Musings on Life, Love, Politics, Military Affairs, the Media, the Intelligence Community and Just About Anything Else that Captures Our Interest
Why is it ALWAYS our responsibility to fix the world's problems?
Exactly who is the opposition in this case? A radical Islamist theocracy a la Iran would be worse. Too many times we've been been burned by the facile philosophy that the enemy of our enemy is our friend. It ain't necessarily so.
Maybe because despite all of the blithering about America's decline, we still are the only country with the will, capacity and perhaps understanding that if we don't fix the problems "out there" they will soon become problems at our doorstep.
Planethou:Either we fix the world's problems the way we want them fixed or we accept the fix that others make, like waiting while the world does nothing in Rwanda or having Hugo Chavez destabilize Colombia. Either we lead the world or we watch as others lead it where we don't want it to go. Take your pick. F
The reason nobody is supporting Libyan rebels, quite frankly, is because there's nothing to gain by doing do. So what if Qaddafi mows down and armed resistance with fighters and tanks? What impact will that make on us here in America? He's already in power. Why would we get behind rebels with no clear leader at their forefront. Replace a dictator with anarchy? I'd prefer to live with the crappy dictator I know rather than the rebellious mob I don't know. As sad as it may seem, there's nothing in Libya worth fighting for. This nonsense about "fighting over there so we don't have to fight on our doorstep" is ludicrous. It's much cheaper to fight over here. Make them extend their supply lines. I'm quite certain they don't have the logistical support to sustain operations over here anyway. "Fighting over there" is a straw-man argument that plays well in cliche logic, but falls short in real-time analysis. Sorry Libyan rebels...you should have made sure you had airpower in the bag before you started your rebellion.
Post a Comment