Failure Is An Orphan

Victor Davis Hanson on Obama’s Libya strategy, or whatever it is:

The president spoke Monday night to clarify our intervention in Libya. Instead he made things worse, and could not explain the mission (are we/are we not after Qaddafi?), the methodology to achieve it (are we in a no-fly-zone or are we bombing ground targets essential to save the rebels?), and the desired outcome (who are the “rebels,” what do we wish from them, and are they better than Qaddafi?). Indeed, after almost two weeks, these questions still have not been asked much less answered.

So the omissions pose the question: how did Obama, the archetype war critic, find himself bombing—in optional and preemptive fashion, and without congressional authority — an Arab Muslim oil-exporting country, and one that posed no immediate threat to American national security, despite being governed by a monster who, nevertheless, had been recently courted by Western intellectuals, academics, universities, and diplomats?

Unfortunately, Obama has no principled or strategically logical foreign policy. So it is mostly loud declarations that he is not George Bush and making things up ad hoc as he goes along

Read the whole thing…

4 thoughts on “Failure Is An Orphan

  1. The ProtestWarrior guys had a poster which read “Say no to war…Unless a Democrat is President”.

    Dennis Kucinich seems to be the only anti-war Democrat who still is an anti-war Democrat.

    Watching the Defectives over at MSDNC has been incredibly funny the last few days. Nearly everything they said about Iraq can be said about Libya and either they just don’t care or get the hypocrisy. War for Oil, Check. War of Choice, Check. Didn’t get approval from Congress, Check.

    Actually on that last one Bush did get it for Iraq, but, Obama got the Arab League’s approval. Funny I can’t remember what my representative from Bahrain had to say about Iraq.

  2. Libya=Barry and the Dims “wag the dog” moment.

    Likely as not the dog will turn around and bite.

Leave a Reply