understand. You see, not intervening directly in a situation like Libya does not mean we fail to do anything at all. It is a measure of tactics and magnitude...a surgical strike on an Al Qaeda leader in Yemen does not mean we are intervening in the Yemeni civil war, for example. I know its complex, Sinkspur, so you may have to really think about what he's saying for a while before its obviousness sinks in fully. Give it some time.

[sinkspur]

There's no need for us to lie. We just lay out the actual events and context and the truth clarifies itself.  The fact that you don't understand policy and strategy is entirely on you.

He didn't flip flop on anything. He WAS against intervention there in the way we did it, and he IS against intervention there in the way we did it. All he said was that if you needed to change regimes there you do so in a surgical strike sort of way. As that is nothing like what we actually did, and since he was critical of the WAY in which we reacted to the Libyan situation...he is precisely on his original point.

I realize nuance can be difficult for some like yourself to fully understand. You see, not intervening directly in a situation like Libya does not mean we fail to do anything at all. It is a measure of tactics and magnitude...a surgical strike on an Al Qaeda leader in Yemen does not mean we are intervening in the Yemeni civil war, for example. I know its complex, Sinkspur, so you may have to really think about what he's saying for a while before its obviousness sinks in fully. Give it some time.

Go up and read the yellow-highlighted portion of Dickerson's interview.  Trump was completely unaware he had supported intervention in 2011!!

Some nuance.  Trump can't remember from one day to the next what he said, so he just says whatever he thinks people want to hear.   Trump has no idea what a "surgical" strike even means, nor how it would done. And, for some reason, he never thought about what would happen if Gadaffi were removed. What would happen next? Why, the people would take over from Qaddafi eventually and then “they should pay us back,” using oil revenue, out of appreciation.

Your defense of Trump is weak and you fail to recognize that Trump wasn't even aware he had supported intervention. 

You look foolish, my man. You should at least acknowledge that Trump looks ridiculous and, if you continue to defend him, so do you.

[Mechanicos]

Go up and read the yellow-highlighted portion of Dickerson's interview.  Trump was completely unaware he had supported intervention in 2011!!

Some nuance.  Trump can't remember from one day to the next what he said, so he just says whatever he thinks people want to hear.   Trump has no idea what a "surgical" strike even means, nor how it would done. And, for some reason, he never thought about what would happen if Gadaffi were removed. What would happen next? Why, the people would take over from Qaddafi eventually and then “they should pay us back,” using oil revenue, out of appreciation.

Your defense of Trump is weak and you fail to recognize that Trump wasn't even aware he had supported intervention. 

You look foolish, my man. You should at least acknowledge that Trump looks ridiculous and, if you continue to defend him, so do you.

Unless you have perfect memory of everything you said years ago you got nothing here. Mesaclone nailed you pretty good.

[RedHead]

All he said was that if you needed to change regimes there you do so in a surgical strike sort of way.

OK so say a President Trump dropped a Hellfire missile on Qaddafi while he was driving down the highway.  Boom, Qaddafi is gone and you can't get much more surgical than that.  Then what?  How would Libya be different?

[Mesaclone]

Go up and read the yellow-highlighted portion of Dickerson's interview.  Trump was completely unaware he had supported intervention in 2011!!

Some nuance.  Trump can't remember from one day to the next what he said, so he just says whatever he thinks people want to hear.   Trump has no idea what a "surgical" strike even means, nor how it would done. And, for some reason, he never thought about what would happen if Gadaffi were removed. What would happen next? Why, the people would take over from Qaddafi eventually and then “they should pay us back,” using oil revenue, out of appreciation.

Your defense of Trump is weak and you fail to recognize that Trump wasn't even aware he had supported intervention. 

You look foolish, my man. You should at least acknowledge that Trump looks ridiculous and, if you continue to defend him, so do you.

No, he was unaware of the specific terms he used 5 years ago in a single conversation. Heck, I can barely recall what I talked about with my wife last night over dinner...how in holy he!! would anyone remeber the specific phrasing of a 5 year old interview? That's ridiculous.

And as it turned out, that 5 year old conversation was perfectly in synch with his current position, so not sure what the issue here even is?

[sinkspur]

No, he was unaware of the specific terms he used 5 years ago in a single conversation. Heck, I can barely recall what I talked about with my wife last night over dinner...how in holy he!! would anyone remeber the specific phrasing of a 5 year old interview? That's ridiculous.

And as it turned out, that 5 year old conversation was perfectly in synch with his current position, so not sure what the issue here even is?

In the intervening years between 2011 and now--especially in the primary campaign--Trump said he opposed any intervention in Libya.

TRUMP: And you can make the case, if you look at Libya, look at what we did there– it’s a mess– if you look at Saddam Hussein with Iraq, look what we did there– it’s a mess– it’s gonna be same thing.

TODD: You think the Middle East would be better today if Gaddafi, Saddam and Assad were sort of– if Saddam and Gaddafi were still there and Assad were stronger? You think–the Middle East would be safer?

TRUMP: It’s not even a contest, Chuck. It’s not even a contest…

Of course it would be. You wouldn’t have had your Benghazi situation which is one thing which was just a terrible situation. But, of course, it would. Libya is– is not even– nobody even knows what’s goin’ on over there. It’s not even a country anymore.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/donald-trump-bashes-libya-intervention-which-he-strongly-advocated-for-in-2011/

Don't give me that nuance bullshit.  Ask Trump what "nuance" means.  I'm betting he couldn't tell you.

[Mesaclone]

OK so say a President Trump dropped a Hellfire missile on Qaddafi while he was driving down the highway.  Boom, Qaddafi is gone and you can't get much more surgical than that.  Then what?  How would Libya be different?

I don't expect that's how it would happen contextually, and addressing that sort of hypothetical without my knowing all of the intel from inside Libya at the time would make it impossible to provide a complete answer. A short answer is that you'd have to first have a plan in place to secure all the loose weapons caches in the country, and to promote non-ISIS groups sufficiently to prevent an ISIS takeover...two tasks that we failed at miserably. Further, he would't send in a poorly protected ambassador and CIA station and then abandon them during an attack...followed by months of lying about what had actually occurred.

So that's a start. But while Donald was saying you could use a surgical strike to take out Qaddafi, he was not saying that was the only or even best way to resolve the Libya situation. We all know what the worst way was, as we saw it play out in real time.

[mountaineer]

All he said was that if you needed to change regimes there you do so in a surgical strike sort of way.

I don't believe he said anything like "if you needed to change regimes." He said Gaddhafi should not have been killed, then he said we should have killed him in a surgical strike.

Which is it? If he's just objecting to the manner of his death, why did he say things would be better if he still were alive? Does he understand the difference between alive and dead? 

[Mesaclone]

In the intervening years between 2011 and now--especially in the primary campaign--Trump said he opposed any intervention in Libya.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/donald-trump-bashes-libya-intervention-which-he-strongly-advocated-for-in-2011/

Don't give me that nuance bullshit.  Ask Trump what "nuance" means.  I'm betting he couldn't tell you.

What's your point here, he DID oppose intervention in Libya...then and now.

[Mesaclone]

I don't believe he said anything like "if you needed to change regimes." He said Gaddhafi should not have been killed, then he said we should have killed him in a surgical strike.

Which is it? If he's just objecting to the manner of his death, why did he say things would be better if he still were alive? Does he understand the difference between alive and dead? 

He was laying out ways it could have been done, perhaps even should have been done if it was necessary. He was not laying out his own policy approach to addressing the whole of the Libya situation. You're drawing broad conclusions from a small portion of a conversation about one narrow aspect of our LIbya involvement.

[sinkspur]

What's your point here, he DID oppose intervention in Iraq...then and now.

We're talking LIBYA in the quote you cited.  So, he was FOR intervention in 2011, was against intervention since then, now is, all of a sudden,for it again.

And, he did NOT oppose intervention in Iraq BEFORE the Iraq War started.  Do I need to post the Howard Stern interview again, in 2002, when he agreed we should go into Iraq?

You're beginning to not make sense.  Too many mimosas at brunch?

[INVAR]

No, he was unaware of the specific terms he used 5 years ago in a single conversation. Heck, I can barely recall what I talked about with my wife last night over dinner...how in holy he!! would anyone remeber the specific phrasing of a 5 year old interview? That's ridiculous.

And as it turned out, that 5 year old conversation was perfectly in synch with his current position, so not sure what the issue here even is?

Another example of Mesaclone applying Saul Alinsky's  "Ethics of means and Ends" Rule No. 4:

4. “[J]udgment must be made in the context of the times in which the action occurred and not from any other chronological vantage point.”

IOWs, it's the blueprint of how to tap-dance out of being caught in a lie or changing position.

[Mechanicos]

In the intervening years between 2011 and now--especially in the primary campaign--Trump said he opposed any intervention in Libya.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/donald-trump-bashes-libya-intervention-which-he-strongly-advocated-for-in-2011/

Don't give me that nuance bullshit.  Ask Trump what "nuance" means.  I'm betting he couldn't tell you.

I see what you and the liberal sources (mediate [Soros]) did there, interchanged invasion with intervention a much broader term.

[andy58-in-nh]

Ask Trump what "Nuance" means.  I'm betting he couldn't tell you.

That's Beyonce's younger sister, right?

[RedHead]

I don't expect that's how it would happen contextually, and addressing that sort of hypothetical without my knowing all of the intel from inside Libya at the time would make it impossible to provide a complete answer. A short answer is that you'd have to first have a plan in place to secure all the loose weapons caches in the country, and to promote non-ISIS groups sufficiently to prevent an ISIS takeover...two tasks that we failed at miserably.

So in other words, nation building.  Take out the leader you don't like and install the leader that you do, with all the time, expense, and commitment that involves.  Where is that a "surgical strike"?

So that's a start. But while Donald was saying you could use a surgical strike to take out Qaddafi, he was not saying that was the only or even best way to resolve the Libya situation. We all know what the worst way was, as we saw it play out in real time.

He doesn't say because he doesn't know.  Trump is the master of coming up with a simplistic, one line, unworkable solution.

[Mechanicos]

So in other words, nation building.  Take out the leader you don't like and install the leader that you do, with all the time, expense, and commitment that involves.  Where is that a "surgical strike"?

He doesn't say because he doesn't know.  Trump is the master of coming up with a simplistic, one line, unworkable solution.

US has done so more then once without an invasion of troops.

[RedHead]

US has done so more then once without an invasion of troops.

When was the last time?

[Mechanicos]

When was the last time?

US has done regime changes a few times. The usual method is to create a puppet and help that person take over the country with money and support then have a puppet state.

I could be wrong but  I suspect Bahraini was the most recent.

I normally do not use wiki but here it lists some more
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_U.S._regime_change_actions

[RedHead]

US has done regime changes a few times. The usual method is to create a puppet and help that person take over the country with money and support then have a puppet state.

I could be wrong but  I suspect Bahraini was the most recent.

I normally do not use wiki but here it lists some more
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_U.S._regime_change_actions

You have the knowledge base of a true Trump supporter. 

[Timber Rattler]

I realize nuance can be difficult for some like yourself to fully understand.

Oh wow... NUANCE...a John Kerry word!!!!