President Obama defended the U.S.-led aerial bombing in Libya Monday night by insisting that Libyan leader Muammar el-Qaddafi had to be stopped from slaughtering his own people and that some sense of stability had to be preserved, along with the need to prevent a refugee crisis from developing and causing Libyans to flee into Egypt and Tunisia, two countries trying to put their own recent coups behind them. He stressed that the U.S., far from going it alone in Libya, is working in concert in key European and Arab allies.
While it's up to the Libyan people to force Qaddafi's exit, Obama said as he ruled out sending ground troops, it was America's moral responsibility to use its power to prevent an atrocity similar to the genocide that took place in Rwanda in 1994.
The President offered a sound reasoning for intervention and was able to strike a delicate balance between helping the Libyan people and avoiding entanglements in their internal affairs. I thought his speech was effective. But many people, unable to grasp the complexity of the situation, either thought Obama has done too little or done too much, and that he has not adequately explained the case for the no-fly zone, which NATO will take control of soon. While Obama has been effective in handling this international crisis so far, one fact is inescapable: We're on another interminable military mission in a third Muslim country while we have pressing needs at home. :-(
Posts
