
A boy looks out as mourners pray during the funeral of a rebel killed by forces loyal to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in Benghazi, March 22
John Judis (The New Republic): âŚ.I looked at various blogs and websites that air opinion on the left. With some notable exceptions (like Juan Cole), all I have found is opposition to the Obama administrationâs decision to intervene in Libya.
So I ask myself, would these opponents of U.S. intervention (as part of U.N. Security Council approved action), have preferred:
(1) That gangs of mercenaries, financed by the countryâs oil wealth, conduct a bloodbath against Muammar Qaddafiâs many opponents?
(2) That Qaddafi himself, wounded, enraged, embittered, and still in power, retain control of an important source of the worldâs oil supply, particularly for Europe, and be able to spend the wealth he derives from it to sow discord in the region?
(3) And that the movement toward democratization in the Arab world – which has spread from Tunisia to Bahrain, and now includes such unlikely locales as Syria – be dealt an enormous setback through the survival of one of regionâs most notorious autocrats?
If you answer âWho cares?â to each of these, I have no counter-arguments to offer, but if you worry about two or three of these prospects, then I think you have to reconsider whether Barack Obama did the right thing in lending American support to this intervention.
âŚShould Obama, as some critics have charged, have gone to Congress for a war powers resolution? I am not sure there was time for a full-scale debate…
…isnât Obama repeating the same mistakes that George W. Bush did when he invaded Iraq in order to oust a despot? Thereâs a big difference between then and now: The United States is supporting an active revolt; it is preventing carnage; and it is encouraging real, rather than imagined, democratic movements across the region. These are all reasons why, even at this late date, and with uncertain prospects, it made sense to intervene.
Full article here
be nice, say hello to our visting tea partier
Tags: Barack, beck, comment, east, egpyt, Egypt, Fox, funny, glenn, hilarious, idiot, map, Middle, moron, news, Obama, palin, party, President, sarah, stupid, tea, teabagger, wrong, wtf
Yep, we had another Tea Partier visit tonight.
He left a very intelligent comment …. kidding: he advised us all to listen more carefully to Glenn Beck, only then will we learn the, um, truth. I can’t remember the precise details, I clicked the ‘trash’ button way too quickly, but I think the gist of it was that President Obama is conspiring with three-eyed men from Mars and tribesmen from that well known African village of South America to overthrow the democratically elected leader …. đ …. of “Egpyt”.
Night everyone đ
PS Apologies for bringing you the thoughts of the former half term Governor of Alaska on Egypt, but, in fairness, she has provided an insight to the situation that is quite, quite unique:
“….nobody yet has, nobody yet has explained to the American public what they know, and surely they know more than the rest of us know who it is who will be taking the place of Mubarak and um, no, not, not real um enthused about what it is that thatâs being done on a national level and from dc in regards to understanding all the situation there in Egypt.”
It’s no wonder, though, that the half-termer is so concerned – as a Fox ‘News’ viewer she thinks “Egpyt” borders Iran:
Um, Fox? Try this one: