No, JD Vance Isn't Breaking With Trump on Possible Military Strikes on Iran
I'm Shocked USA Today Allowed This Op-ed to Be Published About the Minneapolis...
Conservatives for Property Rights Urge White House Support for Patent Reform
Where's the Left's Outrage Over This Florida Shooting?
From Madison to Minneapolis: One Leftist's Mission to Stop ICE
Two Wisconsin Hospitals Halted 'Gender-Affirming Care' for Minors, but the Fight Isn't Ove...
Dilbert Creator Scott Adams Has Died at 68
Trump’s Leverage Doctrine
Stop Pretending That Colleges Are Nonprofit Institutions
Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on Men in Women’s Sports...and Hoo Boy
Federal Reserve Chairman ‘Ignored’ DOJ, Pirro Says, Necessitating Criminal Probe
Iran Death Toll Tops 12,000 As Security Forces Begin to Slaughter Non-Protesting Civilians
If Bill Clinton Thought He Could Just Not Show Up for His House...
The December Inflation Report Is Here, and It's Good News
The GOP Is Restoring the American Dream of Homeownership
Tipsheet

President Obama's Libya Speech

The president's full remarks, via WhiteHouse.gov:



One element of the president's speech was the assertion that our involvement in Libya is rooted in our national interest:
Advertisement


...When our interests and values are at stake, we have a responsibility to act.  That’s what happened in Libya over the course of these last six weeks.

...At this point, the United States and the world faced a choice.  Qaddafi declared he would show “no mercy” to his own people.  He compared them to rats, and threatened to go door to door to inflict punishment.  In the past, we have seen him hang civilians in the streets, and kill over a thousand people in a single day.  Now we saw regime forces on the outskirts of the city.  We knew that if we wanted -- if we waited one more day, Benghazi, a city nearly the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.

It was not in our national interest to let that happen.  I refused to let that happen.

Would his own Secretary of Defense agree with that assessment?  From yesterday's Meet the Press:




The Weekly Standard's
Bill Kristol liked the speech:

The president was unapologetic, freedom-agenda-embracing, and didn’t shrink from defending the use of force or from appealing to American values and interests. Furthermore, the president seems to understand we have to win in Libya. I think we will.

Victor Davis Hanson did not, writing at NRO:

President Obama just gave a weird speech. Part George W. Bush, part trademark Obama — filled with his characteristic split-the-difference, straw-man (“some say, others say”), false-choice tropes...

In a speech dedicated to clarifying our policy, it left it even more murky. What was our objective, and what is it now? Obama asserted that “We have stopped his deadly advance.” But is that the aim — the status quo, and a sort of permanent safe zone for rebels in accordance with UN directives? Or are we going beyond that to eliminate Qaddafi, who is the source of the problem? The president now says he won’t overthrow Qaddafi by force, but that is what he hopes, in fact, will happen as a result of our military presence.
Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement