FACT CHECK: How Obama's Libya claims fit the facts (AP)

[VoteProgressive]

Full Story at

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110329/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_libya_fact_check

WASHINGTON – There may be less than meets the eye to President Barack Obama's statements Monday night that NATO is taking over from the U.S. in Libya and that U.S. action is limited to defending people under attack there by Moammar Gadhafi's forces.
In transferring command and control to NATO, the U.S. is turning the reins over to an organization dominated by the U.S., both militarily and politically. In essence, the U.S. runs the show that is taking over running the show.
And the rapid advance of rebels in recent days strongly suggests they are not merely benefiting from military aid in a defensive crouch, but rather using the multinational force in some fashion — coordinated or not — to advance an offensive.
Here is a look at some of Obama's assertions in his address to the nation Monday, and how they compare with the facts:

OBAMA: "Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action."

THE FACTS: Mass violence against civilians has also been escalating elsewhere, without any U.S. military intervention anticipated.
More than 1 million people have fled the Ivory Coast, where the U.N. says forces loyal to the incumbent leader, Laurent Gbagbo, have used heavy weapons against the population and more than 460 killings have been confirmed of supporters of the internationally recognized president, Alassane Ouattara.
The Obama administration says Gbagbo and Gadhafi have both lost their legitimacy to rule. But only one is under attack from the U.S.
Presidents typically pick their fights according to the crisis and circumstances at hand, not any consistent doctrine about when to use force in one place and not another. They have been criticized for doing so — by Obama himself.
In his pre-presidential book "The Audacity of Hope," Obama said the U.S. will lack international legitimacy if it intervenes militarily "without a well-articulated strategy that the public supports and the world understands."
He questioned: "Why invade Iraq and not North Korea or Burma? Why intervene in Bosnia and not Darfur?"
Now, such questions are coming at him.

<snip>

[atreides1]

1. Thank you for this

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[VoteProgressive]

3. 100% correct! nt

[truedelphi]

4. On the other hand, anything from the AP may be true,

or totally made up.

As someone who followed the AP and their made up reports over several years on the MTBE issue, and who finally tracked down the man they were quoting about MTBE's safety and I asked him why he said that MTBE was safe, he told me that he said the opposite. (in that case, the MTBE Big Oil forces needed the truth to be spun on its butt.)

AP is to truth as chocolate fudge cake with whipped cream is to successful diets. The AP's sound bytes are nice and easy on the brain, but in many cases there is no truth in their reports.

[JoePhilly]

5. This sad meme again.

If you can't fix the world all at once, you have to stop fixing the part you are working on.

[FrenchieCat]

6. AP never met a fact that once they got through with it didn't simply become their opinion.

FUCK the Associated Press corporation,
which is part of the GOP message machine.

But be naive if you must,
as you have that right.