-
John Kerry, Secretary of Gaffes
April 25, 2013 | 9 comments
-
Rand Paul and Marco Rubio at CPAC
March 14, 2013 | 0 comments
-
SEQUESTER: The Dumbest Weight-Loss Plan Ever
March 1, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Israel’s Hard-Right Turn That Wasn’t
January 22, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Deep Space Nine, Twenty Years Later
January 3, 2013 | 23 comments
The Spectacle Blog
President Obama, this evening:
Of course, there is no question that Libya - and the world - will be better off with Gaddafi out of power. I, along with many other world leaders, have embraced that goal, and will actively pursue it through non-military means. But broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake.
The task that I assigned our forces - to protect the Libyan people from immediate danger, and to establish a No Fly Zone - carries with it a UN mandate and international support. It is also what the Libyan opposition asked us to do. If we tried to overthrow Gaddafi by force, our coalition would splinter. We would likely have to put U.S. troops on the ground, or risk killing many civilians from the air. The dangers faced by our men and women in uniform would be far greater. So would the costs, and our share of the responsibility for what comes next.
To be blunt, we went down that road in Iraq. Thanks to the extraordinary sacrifices of our troops and the determination of our diplomats, we are hopeful about Iraq’s future. But regime change there took eight years, thousands of American and Iraqi lives, and nearly a trillion dollars. That is not something we can afford to repeat in Libya.
Hmm. True, we don’t want another commitment on the scale of the Iraq War. But tell me more about these “non-military means.” Because if regime change is the stated goal of US policy, but not the goal of military action, I’d like to know how exactly these non-military means are going to meet up with the desired ends. In a speech that ran over 3000 words, I don’t think the President quite got around to explaining that key point.
View all comments (5) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by John Tabin
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/03/28/regime-change-through-non-mili
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
DRed| 3.28.11 @ 9:48PM
Maybe we'll enact a kinetic regime altering action.
Oldefarte| 3.28.11 @ 10:07PM
This whole middle east campaign of citizen uprisings cascading from one of their countries to the next is strange and puzzling that it now is occurring within two years of his election. Some are ignored, such as in Iran, while others are put upon a political pedestal such as Egypt, with this administration being encouraged etc by the MSM. If all of these countries follow the example of Iran subsequent to the Shah's exiting and Iran being thereafter being election-conquered by the Muslim religious fanatics that now control same, the western-free world is in for a huge evolving global threat. This so-called middle eastern democracy movement is highly suspicious to me, especially with our government's administrators now extremely involved in supposedly manipulating an outcome of same!!!!!!!!!!
Handy| 3.28.11 @ 10:32PM
The troops see through the BS. Expect mass resignations if they are ordered into Libya with no clear mission. At least no re-enlistments. And, the officers will be the first to leave.
Same cycle that Carter started, and Clinton perfected. When the troops have no confidence in their leaders, they will leave the service.
It is a loss to all of us and to those affected by incompetent politicians. We get less protection, the troops get shat upon by civilians who won't hire the vet, and the craven politicos can brag that they saved money. All the while the world burns, and they garner more excuses to foment strife.
It is sickening.
Dee See| 3.28.11 @ 11:31PM
BTW ---speaking of regime change
With the perpetrators of the greatest halocaust
in human history still the ruling oligarchy,
with tens of thousands of violently suppressed
demonstrations annually, countrywide,
with Globalist eugenics and mind control
being their proxy role, WHY is the subject of
possible (we should say inevitable) regime
change in Beijing NEVER, EVER mentioned
much less discussed???
"Remember, 'Free Trade' and Globalism
are ALWAYS intertwined with EUGENICS
and ALWAYS operates beyond the pale
(i.e. in TREASON). ALWAYS."
-ALAN WATT
(essential online coverage)
ALWAYS---------------------------------------------
The Bruce| 3.29.11 @ 12:00AM
Well, we already know that the President and Secretary of State were briefed that many of these rebels have ties to Al Quaeda (sp).
So why do we want regime change, again? Maybe we'd be better off letting him wipe out the rebels, and we could simply deal with him later.