NYT OpEd: Washington's Options on Libya

[wtmusic]

"The Obama administration is throwing out so many conflicting messages on Libya that they are blunting any potential pressure on the Libyan regime and weakening American credibility. It’s dangerous to make threats if you’re not prepared to follow through. All of the public hand-wringing has made it even worse.
Related

President Obama was talking tough again on Monday, warning that the West is considering all options, including military intervention. Just a day before, his chief of staff, William Daley, complained that “lots of people throw around phrases like no-fly zone; they talk about it as though it’s just a video game.” A few days earlier, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said a no-fly zone could require a huge, prolonged operation, an argument challenged by some military planners.

We are not eager to see the United States involved in another conflict in the Muslim world. Sending in American troops would be a disaster. But some way must be found to support Libya’s uprising and stop Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi from slaughtering his people. On Tuesday, his forces appeared to be gaining momentum as they again turned warplanes against the opposition."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/opinion/09wed1.html?_r=1&hpw

A home run.

[yourout]

1. The only REAL option we have is sanctions.

Military intervention would be a catastrophic mistake.

[jwirr]

2. At this point I would take what Obama says with a grain of salt. He

is talking to the rebels and the leaders so the message is not for us. Tough talk is a weapon all by itself.