The Portland Press Herald has an article today detailing the failure of U.S. and allied airstrikes to end the violence in Libya.
Duh.
Doesn’t anyone remember the “shock and awe” campaign that began the Iraq war with the bombing of Baghdad? That bombardment was suppose to take the fight out of the enemy and make them quickly surrender.
It is the military action that began the war in March of 2003 — eight years later we’re still there.
Yesterday we lost a fighter jet in the mission. Luckily, the pilots were rescued. (How would we act if Gadhafi’s men had captured the pilots?)
What is this “limited” campaign suppose to accomplish? Is it to protect the rebels who are fighting against Gadhafi for their freedom? Who exactly are these rebels? If they succeed, will they be friendly to the U.S.? If they don’t succeed, and are crushed by Gadhafi, have we forever severed our ties with Libya after President Obama declared that “it is U.S. policy that Gadhafi must go”?
Why are we even part of this internal dispute in Libya? We didn’t intervene in Egypt. We’re not involved in Syria or Yemen.
If it’s suddenly our job to protect every population that is ruled by tyrants, I guess we should be intervening in Iran and North Korea too.
Not.
The quality of life and security for the citizens has been largely restored and we are a large part of why that has happened.
Posted by: Dominic Caraccilo | August 30, 2020 at 06:59 AM