Republicans Show Divisions Over the U.S. Intervention .

The Wall Street Journal ^ | MARCH 30, 2011. | NAFTALI BENDAVID

[Scanian]

WASHINGTON—Republicans are grappling with internal divisions on their approach to the U.S. intervention in Libya, making it harder to present a unified front as Congress ratchets up its scrutiny of President Barack Obama's decision to act there.

While some Republicans chastise Mr. Obama for not intervening earlier and more forcefully, others are demanding the president consult Congress or pull out of the operation altogether.

At the same time, a faction powered in part by tea-party activists and strengthened by the last election is complaining about the cost as well as the policy of foreign interventions. Rep. Raul Labrador, a Republican freshman from Idaho, argues the U.S. should pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan as well as Libya.

"We're already engaged in two wars in the Middle East, and I think we need to get out of both of them," Mr. Labrador said. "Now we're engaging in a third one, and we don't have the resources."

Mr. Labrador's comments reflect the views of many in a large freshman class in Congress who are skeptical of foreign interventions, partly due to their cost. In the Senate, newly elected members Rand Paul (R., Ky.) and Mike Lee (R., Utah) have sharply questioned the Libya action.

In contrast, Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.), the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, says Mr. Obama miscalculated by not acting sooner against Col. Moammar Gadhafi. "If we had acted three weeks earlier with a no-fly zone, he would have been taken out," Mr. McCain said in an interview.

[screaminsunshine]

I now understand the natural alliance of Islam and Liberalism. Liberals finally found something as insane as they are.

[mazda77]

Saw McCain’s butt buddy, Goober Graham, on Gretta last night and is this idiot ever lost. I really hope the SC Freepers and Tea Party folks bounce this deluded dolt.

I have seen almost every other RINO Senator up for re-election has a challenger or is quitting and in the case of Texas, Williams received a very big endorsement of Gen. Tommy Franks. Florida has a couple of good people announcing to take on Bill Nelson who can’t rely on central Florida since the space industry has been virtually shut down.

[Scanian]

Yeah, Nelson’s supposed “leadership” on the space program has been shown to be so much BS.

Some of us here did everything but beg Allen West to run for the Senate but he says, “Not yet.”

He’s 50, so it’s not like he has forever and who knows, with this Regime, whether anything approaching free elections will take place if Obama wins a second term?

Some like Hasner, some like Mack. I can’t spell that Greek fella’s name but he doesn’t seem to be inspiring a lot of support.

I’m going to wait for the debates. Just like for the presidential primaries. The candidates need to sort themselves out, face to face.

[mazda77]

Hasner has a lot of support from Rubio from what I am hearing. With Rubio starting his public coming out last night on Hannity, to be followed by Cavuto today, he has his political hotrod all tuned up and ready to roll. I really beleive whoever gets his nod is in.

[BilLies]

“If we had acted three weeks earlier with a no-fly zone, he would have been taken out,” Mr. McCain said in an interview.

McCain, ever the maverick and almost always wrong.

Soros must have told Obama he wants in on the Libyan oil.

[StonyBurk]

The evil Gin in the White House desires the change seen across the Arab street be brought here so his plan to fundamentally change America cannot be undone once he falls down that well.I see no irreconcilable difference in the Republican response.
That he dithered and delayed the response he ultimately chose proves the LIES told in his speech that by his swift and decisive actions lives were saved. That he appears to have not been transparent with Congress prior to his deployment in what would be called an act of War if Libya did to us what we did to them—likewise a valid concern. Worthy of note. Both speak to the inept leadership of the evil Gin.The man who would have us all subject to his vision of change-no matter how destructive.The sad part is both Parties have for too long been allowed to bend and twist and contort the written Constitution until we are no longer that nation established a free nation of laws applied equally to all.

[scooby321]

Mc Cain ( who cliams Hillary knows the rebels and Graham says Gaddafi must go, what they hell has he done in the last 30 days that he must go? Defend himself from Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Qaeda.

I am pulling for Gaddafi he is the devil I know.

[AndyJackson]

Yes, there is a real debate over Libya because it is a legitimage debate. I am usually quite sympathetic to the Paulian doctrine of staying out of foreign entanglements. OTOH, I have no problem with our forces engaging the rather trivial pursuit of taking Daffy's toys away from him, you know, planes, tanks, artillery and anything he can use against his own people. If the US has alwasy stood for something it is standing against crimes against humanity, and what Daffy is capable of is a crime against humanity.

But in my view the mission ends there, just like in Iraq it ended with locking Sadam down so tight he could not fly a paper airplane across the palace without getting it shot down.

We cannot fix all the world's little troubles, and we certainly have some big ones of our own to attend to. But we can make some of its little trouble makers look over their shoulders for a Predator know and again.

[newzjunkey]

I have real concerns about the ineptness shown by the Obama regime.

So grave and imminent was the humanitarian crisis there was no time to consult congress but was time for UN authorization. Terrible precedent. Obama uses as his justification "Responsibility to Protect" while insisting this is not a precedent for other action such as similar humanitarian crises in Syria, Iran, China, Darfur, Russia and Rwanda.

Gaddafi must go. Or he can stay too. No defined goal only vague platitudes about protecting civilians by bombing Gaddafi's military repelling rebels and attempting to recapture fallen cities. The administration, at least Secretary of Defense Gates, admits there's no vital American interest in Libya. Secretary of State Clinton says we have an interest because our allies have a vital national interest (spelled "O-I-L").

The secretary also says she has no information about specific persons and specific groups among the rebels despite multiple news profiles and interviews with self-described Al Queda among the rebels which tracks with Gaddafi's claims.

A limited role confined to logistical support for UK and French forces turned "tip of the spear" bombings to create the no-fly zone, turned into attacks on Gaddafi forces to help the rebels advance and maintain captured territory. Now we're looking at supplying arms to the rebels and the NATO commandant says "boots" will be necessary if Gaddafi falls.

Misdirection and mission creep. Congress still sidelined.

[newzjunkey]

what Daffy is capable of is a crime against humanity.

Capable means nothing.

Is that happening or is a recognized leader trying to put down an insurrection manned by external interests, al queda terrorists and similar groups? I have no issue with Gaddafi sending military to retake captured towns and cities. If it's a civil revolutionary war, the rebels knew what they were undertaking.

You mentioned "capable" but that's the trouble. Ahmadinejad is too. And countless others. When we act we should damn well know on whose behalf we are acting.