Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
I wasn't aware I ever voiced support in the first place.
-spence
|
you aren't aware of many things...
.................................................. .............
Looks like the strategy is moving along well. I think Obama is playing this one perfectly...
-spence
Considering the complexity and variability of the situation, its actually not looking all that terrible. Obama seems to have been pretty careful to not make statements or promises we can't keep, something very different from Bush.
And if the UN does impose a no fly zone in Lybia, who's going to stand behind the Lybian Govt? The Sudan??? I'm not sure the regime can survive...
-spence
While we don't want to get into a real battle, it does seem like Ghaddafi has crossed the line with his actions...they're going to squeeze him until he pops.
-spence
Well, there seems to be pretty strong support from EU and the other Arab nations.
Justification is because the Libyan government has turned to using the military against their own people without much regard. It looks like they've been bombing and shelling killing just about anyone. I've really some really gruesome stories.
Fear is that atrocities will increase and cause a humanitarian crisis which would destabilize the region, especially considering the events in Tunisia and Egypt right next door.
At least that's the reasoning he gave when he spoke today.
-spence
We'll see how close they really are. Clearly the Admin is not going to go it alone, nor should we. I think the bigger piece is that Khadaffi is now seen as damaged goods by even much of the Arab leadership.
I think the calculus in Libya might not be in Khadaffi's favor. The real end game may be to get regime ending concessions.
-spence
As for Obama's statements, I thought they have been pretty clear on this. While the position of the Administration is that Ghaddafi should go, the legal resolution is only to protect the civilians and as such that is the direct mission.
They appear to be very mindful of the slippery slope and also the strategic situation.
Put yourself in Obama's shoes here and I think many would come to the same conclusion.
-spence
Generally speaking war is a legal term. Vietnam, Korea...not wars...yikes.
I wouldn't call this a "war"...yet...although I doubt (i.e. hope) it doesn't go there. Depends on how we don't react to Ghaddafi's provocations.
-spence
Preemptive (or worse preventative) war isn't the same thing as an internationally legal humanitarian mission and you know it...
-spence
I heard that today there were aircraft from Qatar over Libya under the UN resolution. This is pretty remarkable.
-spence
The situation in Libya is real. Indiscriminate bombing of civilians was occurring. The situation was deteriorating and heading towards a likely genocide. The destabilizing impact of this would most certainly harm US interests, especially those of our Arab allies.
What's remarkable is how the Administration united Western and Middle Eastern interests under International Law. I'm not sure this has ever been done before and could set a very positive precedent.
-spence
If anything, Obama is giving a simplified response as this is a question during a campaign interview. I'm sure he's quite intimate with the long running debate on this topic.
-spence
The Constitution certainly does appear to give the President the ability to use military force without Congressional approval as Obama says in his quote...And there's also a lot of subjectivity as to what constitutes a "threat" to the US. This has been used to justify all manners of military action without Congressional approval throughout the years...and often with controversy given the situation.
In the case of Libya the UN resolution has a very limited objective but also legal legitimacy and sponsorship from a number of nations. This is the UN acting as much or more than the US acting. There also is a pretty clear threat to US interests.
While certainly not free, the US involvement in enforcing the UN Resolution isn't likely to change the funding or mission of the armed forces...assuming the action is kept within the expected scope.
-spence
I think he's waiting until tomorrow so he can reference the hand off to NATO. While frustrating, this is probably worth the political cost.
He certainly needs to clarify the mission and US involvement if he hopes to get full Congressional support. That being said, don't forget that the entire Republican caucus in the Senate has already voted in support of a no fly zone earlier this month.
The Administration may have (once again) poorly handled the domestic debate on this issue, but it's not like they're going it alone. There's quite a lot of GOP support out there.
-spence
a) Obama has been taking a lot of heat from the Left on Libya
b) I think Obama has shown some patience that like in Egypt might have paid off. To parlay this into playing dead is a bit o spin.
c-spence
Hybrid Mode
