Barack Obama's muddled speech leaves Libya war aims unclear

[cali]

By Toby Harnden World Last updated: March 29th, 2011


President Barack Obama delivered an elegant speech in a setting – the National Defence University – in which he appeared much more at ease then he does in the Oval Office. He spoke movingly of the moral rationale to intervene in Libya and of Amerian leadership in the world:

To brush aside America’s responsibility as a leader and — more profoundly — our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are.

That’s the good news. The bad news is that he left Americans no clearer about how this war ends and while speaking about American leadership tried to pretend that it was the European allies and Nato that were going to take the weight from this point on (the reality is that the US wil continue to do the heavy lifting).

While stating that Colonel Muammar Gaddafi had to go, he clung to the fiction that this action was about protecting civilians and shrunk from committing US forces to finish the job by unseating its murderous ruler.

<snip>
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyharnden/100081628/barack-obamas-muddled-speech-leaves-libya-war-aims-no-clearer/

yes, I know The Telegraph is a conservative paper. It's still a good piece.
.

[Obamanaut]

1. I wish the Pres would deliver an elegant speech in which he speaks movingly

about fixing the mess here at home, bringing home troops and disengaging from all the action in the -stan suffixed countries (and now this new one as well), making a balanced budget and sticking to it.

Some say this point of view is nationalism, but to me it's just good sense. One should repair his own house after a storm before going someplace else to repair other houses.

oh, and rec.