- Foreign Policy points out that Obama's coalition is the smallest international coalition in decades. Here are names and numbers to back it up. Short version: the current coalition for Libya (15 nations) versus the previous one for Iraq (40 nations). Hmmmm. The closest in number of participating nations would be the coalition for Kosovo in 1999 (19 nations).
- "Down the Rabbit Hole" by Adam Garfinkle, who also gives us the quote of the day:
To all appearances, U.S. foreign policy in the Obama Administration has now definitively gone down the rabbit hole. It is intoxicated with an advanced form of Wilsonian madness, one shorn of all sensitivity to the consequences of the U.S. government’s behavior. Like Alice with her pills, some things are getting or will soon get bigger—risks, mission definition and casualty figures on the ground in Libya—while others are getting smaller—our reservoir of good options, our stock of common sense and our peace of mind.
- "The Libyan Rabbit Hole" by Ross Douthat in the NY Times
- "Who's in Charge Here?" op-ed by James Taranto in the WSJ, which has this bon mot:
...the Obama administration is sending mixed signals. Actually, "mixed" doesn't quite do it justice. It's more like pureed, chopped or whipped signals.
- Is Obama failing to grasp the gravity of going to
warkinetic military action? (By the time, the use of "kinetic military action" is ridiculous.) - The second time as farce ...? Heh.
For the record, I want some clarity here. If the endgame is to get rid of Qaddafi, then get on with it. All this dithering and confusion is basically guaranteeing a higher body count in the end because you're prolonging the conflict. Anyway, about goals and objectives: what was the line that Napoleon said? Oh, yeah: When you set out to take Vienna, take Vienna.
I have to point out one piece, though, because it both makes a point and kind of bothered me. Charles Krauthammer recently and rightfully hammered Obama's Libya policy (or lack thereof) in a piece entitled "The Professor's War." OK, I understand that too many professors and eggheads and academics are LIKE this, but not every one. My military history friends and I take exception to that idea! (UPDATE: We want to be this. Or this.)
By the way, I've basically given up following the news of the president's latest non-statements. I just feel like yelling, "What are you even doing?!" It's as if I had called on a kid in class, and he sits there with the deer-in-the-headlights expression while making up crap (using as many pretentious words as possible in an attempt to fake me out) because he's clearly not done the reading for the day. If Obama were a student in one of my classes, I would be probably sending out a mid-term warning email -- you know, the sort that says, come see me at once because you're in danger of flunking the class.
Hell, flunking a class would be a blessing in comparison to what's going on. We can argue about whether, in the beginning of all this, Libya was really that important to American interests. But thanks to the pitiful performance by the increasingly Lilliputian non-Commander-in-Chief, it basically has become one because it's thrown the image of weak -- nay, clueless! -- American leadership across every media outlet in the world. A weak America, even if weak only in leadership and appearance, makes the entire free world, and the world in general, a much more dangerous place as it emboldens bad guys -- and there are indeed bad guys.
By the way, I've basically given up following the news of the president's latest non-statements. I just feel like yelling, "What are you even doing?!" It's as if I had called on a kid in class, and he sits there with the deer-in-the-headlights expression while making up crap (using as many pretentious words as possible in an attempt to fake me out) because he's clearly not done the reading for the day. If Obama were a student in one of my classes, I would be probably sending out a mid-term warning email -- you know, the sort that says, come see me at once because you're in danger of flunking the class.
Hell, flunking a class would be a blessing in comparison to what's going on. We can argue about whether, in the beginning of all this, Libya was really that important to American interests. But thanks to the pitiful performance by the increasingly Lilliputian non-Commander-in-Chief, it basically has become one because it's thrown the image of weak -- nay, clueless! -- American leadership across every media outlet in the world. A weak America, even if weak only in leadership and appearance, makes the entire free world, and the world in general, a much more dangerous place as it emboldens bad guys -- and there are indeed bad guys.
No comments:
Post a Comment