Josh Marshall TPM: Just a Bad, Bad Idea (Intervention in Libya)

[CreekDog]

Just a Bad, Bad Idea
Josh Marshall | March 20, 2011, 6:11PM

...

A week ago a relatively limited intervention probably could have sealed the rebels' victory, preventing a reeling Qaddafi from fully mobilizing his heavy armaments. But where do we expect to get from this now? It's not clear to me how the best case scenario can be anything more than our maintaining a safe haven in Benghazi for the people who were about to be crushed because they'd participated in a failed rebellion. So Qaddafi reclaims his rule over all of Libya except this one city which has no government or apparent hope of anything better than permanent limbo. Where do we go with that?

We're calling a time out on a really ugly situation the fundamental dynamics of which we aren't in any position to change. That sounds like a mess.

Maybe we do this and then that rejuvenates the opposition and Qaddafi is gone in a week. If that happens, great. Egg on my face. But I doubt it.

Second, it's difficult for me to distinguish this from an armed insurrection against a corrupt autocrat that looked to be winning and then lost. That sort of thing happens a lot. Only in very specific circumstances is there any logic for us to intervene in a situation like that.

...

This is ugly and it's brutal but a lot of people getting killed in a failed rebellion isn't genocide. It's not. And unlike situations where violence can destabilize the larger region, in this case our presence seems more likely to destabilize the larger region.

...

It looks more like once we've closed down Qaddafi's air forces we've basically taken custody of what is already a failed rebellion. We've accepted responsibility for protecting them. Once we recognize that, the logic of the situation will lead us to arming our new charges, helping them get out of the jam they're in.

So let's review: No clear national or even humanitarian interest for military intervention. Intervening well past the point where our intervention can have a decisive effect. And finally, intervening under circumstances in which the reviled autocrat seems to hold the strategic initiative against us. This all strikes me as a very bad footing to go in on.

...
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/03/at_the_end_of_last.php?ref=fpblg

[ClarkUSA]

1. Josh Marshall likes the idea of nuclear power, though.

[yourout]

2. What does that have to do with Libyia?

[ClarkUSA]

3. Just goes to show you that any commentator has varying opinions one may or may not agree with.

[ProSense]

4. Josh Marshall is

making a point that goes with the rest of the second guessing:

<...>

So let's review: No clear national or even humanitarian interest for military intervention. Intervening well past the point where our intervention can have a decisive effect. And finally, intervening under circumstances in which the reviled autocrat seems to hold the strategic initiative against us. This all strikes me as a very bad footing to go in on.

The argument focuses on speed. Earlier may have been a better time, but that would have certainly been met with outrage about the rush to intervene. Later, in the face of a more severe humanitarian crisis, there would have been cries about another Rwanda.

Was this the right time? The President joined the U.N. Security Council in making that decision.

Would Marshall and others have supported an intervention two weeks ago?

[CreekDog]

5. it's wrong to second guess a war?

:wtf:

[ProSense]

6. Did I say it was wrong?

Here is what I said:

"The argument focuses on speed. Earlier may have been a better time, but that would have certainly been met with outrage about the rush to intervene. Later, in the face of a more severe humanitarian crisis, there would have been cries about another Rwanda.

Was this the right time? The President joined the U.N. Security Council in making that decision.

Would Marshall and others have supported an intervention two weeks ago?"



Would you have supported an intervention two weeks ago?

[Clio the Leo]

11. "Intervening well past the point where our intervention can have a decisive effect."

I dont even understand what he means by that statement, do you?

[David__77]

7. What's the exit strategy?

There is none. No one seems to care now, just like with certain other military engagements that are still ongoing.

[Clio the Leo]

9. What did you think of Gates' statement today? nt

[David__77]

10. Sounds good, if true.

He was clearly skeptical of this whole thing from the start. I am concerned that his statements won't matter too much. I hope so! I certainly hope the US part of this is over quickly.

[Clio the Leo]

13. What specifically in his statement sounded good to you?

The part where he said the admin., including himself, were unanimous in support of the President's decision?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/20/libya-usa-gates-idUSN2022046120110320

[David__77]

24. No, not the pro forma part.

That's the part to ignore is purely unimportant.

[Clio the Leo]

26. ah, cherry picking, I see. nt

[Arkana]

27. We have one--we turn the boats around and go home in a week

like Gates said we were going to.

[Clio the Leo]

8. A whole lotta shark jumpage on my Twitter timeline this weekend....

.... from my boys in DC. I call them "my boys" because I adore them and, well, they're all boys. :)

ALL of the arguments against the offensive are based on presumption and supposition ... not facts as we have them. Granted, there has not been a lot of information from the White House/Pentagon, but that's not a huge problem given we're only 36 hours into it.

10 members of the UN Security Council voted in favor of a resolution introduced by .... wait for it .... LEBANON. Not the US, not the UK, not even France, but LEBANON. Which, last I checked, was not a white, western, Christian nation.

10 votes in favor .... no votes against. Five countries COULD have voted against, nothing stopped them from voting against it, but they didn't.

What little the Pentagon has said ... they have repeated "we will not be engaged in this long term" ... "we are in a support role" .... "days not weeks." It's normal to want to second guess that, but to accuse Obama in engaging in "another open-ended conflict" (may not be Marshall's words but they belong to several others) in in direct opposition to information provided to us administration.

If weeks go by and our planes are still attacking, then that's another matter. But it's been 36 hours. 36 hours and the President has yet to contradict himself on the matter. Call me old fashioned, but I think we at least owe the President (who happens to be a Democrat) a little more faith than that.

I've been VERY disappointed in the reaction of some journalists who I admire and respect. Not because of WHAT they're saying, but by the clear lack of effort they've put into forming that opinion. Supposition, speculation and a massive amount of Chicken Little hyperbole.

[Amonester]

12. +1

Your reply deserves to be an Original Post.

Thanks!

[Clio the Leo]

15. Well, I can sympathize with their gut reactions...

.... I had some of those feelings myself. I was not pleased with the decision.

But after having READ as much on the matter as I can.... most of which I have posted here .... I can honestly say this is unlike any conflict I can remember the US being involved in. I fully believe we intend to be in this only in the short term. How Obama was able to pull off that coup is a story I cannot wait to read. And I will admit I'm leery he can make it happen, but am anxious to see how it plays out.

And even though I'm leery .... I treat the President how I would want to be treated .... I'm giving it time to see what happens before I throw up my hands in frustration and declare the mission a failure.

Anyway, if today is any indication, this thing will NOT last long.

[vaberella]

20. They have it a tad bit wrong.

It was Lebanon, from the Arab League---after the Arab League got together and voted---who presented to the UN that the Arab league decided it would be a good idea to enact a NFZ. The French/Brits were already pushing for intervention. But the US was backing off since they didn't want to get involved in this and they felt the NFZ was a bad idea. However, when the Arab League supported this decision and the French/Brits were pushing this---then the US obliged.

Yup, this is not a situation that will go on for weeks and despite Gaddafi's bolstering---he backed off quick in Benghazi--since their air systems are dead. Additionally the "leadership" role that the US has taken, which is very little --and deals with the naval standpoint will be differed to an International Commander provided by the UN.

I agree totally with your statements at the end. Additionally the information is out there and this is just them running on their own biases about this action. I'm not really for this move by the President, but I think it's incorrect to spread misinformation because I have issues.

[Clio the Leo]

22. Yep, and that's what bothers me about it...

.... it's one thing for someone here at DU to give their opinion, another matter entirely for Marshall to given his (deserved) credentials as a fair journalist. I think he makes it clear what he wrote was his opinion, but HIS opinion carries more weight than the average bear. And for him to base his opinions on what clearly seems to be lack of information (or outright disregard for the statements by the admin today) is sad.

[vaberella]

14. What I've come to notice about life. No one knows what is a good or bad idea.

It's all about hindsight, and doing the best you can with the cards you are sure of. Everything else is up to fate and hope.

[Clio the Leo]

16. And whomever has the most cruise missiles....

.... well it's true! :)

[FrenchieCat]

17. 8,000 dead Libyans killed by Gaddafi's rented Merecenaries are a FACT

Not simply an "idea".

Like Josh, but don't agree with him. If it was his family, he'd be all gun-ho...
let me tell you.

[Clio the Leo]

18. Yep, and apparently, Josh didn't see the images I saw on al Jazeera ....

... of the 7 year old shot in the head by pro-Gadhafi forces. Not by a drone, which is an evil all it's own, but point blank shot in the head.

The little boy is expected to survive. His parents are not.


And then there's the hospital that Ghadaffi reportedly fired upon today.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/At-least-94-killed-in-Gaddafi-assault-on-Benghazi-Hospital/articleshow/7748081.cms

[FrenchieCat]

19. Many only see tax dollars, and believe that since we usually kill Brown people,

ain't no way this is any different.

I sympathize with cynics, but that doesn't make them right.

[qazplm]

21. I'll agree with this

the better time to intervene was at the beginning when the rebels were close to winning. Sometimes being as overly cautious as Obama seems to be in everything doesn't work. We should have set this up much quicker, done it through NATO if necessary, or heck tried and get Egypt involved. They've got the military to do it.

[Clio the Leo]

23. Tried to get Egypt involved?

3/17/11 - "Egypt's military has begun shipping arms over the border to Libyan rebels with Washington's knowledge, U.S. and Libyan rebel officials said."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704360404576206992835270906.html

[FrenchieCat]

25. Yeah...Fuck the UN.....let's just have Dictator Obama to go it alone!

No...let's have the partisan Republican Senators get into it, so that we can debate the issue until 100,000 Libyans are killed by their Dictator's rent-a-mercenaries meanwhile! Yes siree....everything is easy when one only needs to type on the internet or run one's mouth! Then, all of the world's problem ain't nothing more than a Piece of fucking cake!

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

28. Marshall would have been bitching if we had let Gaddafi slaughter the Rebels, too