Color me underwhelmed.
And as for all the reasons given why we should intervene…. wouldn’t those have been good arguments to make to Congress?
1. No clear mission or goal- “Do something!” isn’t clear guidance.
2. A failure to even attempt to rally the American people to his cause. While I spent a goodly portion of my career adhering to the precept that “It’s better to ask forgiveness than permission” it’s a quite another matter to take that approach to starting a war…
3. If the case for intervention was so clear, why NOT try to sell it to Congress? Wouldn’t he have been pushing on an open door? If there WAS resistance to US intervention from Congress, well, first, that’s why we HAVE a Congress, and second, he could have used point number 1 above, popular support, to push back against that congressional resistance.
4. Either we lead, follow or get the hell out of the way. Which is it? Obama has tried to take credit for leadership, place any potential blame by saying we’re just following, and yet, won’t get the hell out of the military’s way and let the armed forces go for regime change…
5. Regime change- once the President of the United States got on television and said Quaddafi had to go, there was NO other politically acceptable outcome. Either we mean it, or we don’t. So why can’t he stand by his previous statement, and attempt to make that happen? Half assed measures in war are the very worst kind.
6. You’ll see a lot of comparisons of Obama’s actions and speeches to those of Bush in 2002 and 2003 justifying the invasion of Iraq. But there is no comparison. Bush repeatedly addressed the nation, Congress, and the international community to build support for that invasion. Obama instead is coming out after involving us in a war and telling us to like it or lump it. The next liberal that tells me Bush was an imperial president is gonna get a lump of his own, right on his noggin.