Why is the US still "at war-not at war" with Libya?

Oh, don't worry.

Obama told us that the "kinetic action" in Libya would be only a matter of days, not weeks.

But, I am beginning to wonder at what point days become weeks.

You must understand, it is not a war if called by a Democrat. Truman had a police action. JFK had a failed coup (Cuba) and an inherited training mission (by Eisenhower) which when the Buddhist monks started to burn themselves of the terror of the French Catholic elite, it became a defending an communist incursion. It was not until Johnson faked the Gulf of Tokin that the term war got kick about since a few too many rich white boys came home dead. Then next took the war over to solve it by claiming victory resigning and leaving Ford to hold the bag.

Democrats do not have wars ---

To YB Logical, remember Obama counts days the opposite of how he counts jobs. With job as real jobs tend toward zero, the number of jobs saved or created tend towards 10^6, while as the number of days of a kinetic actions exceed 90, the rhetoric denotes the days as tending towards zero.

President Obama's ideological presuppositions effectively thwart any effort he might be trying to make regarding the Middle East (assuming he is actually making such an effort). As for the "at war - not at war" situation in Libya, this postmodernist balderdash reminds me of former President Bill Clinton: "That depends on what the meaning of 'war' is."

The longer Obama remains in office, the more damage he does. After his time in office is up, it may very well take decades to repair all of it. Heaven help our country.

Obviously USA wants that country destroyed...

For those who state that USA has not used ground troops but just bombs, a reminder that helicopters USA used are considered ground troop weaponry...

Lets not be naive to not suppose that Obama is the tip of the iceberg concerning all those American lobbies which have started waging wars since the fall of USSSR. Theoretically, he is the one man decision, but not in reality...

Obama is even worst than Bush for the mere fact of starting more wars, instead of ending the previous ones. The same fear-mongering goes in USA and Europe.

And Leftists for the era of heritage have not been militaristic and expansionist? See the U.S.. Edit: ok how approximately China? North Korea? Vietnam? Cuba? eastern Bloc international locations? commencing as much as expire of examples. it truly is fairly much as though leftist international locations all become corrupt protection stress dictatorships. Hmm... Edit2 : They have been/are socialist international locations with communist governments. They not at all finally end up accomplishing communism because of the fact they comprehend that's a pipe dream and basically till now they disintegrate economically they liberalize the markets like Cuba is now doing... Deny all of it you choose for, they espouse leftist ideals.

You feminists worry if El gaddaf's femele guard will be captured!

Imagine a race beetwen our troops and The boys to capture this particular troops and alway sremember that the femele belong to the winners since "Les horaces et les Curiaces"

Rome was knowing how to winn wars but our politicians know how to loose them now!

It was a poorly planned war, although i do support the action taken by N.A.T.O.

Cause Obama is a crazy person.

blowing people to tiny bits is not a war...obama has said as much...

peace be upon him...

why do you doubt him?