Baldilocks wondered when President Obambya was gonna get around to asking Congress for authority to...you know...go to war.
I too have a question--Does SuperGenius Hussein McSmartyPants have a plan or is he just making it up as he goes along?
“Our military action is in support of an international mandate from the [United Nations]Security Council that specifically focuses on the humanitarian threat posed by Colonel Qadhafi to his people,” the American president said. “Not only was he carrying out murders of civilians, but he threatened more.”
Okee-dokee, St. Barry. So you're just doing your Euro-hip Nobel Prize winning humanitarian act. Right. Got it.
“I also have stated that it is U.S. policy that Qadhafi needs to go,” Obama said, noting that a United Nations resolution last week authorizing force against Libya is based on humanitarian concerns, not regime change. “When it comes to our military action…we are going to make sure that we stick to that mandate.”
Wait...what?
I hate to get pushy about this, but which one is it Bamster? Are we enforcing a no-fly zone, or are we trying to stick a fork into Mad Moammar?
Maybe we should ask newly butched-up warlord Nicholas Sarkozy what the hell is going on here. He might have a clue. Obama clearly does not. Even better than the President's feckless display of spectacular obliviousness is the fact that he's created a foreign policy scenario where a sawed-off twerpy French Prime Minister probably has the best handle on the situation.
Besides Obama delivering the change we can all be horrified by, it's important to consult history. Erwin Rommel famously remarked, "No plan survives contact with the enemy." Very true, but the Field Marshall never told us what would happen to the plan when we finally made contact with our allies. In case you've gotten confused, we're supposed to be protecting Libyan rebels from the predations of Colonel Qadaffi. Nobody really knows who the hell these people are, who they're friends with or what kind of government they want to create in the place of the current. Armed with that lack of information, of course we should throw our support behind the Libyan rebel forces.
Just to be clear: Obama has just gotten us into a war where we're not really calling the shots while we're somehow doing most of the fighting with no clear idea what victory would look like for people who probably despise us with a thousand year old Kaaba-sized chip on their shoulders and who will most likely plot against us once we're done doing the wet work for them.
Anybody else ready for 2012?
His supporters have a plan. He's just along for the ride.
It's a game of gotcha: conservatives and independents always support a Dem President in time of war. If they are consistent in their behaviour, then the re-election ads will herald the POTUS's leadership and ability to forge bipartisanship in times of crisis. If the conservatives and independents become inconsistent and balk, then it's 'gotcha!' The campaign ads will insinuate, if not outright accuse folks of treason, or at the least of hypocrisy.
Secondary order of effects: with the hard-core pro-freedom/democracy and pro-Khaddafy types KIA or fled the country, the financial/political/social vacuum will be filled by the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies, who've sat out the conflict so far. The US's military action basically serves to weaken resistance to the Brotherhood.
Tertiary order of effects: with DOD constrained first by a continuing resolution, and second by budget resource decisions, the services involved will be find it very difficult to restock in preparation for future conflict. In terms of capability, this forces our military into a lower state of readiness and much less capable against the range of threats.
Posted by: DaveO | March 22, 2011 at 12:41 PM
"His supporters have a plan."
What, is this BattleStar Galactica? Some people see conspiracies everywhere.
A simpler and more effective explanation is that President Barry is following the Underpants Gnomes method of international diplomacy. In this case we have Phase 1: make speeches, Phase 2: ???, Phase 3: world peace.
Posted by: Casey | March 23, 2011 at 02:46 PM
My poppa always says (being a dry alcoholic) "watch out when you are spending money you don't have to impress people you don't know."
I'mma vote for my dad for president in 2012.
Posted by: Wry Mouth | March 23, 2011 at 08:04 PM
It's a game of gotcha: conservatives and independents always support a Dem President in time of war.
That is only true when we are in a war someone understands. No one I have talked to understands or agrees with this "war".
We are killing Libyans to save Libyans from being killed by Libyans. Along the way, we might also kill some of the wrong Libyans (see omlettes and breaking a few eggs).
We are using air strikes against targets that are poorly defined in areas we do not control. To pilots, a truck load of military supplies for Gadaffi looks just like a truck load of orphans fleeing the violence. At 500kts and 5000 feet, it all looks alike.
Posted by: Professor Hale | March 24, 2011 at 01:10 PM
Professor Hale,
No, conservatives' and independents' support for a president in time of war is a character trait. Involving the US in a war was used by President Clinton during his impeachment and trial. The strategem was used by Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, FDR, and Wilson.
This is not so much a conspiracy theory as understanding Obama's allies are not unintelligent; and wish to retain power; understand strategy and tactics. What better way than to create the shibboleth of war?
Alinsky preached, along with Napoleon and Sun Tzu, the requirement to use the enemy's nature against himself in order to fix him in place. Once fixed, the enemy can be destroyed at leisure. The WH and the POTUS's advisors may not be up on their maxims, but they know their Alinsky.
So if a conservative or an independent questions being in a shooting war with Libya - s/he'll be hoisted on petard for supporting OEF/OIF but being a partisan hypocrite for not supporting OOD.
By the way, not having seen the new version of BSG: who won? Humans, or Cylons?
Posted by: DaveO | March 25, 2011 at 02:15 PM