With Qaddafi gone, will Libyans put down their arms, clear the rubble, organize a decent government, and use the oil wealth that lies under the desert sands to rebuild? One can hope. Few bookmakers would give odds.
Qaddafi was not America’s friend, but the vision of U.S. troops pulling Saddam Hussein from a spider hole in Iraq did persuade him that having America as an enemy was not smart. So he gave up his drive to develop nuclear weapons and coughed up useful intelligence on how that project had been organized. He stopped financing terrorism — as far as we’re aware. He did continue oppressing his own people. Both the Bush and the Obama administrations pretty much gave him a pass on that.
If the Great Arab Revolt — “Arab Spring” is a hopeful, not descriptive term — ends up only removing Qaddafi and, from neighboring Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, a despot who was, nonetheless, a reasonably pliant client of the U.S., and if Iran’s theocrats remain in power and manage to save the Assad dynasty in Syria while continuing to use Hezbollah to control Lebanon and sponsoring Hamas in Gaza, the lesson will be clear: It is more dangerous to be America’s ally than its enemy.
Such a lesson will carry long-term strategic consequences. If there are strategic planners in the current administration, now would be a good time for them to start worrying.
You know, I thought this same thing. Qaddafi discontinued his weapons program, gave US intelligence, and was generally cooperative with us. So, what did that gain him in the end and what incentive do other rulers, "benign" and despotic, have to cooperate with the United States?
On a side note: I thought that we might have smuggled him out of Libya, provided him with reconstructive plastic surgery, and placed him comfortably somewhere in South America. Guess not.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCliff May is right. We should have provided Gaddafi safe haven, Lockerbie be damned! Is that what he is saying?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI guess some conservatives can never be happy with a Democratic administration proving better at defense than an incompetent Republican one.
Your troll credentials are showing again, Drpalinipresume.
Your comments are as juvenile as they are idiotic.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo you're fine with the removal of nasty dictators regardless of whether they present a threat to the United States? Just want some clarity from the left because that didn't seem to be the case when W. removed the Taliban and the Baathist dictatorship in Iraq, both of which were greater threats to the US than Gaddafi.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBTW, I’m very pleased that he’s gone and am happy to give credit to Obama and the rest of NATO for this success but I do think this just exposes the left as just a bunch of partisans not morally principled as they postured for the two terms of GWB.
The entire Libya project was intended solely as a political campain prop to swing right leaning voters Obama's way.
Not that it worked out that way. Democrats have only the most cartoonish understanding of the right's foreign policy philosophy. And almost no understanding of foreign policy themselves.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt’s funny (no not really) how the international diplomats who are now applauding his death are the same yahoo’s who cheered his UN anti-American, anti-West, anti-Israel rants.
The ‘International Community’ is a fickle breed indeed.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd there are those in the U.S. too, aren't there (leaders who are Anti-American, Anti-Israel)? i.e., the president, vice president, former president jimmy carter, the democrats in congress and senate?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI agree with Derb. If every once in a few years you have to plop a few thousand troops somewhere to get rid of a tyrant, do it, but get out. THEN, do it again a few years later if they don't get the message; it's a lot cheaper that way. I didn't think this thing would work, to ben honest, but well done, Mr. President. Now can have some that oil to pay for it?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLet's see here: Obama starts an undeclared war on Libya (lying about it in the process), leaves the mess for NATO to clean up, and liberals want to give him CREDIT for the outcome?
If US troops weren't involved, Obama deserves no credit. If they were, he deserves impeachment.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWe need St Helenas. If tyrants have no where to go, there is no incentive to ever go. As bad as it is that the world has a variety of states under the control of tyrants, it is better that we have a means of exiting them when possible,
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThat you can blow up my wife's best friend and live 20 years care free before we come after you?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"With Qaddafi gone, will Libyans put down their arms, clear the rubble, organize a decent government, and use the oil wealth that lies under the desert sands to rebuild?"
Yeah, and Barry is going to come out in favor of less government regulation and lower taxes to stimulate economic growth.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAre you kidding me? Qaddafi was not our "ally". He went from being a sworn enemy to a neutral party with the U.S. UK and Canada are allies. So, it's silly to say it's more dangerous to be our ally than enemy. Plus, he lost our support when he started attacking his people with the military. I'm pretty sure that, if Canada started attacking its people, we would be reevaluating our relationship with them. What a ridiculous conclusion. Don't be so reflexively negative about Obama. He made a decision on Libya, and it seems to be working out. I'll take this any day over the 8+ years we have spent in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat will it teach your enemies?
DON'T EVER BECOME FRIENDS WITH THE UNITED STATES!!!! EVER! Look at Assad, he is surviving. But not Mubarak and not Qadaffi.
Best thing is to be an enemy of the US, in that case the Western left will suck up to you. Plus you can rely on the fact that any attempt to unseat you will be deemed an evil Neo-Conservative Israeli/Jewish plot for oil and greed and you'll be safe.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Arab Spring in Egypt burned churches and killed Christians. (Jews have escaped that bastion of freedom decades ago.) In Libya, the “freedom-loving” rebels have used machine guns to chase away a Jewish refugee from Libya, who had returned to his home town to re-open a synagogue. It is beyond reason and common sense to support regimes that are likely to be more oppressive than their predecessors, yet the West seems bent on doing away with the last vestiges of stability in the Middle East.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI never understand why these guys don't buy their way into a villa in UAE long before they get chased into a hole. Saddam and Moammar had enough gold to save their hides, and yet they end up in holes with not one single person left standing by them. And why neither of these tyrants came out of the hole guns blazing is a mystery. They KNOW it will not end well.
Anyway, I'm refraining from making political hay over it - both the Republicans and Democrats have been infected by neo-conservatism, and both have made a real mess of the world. There are definitely times and places to exact justice, but Iraq and Libya were real head-scratchers. It's not clear if either will be better off in the long run. The good guys start to look an awful lot like bad guys after a short time.
-Diver
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThese guys are not normal guys -- they dont react to personal gain or loss in normal ways.
Normal guys would not end up with that much gold and power in the first place.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe real lesson. That International Law is a pathetic joke and the joke's on the West. Instead of taking him out in the 1990s, the blister was left to fester while lawyers set about making themselves feel good about themselves.
(Oh BTW, is Amnesty International gonna call Pres. Obama up on war crime charges? Ain't gonna hold my breath)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseA man who stops plotting to kill me because he may be caught is hardly now my ally. Qaddafi had been a sponsor of terrorism since he seized power. He recently shaped up, due to the perceived threat of an American military response to terrorism after 9/11, but no doubt he would rather have continued his anti-Western activities. He remained an enemy, and when an opportunity arose to remove him by supporting the rebels, the administration made the right move. Given that the rebels were being defeated before NATO intervention, it is not clear at all that it is 'more dangerous to be America's ally than it's enemy'. The lesson is: mess with us, and sooner or later we will get you ourselves (Iraq) or help your enemies get you (Libya).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUnfortunately, except for Israel, the entire recent history of the Middle East is that one dictator is killed or overthrown, only to be replaced by another kind of dictatorship. Time will tell how Libya turns out, but I'm concerned that madman Qadaffi will be replaced by madmen Islamic extremists. Let's hope not. So far, Egypt after Mubarak isn't turning out real well for its citizens, the U.S., or Israel. Let's also hope there isn't a bloodbath of reprisals against Qaddafi's old supporters, or what we went into Benghazi to prevent months (not days or weeks) ago to prevent on one side will only happen on the other side.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse