Military Action Against Libya May Not Have Been Necessary

Matt Margolis

I point you to a story from December of 2003, a little over a week after Saddam Hussein was captured…

Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, in an exclusive interview with CNN, acknowledged Monday that the war in Iraq may have played a role in his decision to dismantle his country’s weapons of mass destruction programs.

This story should remind everyone why it is important that we have strong, decisive leaders in the White House. If we had one now, military action against Libya today probably would not have been necessary. This story reminds us that foreign leaders may not like us, but will respect strength. Obama’s weakness ultimately let this situation with Libya get to this point. He dropped the ball. Things were made worse by Obama waiting for action against Libya to “pass the global test” — as John Kerry once put it — and that just made us look weaker. The President of the United States isn’t just the leader of the country, he is supposed to be a world leader. Obama has proven time and time again that he lacks the ability to stand amongst giants on the world stage.
Talk is cheap, but leadership is priceless. Sadly, it will take a long time to restore the respect this country once had when we showed strength on the world stage.

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: and the kook left is already out there protesting the US action. Now, liberals, where is the declaration of war which you insist must happen before any US military action? Shouldn’t you now get out there and demonstrate against Obama’s illegal war for oil?

UPDATE II, by Mark Noonan: Ok, so this is the War to Protect Civilians. Does this mean we’re protecting all of the civilians of Libya, or just rebel civilians? Do we care at all about the civilians still suffering under Gaddafi’s rule? What is the purpose of our action? Are we trying to get rid of Gaddafi? Just prevent his victory? Are we hoping for a negotiated settlement between Gaddafi and the rebels? Suppose Gaddafi adheres to no-fly (and he probably will by fact of his pilots refusing to go in to the air) but still drives on over land? Maybe not at Benghazi where attention is focused but round about to hit the rebels at Tobruk?

Inquiring minds want to know…but the basic we have here is that there is no policy, there is an attitude. Something had to be done, and so something has been done…but there is no direction from the President of what we hope to accomplish.

UPDATE III, by Mark Noonan: Early reports are that 110 cruise missiles have been fired. That is the sort of softening up you’d do if you planned on invading…are we going to send in the Marines? If that is the case, then that would be a good thing…ensures an anti-Gaddafi victory…but leaves open what sort of post-Gaddafi regime we want and what we’re willing to do to ensure it happens. And if we’re not going to send in troops, then why take a sledge hammer to a flea?