It seems almost laughable to me watching the Obama Administration tap dance their way around the Libya action:
From the Washington Times:
Keep in mind:
Ambassador Rice was on the NSC during the Clinton Administration.
Samantha Power began her career covering the Yugoslavian wars.
Secretary Clinton was obviously involved in the Clinton Administration.
If true that these three really pushed the President to intervene, over the objections, or reluctance, of the military side of the cabinet, it is starting to seem like intervention in Libya is an apology by certain people in the Administration for not acting in Rwanda.
Already Secretary Gates has admitted we have no real vital interest in intervention and the double talk from President Obama is staggering:
From the Washington Times:
Even after hearing the President speak on the matter last night..nothing seems to be settled..we have apparently established a doctrine of getting involved to stop abuses to our "common humanity" (whatever that means), and are now involved in a situation with no clear goals, and no clear plan for a good outcome.
Do we even know what the rebels want, or who they are? It does not seem like it, yet we seem to be actively supporting them. Why?
It is hard to look at this situation as anything other than a poor foreign policy choice pressed by Clinton Administration holdovers who still harbor guilt from staying out of Rwanda.
