At a time when the economy is in shambles, we are drowning in debt and even Obama is talking about cutting expenses, the Marines are spending a fortune preparing for an amphibious landing on a hostile shore.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/06/17/marine.corps.exercise/index.html?&hpt=hp_c2
One has to ask why? We all know the history of the marines landing on hostile shores. There certainly was a time in our nation’s past when this was a critical need. But, things have really changed since then. I have looked at the globe and tried to figure out where, exactly, such an invasion might make sense. The only obvious answer is Libya. The following article is interesting. I don’t know these guys and do not know the credibility of this report:
http://www.infowars.com/huge-marine-drill-confirms-ground-invasion-of-libya/
Obama is trying to figure a way to get our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, our efforts in Libya thus far have been specifically designed to avoid using U.S troops. We are primarily sending in high tech bombers and drones to do the job. Even Obama admits that we are conducting the war primarily against targets incapable of shooting back.
If the President was someone other than Barack Obama, I would consider this to be nonsense. Why on earth would we consider invading Libya? We have already wasted about $1 billion bombing the crap out of the place and Gaddafi is still there. Congress appears to be on the verge of cutting off funds in response to Obama’s refusal to explain what we are trying to accomplish. Public support is low and dropping like a stone. I can’t imagine congress being supportive of sending in the Marines. But Obama doesn’t seem to really care whether congress approves anything or not. If this report is accurate, and the sources seem to be pretty reliable, we already have troops in Libya and Obama is ready to up the ante. This would put a whole new perspective on the showdown in congress regarding the war powers act. I have tried to imagine the motivation for being so determined to intervene in Libya. I can understand why France and Germany wanted to intervene; they are after the oil. So I did some research to see who else would want Gaddafi gone. The answer is easy: Saudi Arabia. In 2003 some Saudi dissidents were caught in a plot to assassination Crown Prince Abdullah by shooting grenades and other nasty things into his apartment. It turned out they had been recruited by Libyan agents and offered $1 million as an incentive. The Saudis were not impressed! Keep that in mind when reading the following article. Is there any evidence of Saudi influence here?
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/the_muslim_brotherhood_and_weiner.html
There are also rumors that Obama’s Harvard education was funded by a Saudi Prince:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EcC0QAd0Ug
Is it a coincidence that a President with a strong reluctance to use military force suddenly confronts his own congress to attack Libya, a country that is no possible threat to us? You decide! I must admit, I have no answer. This makes no sense. I personally find it very hard to believe we are seriously considering sending troops into Libya. But the exercise is happening and it is a massive undertaking. History shows us that our military does not usually engage in these types of training exercises unless someone feels this is necessary. So are we just wasting a lot of time and money preparing for an amphibious assault that no one anticipates or are we preparing for a real event? Either way, this is worthy of our attention.
TDM