As hard as he may try to make the claim that he’s entitle to take some level of credit for this, which he is already attempting to do, Barry, and therefore America, led from behind in this one and thus deserve very little credit for the outcome. Whether the outcome was right or not. The death of Libyan strongman Muammar Qadhafi, while seen as a very good thing for the people of Libya, it remains to be seen if it will be good for the world at large. But it will, apparently, serve to have some impact on the race for president . It is, as we speak, already being used in an attempt to sharpened the “contrast” between what are being referred to as Barry’s recent “successes” on the foreign policy front and what is being referred to the scattershot criticism offered by his Republican challengers. “Successes” I might add, if were talking about nothing more than the death of three muslim thugs, that Barry actually had very little, if anything, to do with. But like always, you can bet your bottom dollar that he’ll be there to take credit for the entire operation. Qadhafi’s death came seven months after Barry, content to essentially ride shotgun on this one, and European leaders launched a military campaign, eventually headed up by NATO, and aimed at preventing the Libyan leader from massacring his own people. The NATO effort eventually became closely integrated with “rebel” forces in Libya and carried out thousands of air strikes aimed at protecting them from Qadhafi’s regime and his loyalists. Republican presidential hopefuls have criticized Barry, and rightly so, arguing that he acted too slowly and deferred to much control to U.S. allies, then after he had finally decided to enter into conflict he ramped up the effort without adequate explanation.
But now with the death of the Qadhafi, following the triumph of “rebel forces,” has Barry and his team thought about what comes next, as the Democrats were so quick to blame Bush for supposedly not doing. The identity of these “rebel forces,” or from whom it is that they’ll be receiving the majority of their backing is still remarkably uncertain. Will they be a friend of America, or just one more Middle Eastern enemy on what is already a rapidly growing list, thanks to Barry. But that, using Barry’s typical way of dealing with things, is a worry for another day, because with the successful overthrowing of the Libyan government, Barry can now bask in the adulation and the political spotlight and be confident that it is now once again safe to be back out front. So patting himself on the back he has declared success in a statement in the Rose Garden. “Today, we can definitively say that the Qadhafi regime has come to an end,” he said, adding that “we achieved our objectives.” Even old “Slow Joe” Biden, speaking in New Hampshire, argued that the decision to tackle the problem through NATO, with the U.S. in a supporting role, was a wise one. “NATO got it right. NATO got it right,” he said. “America spent $2 billion total and didn’t lose a single life.” So is this criteria that America is now supposed to use in justifying its relinquishing of its natural leadership position in the world to others with questionable motives?
After enduring years of Republican attacks for a feckless and weak foreign policy, Barry seems to be under the impression that if he can create the perception that he’s scored a few “hits,” he can wipe out his nearly endless list of misses. His “hits” come courtesy of others, with one coming from SEAL Team 6, another courtesy of a drone strike and, lastly, one by NATO forces, all in recent months. It was in May that U.S. Navy SEALs killed Al Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden in a daring nighttime raid inside Pakistan. And just last month later it was a U.S. drone strike in Yemen that killed Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born Islamic militant viewed as a key recruiter of terror operatives for Al Qaeda affiliates. There have been many foreign policy experts as well who have also come out and said that Barry’s ability to claim credit for Qadhafi’s downfall or the broader NATO success is very limited because of the posture Barry chose to take here. The U.S. was not at the forefront of this one, especially when it came to those pressing for military action in Libya. Barry insisted on dragging his feet, on dithering as is his standard mode of decision making. “They’re into the situation because the French and the British talked the United States into getting involved,” said Les Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations. “They had a stranglehold over us because they’re helping us in Afghanistan, which is not their favorite war.”
While Barry has been hit repeatedly for “leading from behind,” the claim has been made that even the limited U.S. role in Libya required some level of assertive executive action on his part. But while the White House claimed some vindication for the president’s approach, it took care to keep the spotlight on the Libyan rebels. “The president views this as a victory for the Libyan people,” White House press secretary Jay “Dim Bulb” Carney said. “We believe — the president believes that the actions taken by his administration and by NATO have helped the Libyan people reach this day and that they now have an opportunity to secure a much brighter and more democratic future and that was the goal all along.” Libyans “own what happened and they should be rightly proud of what they accomplished,” Carney said. Personally, I’m in agreement with the statement made by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who also traveled to Libya, and told Fox News on Thursday that Europeans were at the forefront of the effort and deserve most of the credit. “Ultimately, this is about the freedom and liberty of the Libyan people. But let’s give credit where credit is due: it’s the French and British that led on this fight and probably even led on the strike that led to Qadhafi’s capture or, you know, to his death,” the Republican Senator from Florida said. Rubio added that Barry “did the right things, he just took too long to do it and didn’t do enough of it.”
Look, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and again. And were it not for the military members for which this Commander in Chief has such disdain, two of these nuts would never have been found. Ever the whiner, Carney began the administration’s whining session by suggesting that many of the criticisms leveled at Barry were vague and opportunistic. Well if there’s anyone who knows about vague and opportunistic criticisms and accusations it would be those who make up the Barry “Almighty” Team. Of course, that’s not to say what is being said of Barry is in any way vague or opportunistic, it’s simply the truth. And with this guy Barry, the truth pretty much has the same effect as does holy water on the Devil. And Barry doing his best to disparage his competition doesn’t make their accusations any less true or accurate. And the louder we hear him complain, I think the confident we can become in knowing that the accusations being made are hitting pretty close to the truth. Barry is the epitome of the political opportunist and no one, be it our brave soldiers or what remains of our allies, is above being taken advantage of. If Barry perceives a political advantage is there to be had, then he’ll make sure that he’s there to own it, fully. The only rules that need to be followed are those “he” deems as needing to be followed.
No comments:
Post a Comment