Near the eight-year anniversary of the Iraq invasion, President Obama enters our country into another war of choice. I finally saw some cable news yesterday and CNN's giant "LIBYA WAR" graphic. There are elements of this that make me (and others across the political spectrum, I'm sure) a little sick. What happens after Qaddafi is killed? Or not killed? Loses power? Or doesn't lose power? What is our responsibility? Our military is stretched so thin; the domestic recovery is slow. How do we have money for this but not for education or universal health care?
And why not Bahrain? Why not Yemen? Why not Sudan?
I hope this turns out well, of course. I hope the Americans come off as supporting the aspirations of people long oppressed by a crazy dictator, and not as invading another oil-rich nation to expand their empire. And I know President Obama would be criticized heavily no matter what he did, intervene or don't intervene. But this cheerleader still feels a little queasy.
1 comment:
"And why not Bahrain? Why not Yemen? Why not Sudan?"
I've asked myself this question a lot lately. I also ask: "And why so few newspaper stories about why not Bahrain? Yemen? Syria?"
(But there is a good story about Syria in today's NY Times that asks just this question.)
I think the answer must be realpolitik. The US military has a base in Bahrain. Our government is allied to Yemen's president Saleh in the war on terror (whatever that amounts to). So, the obvious question is: how deep does the Obama administration's support of democratization in the middle east run? Is the Lybian mission really in support of democratization, rather than the latter just being an excuse to get rid of a longtime enemy?
Post a Comment