Where is the assumption of good faith coming from in regard to the intervention in Libya?

[noise]

How much good faith conduct from politicians have you seen in the last decade?

[Codeine]

1. Context, please? nt

[niyad]

2. I have none, have not had since I was a kid

[mmonk]

3. There is none. We have to come up with our own analysis

when it comes to most things.

[elleng]

5. We should always do our own analyses, and of course

this is a major rationale for First Amendment, which enables, among other things, populace to inform itself. Without that ability, there is no hope, imo.

[RegieRocker]

4. It seems to spread far and wide

[BzaDem]

6. Who cares? Either the intervention is justified or it is not. If a legitimate motive exists, their

motive is irrelevant.

[noise]

7. So the "concern" for the Iraqi people

used to convince the public of the righteousness of the invasion/occupation of Iraq doesn't give you pause?

[BzaDem]

9. Nope.

An intervention is justified or not justified on its own merits. Iraq has nothing to do with Libya. Attacking Iraq was wrong on its own merits.

[Tom Rinaldo]

8. Some comes from sympathy for the Libyan rebels

Most DUers strongly supported their efforts to overthrow a dictator and gain more power over their own lives. The rebels asked for this type of international military intervention.

[Codeine]

10. I never assume good faith.

I make my decisions entirely on my own analysis of the facts of which I am aware. Sometimes I will be right. Often I will be wrong.

[Raksha]

11. There was no assumption of good faith.

Those of us who support intervention were also concerned that it might be a cover for the sabotage of a genuine grassroots revolution. So now it appears the neocons are in charge, turning it into an opportunity to establish a neo-colonial American/EU hegemony in North Africa. How very predictable.

I haven't said much about these concerns because my objections to the false equivalence with Iraq are still valid. This time, the intelligence and facts WERE NOT "fixed around the policy." The brutal facts have been right in front of us for over a month now. The slaughter of civilians in Libya isn't some neocon fabrication but completely real. There are no forged yellowcake documents, etc.

The LAST thing I want is to find myself in bed with Lieberman & Co. but what other choice is there? The choice is still to either intervene (or support intervention) or to stand by and allow Gaddafi to crush the uprising and take his bloody retribution after Benghazi falls. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I cannot stand by and watch that happen.

I was hoping against hope that this would be a LIMITED intervention, only what the Libyan people asked for BUT NO MORE. I guess that was a fool's hope right from the beginning. It now appears to be shaping up into something much more ambitious, and they are ambitions I deeply distrust too.