The thing that bothers me the most about this speech is that we should have had it weeks ago and it should have given the talking points to all those who’ve been out trying to express the intent of the united states.
Gates said that “…there are no vital interest to the United States in Libya…”
Secretary Clinton said that “… there are vital interests in the region to the United States…”
Do those two seem contradictory to you?The certainly do to me, and I can imagine what they mean to the rest of the world.Of course there is a very good thing about all the different comments, if you are looking for something you like: you find it.If you look for something you don’t like: you find it.
The problem is, what is the true policy of the United States?What are we going to do while we are there?
The President said: “…We struck regime forces approaching Benghazi to save that city and the people within it. We hit Gadhafi’s troops in neighboring Ajdabiya, allowing the opposition to drive them out. We hit Gadhafi’s air defenses, which paved the way for a no-fly zone. We targeted tanks and military assets that had been choking off towns and cities, and we cut off much of their source of supply. And tonight, I can report that we have stopped Gadhafi’s deadly advance…”
He further said that this was a limited role for the United States, and as proof he said: “…Our most effective alliance, NATO, has taken command of the enforcement of the arms embargo and the no-fly zone.”
Yet on the same breath he went on to contradict himself by saying: “…Last night, NATO decided to take on the additional responsibility of protecting Libyan civilians. This transfer from the United States to NATO will take place on Wednesday. Going forward, the lead in enforcing the no-fly zone and protecting civilians on the ground will transition to our allies and partners, and I am fully confident that our coalition will keep the pressure on Gadhafi’s remaining forces.”
So I have to ask, who is the bulk of the force and military might in NATO?Is it England?Is it Germany?Is it France, Spain, Norway, Greece, or Turkey?No, it is America, so we’re still involved and the conflict (that’s Politically Correct speech for “war”) in Libya.
Even in trying to explain how America is not involved or leading and that the mission is limited; he makes the statement that NATO has already expanded the mission to “protect civilians”.
Further to my confusion is the comment by a US Military spokesman who says (around 1:38 in the video) that “…we are not in direct support of the opposition… that’s not part of our mandate…”So if that’s the case who are we helping?Libyan opposition is moving westward towards Tripoli and breakneck speed (perhaps outrunning their own supply lines and support).
We are in a quagmire in the making.This is not a good idea, we don’t know who we’re helping, we don’t know what is going to happen, and the sad part is that it is evident that Washington doesn’t know either.