When Obama decided to go to war unilaterally in Libya (without the consent of Congress – against the writings of the Constitution), I wrote that this was a big mistake. Not just for violating the Constitution, but because he was only going to use our Air Force and no ground troops. Yes, this move probably saved the lives of American soldiers (in the short term), but without a ground presence Obama could not influence the creation of a democratic state free of Islamic extremists and most importantly, Obama could not tell what type of people the Libyan rebels were. After all, it makes little sense to overthrow Qaddafi and install a government that is less sympathetic to the West. And this is exactly what happened and now terrorist cells, especially linked to al-Qaida, are growing in Northern Africa. The attack on our embassy in Benghazi and now the attack on the Amenas oil compound in Algeria illustrates exactly what happens when we go to war blindly. Obama sided with Libyan rebels without understanding their intentions and he was not alone. France and other NATO powers also supported the Libyan rebels and provided them weaponry to oust Qaddafi. For these reasons, if the U.S. is going to go to war, it is best to have a debate over the subject to prevent errors from a sole egomaniac. That is why the Constitution says only Congress can go to war, not the President.
Obama campaigned that al-Qaida was dead and on the run. The events in Benghazi and Algeria, in a period of less than 5 months, shows that al-Qaida in Asia may be on the run, but al-Qaida in Northern Africa is alive and well and we were complicit in their growth. Both of these attacks were complicated and took months of planning. To make matters worse, despite video coverage of the Benghazi assault, to date no arrests have been made. It seems as if the administration does not want to get to the bottom of this attack and simply hopes the story goes away. Not that there is too much concern over the media’s allegiance since there was more coverage over the Manti Te’o hoax at Notre Dame than the terrorist assault that transpired in Algeria – killing at least 29 hostages.
Many of the Islamist terrorists shot their way into the In Amenas compound using the AK104 model of Kalashnikov, which was typically used by Libyan rebels in the war against Muammar Gaddafi. They brought F5 rockets that also surfaced in the Libyan war. The Islamists wore the same type of outfits that Qatar provided to Libyan National Transitional Council rebels by Qatar (remember the Qatar government sponsors Al-Jazeera and now Al Gore) – yellow flak jackets with brown patches, known as "chocolate chip" camouflage. The garments are copies of ones worn by Americans in the Gulf war. The terrorists also employed 60mm gun-mortars used by France and Libyan rebels.
So there you have it! Obama and NATO allies provided the weaponry and avenue to power for Libyan rebels who have, in turn, used their weapons and power to successfully attack Westerners using well devised plans. Obama has created a monster in Northern Africa and how has his administration responded? By trying to cover up the attacks and doing nothing to find the culprits. Why? They want the story to go away! Besides, only a few media outlets are covering this rise of al-Qaida in Northern Africa. Where is the liberal outrage over this? Why isn’t this being as scrutinized as the Iraq War (which Congress voted for)?