Skip to comments.Why No One Likes Obama's Libya War
Posted on 03/29/2011 9:03:44 AM PDT by flowerplough
A lot of folks didn't get the peacenik president they planned for. And he still hasn't quite sold Americans on why we should be taking sides in Libya's civil war.
With all the flak Obama was taking a week ago for his go-slow approach on Libya -- and all the phony bouquets for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's handling of the crisis -- you might have been tempted to think that she was the one who had green-lighted missile strikes on Muammar Qaddafi, and Obama was the senator who had once voted to invade Iraq with no provocation and no exit strategy.
It's an irony lost on the "do something" caucus that hounded Obama for weeks while he pressed for the approval of the U.N. Security Council, Arab League and NATO before striking in Libya.
Sarah Palin demanded "less dithering." Rudy Giuliani said that "Hillary Clinton would have been better." Newt Gingrich called Obama the "spectator-in-chief" before Obama committed to the mission, then flip-flopped and said, "I would not have intervened." And after U.S. missiles had already started hitting Libyan targets last weekend, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called Obama "unnervingly indecisive," quipping, "I'm glad we're finally doing something thank God for strong women in the Obama administration."
You can trace it all back to Clinton's own "3 a.m." riff. She was the first one who tried to paint her boss as a weak-kneed dove and not the president who wound up doubling down in Afghanistan.
(Excerpt) Read more at theroot.com ...
Or if it was after Obama made the threat which would mean US credibility was on the line.
At least we who wonder what the hell we are doing there aren’t being called racists.
Like it or not, there will likely be a time when US boots on the ground are required and that, to me, is a no no.