I’ll admit right off the bat that I have mixed emotions about the entry of US and “coalition forces” into the Libyan civil war.
First, there’s no question that Qadaffi is a bad actor. He’s a military dictator, an admitted state terrorist, and mega-thief. In other words, it couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.
HOWEVER.
Could the same have been said about Mubarak in Egypt next door? Why didn’t we intervene then? And aren’t there a dozen other foil-hat dictators around the world who need deposing as well? What is our policy about the unrest in Bahrain and Yemen? Those governments are ostensible allies. What will we do for — or against — them? And what, God forbid, if the unrest spreads to Saudi Arabia?
But more important, it appears that President Obama made one speech about Libya 10 days ago or so, but never contacted anybody in Congress concerning US military involvement. Congress never undertook debate or passed a resolution on the subject. I know it’s true we haven’t had an official declaration of war since 1941, but I think presidents usually at least TRY to get a go ahead from Congress before committing troops.
I know that George W. Bush and secretary of State Colin Powell spent months (while they were “rushing to war”) making the case before putting American boots on the ground in Iraq. They sought and got multiple resolutions from both Congress and the UN before taking action.
In this case, however, nothing seemed to happen until the UN Security Council vote and then within minutes there was a full scale assault on Libyan troops underway, with multiple countries participating.
I support the right of the Commander in Chief to make preparations for military action without revealing all the cards in his hand, but something bothers me about this.
I guess one thing that bothers me is that I can’t see what the immediate US interest is in opening a third front in our Middle East venture.
Surely it couldn’t be about oil?
