Libya: Benghazi unrest, to Civil War, to a new government and Gaddafi's death.

[Cincinnatus]

Perhaps, I'm being a bit to critical here, but aren't the same people who excoriated Bush from the beginning in regards to Iraq hypocritical here?  Saddam was responsible for how many deaths, yet those same people cry in support of Obama's Libya policy.  Even the people who supported the Iraq surge based on the same premise now attack Obama's Libya policy?  France flat-out attacked our Iraq policy, yet here they are seemingly leading the battle cry in Libya?  My Goodness.  Politics is the absolute antonym of common sense.

[Cincinnatus]

In neither case, however - the people Saddam wanted to slaughter and the people Gaddafi wanted to slaughter - was it clear that preventing the slaughtering was beneficial to the national interest of the US.  In fact just the opposite is likely the case.

To our national interest? No, likely not.  To moral interests as human beings? Yes, very much so.  The problem I worry about is an invading force that makes any newly-installed government "illegitimate" to Libya's people (Iraq, for example).  Also, I worry about the long-term costs we might incur because, if we continue to fall more and more in debt, we won't be able to help any foreign nations soon.

[Cincinnatus]

... if we continue to fall more and more in debt, we won't be able to help any foreign nations soon.

Great, so at least we agree on increasing taxes upon the rich.

We agree on decreasing the debt, not completely on how to do it.  You're free to approach the argument anyway you want.  However, I can't say that I expect much civility based on your previous posts..

[Cincinnatus]

"Obama has OK'd use of drones in Libya, Gates says"


I must admit, I appreciate the fact that the administration has so enthusiastically employed drones.  Personally, I'm very interested in aviation and find unmanned aircraft's to be a significant step forward at about 1/6 of the estimated cost of an F-15 (& about 1/4 of the F-16, which was deployed for the no-fly zone).   Hopefully, they can be shown to sustain military and economic viability.  If it keeps military personnel off the battlefield it's clearly a technological avenue to travel.


http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/21/obama-has-okd-use-of-drones-in-libya-gates-says/?hpt=T2

[Cincinnatus]

"Obama has OK'd use of drones in Libya, Gates says"


I must admit, I appreciate the fact that the administration has so enthusiastically employed drones.  Personally, I'm very interested in aviation and find unmanned aircraft's to be a significant step forward at about 1/6 of the estimated cost of an F-15 (& about 1/4 of the F-16, which was deployed for the no-fly zone).   Hopefully, they can be shown to sustain military and economic viability.  If it keeps military personnel off the battlefield it's clearly a technological avenue to travel.


http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/21/obama-has-okd-use-of-drones-in-libya-gates-says/?hpt=T2

They, like air power in general, have their uses.  Like air power, they are not a substitute for boots on the ground.

It can be argued however, that the general idea can be a substitute for manned aircraft.

[Cincinnatus]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42824884/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I really wish people would give evidence when they make statements like this.

[Cincinnatus]

So much for that bullshiat about the opposition being infiltrated by Al Qaeda fighters.

What?  There's been no disproving of that claim.  They may very well be Al Qeuda or other varieties of Bearded Men.

I think there may very well be some Al Qaeda fighters in the opposition.  I just don't think it's as wide-spread as some people seem to believe.  I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens when these new governments are formed in the Middle East.