I might be wrong, but I don't consider the "Humanitarian-intervention-against-militarily-weak-fossil-fuel-producing-countries-in-strategically-important-regions-that-are-also-located-near-many-large-NATO-military-bases-and-are-run-by-dictators-who-kind-of-piss-us-off-and-have-no-powerful-allies Doctrine" the stuff of Grand Strategy.

I think this is the best summation I've seen of what Libya tells us about the so-called "Obama Doctrine":

Heh.

This is the kind of thing you expect from an inexperienced exec.

There's not enough "nuance" there RD.

Huh. Actually, I have the opposite view - I expect an inexperienced exec to rely too heavily on general principles and textbook models instead of performing a case-by-case analysis.

Huh. Actually, I have the opposite view - I expect an inexperienced exec to rely too heavily on general principles and textbook models instead of performing a case-by-case analysis.

How is it a text book maneuver, and why do you think it was driven by his "handlers"?

I'm all for taking out Gaddafi but The Chosen One has zero credibility. Had he and his party and all his followers not been ***** and yelling and complaining and whining about how W got us into a mess, he might be a little more credible. Like the other thread, he ran on not being Bush but is doing everything Bush did and his supporters are just going right along with maybe a slight "tsk tsk" as a show of displeasure. The hypocrisy is enough to melt your face.

We don't answer to the UN.

Obviously, however we are a leading member nation, so have some responsibility to support it's actions don't you think?

He took action without congress approval just like W did but where is the screaming and hollering?

He ran on ending war....

He took action without congress approval just like W did but where is the screaming and hollering?

I don't believe W did that. Congress approved Iraq action.

I love how shooting down aircraft and bombing people is a humanitarian mission.

What a world.

I can't answer your question because of the way you worded it. I don't agree that anything was trumped up or that having the UN give us a thumbs up is needed.

What I do know is that for almost 8 years, you and others of your political persuasion derided every military action W took. Pretty much believed every thing the media slung out as long as it conformed to your ideology. But your boy, who you go to GREAT lengths to defend and give the benefit of the doubt on, is doing a-ok in your book. He took action without congress approval just like W did but where is the screaming and hollering? He ran on ending war and gitmo and all that feel good liberal crap, but what's going on?

Sorry, but I see a guy who has done nothing but do everything he said he wouldnt do and the libs just defend and deflect for him. He gave you guys a line just to get voted into office and you swallowed it hook, like and sinker. And now you just defend him to keep from saying that you made a mistake.

Most of the rebels were soldiers who committed treason among other crimes. It's not exactly a humanitarian crisis.

I actually very much like that this is a UN action, not a US action as I want the US to get out of the role of the world's police force, but as DE pointed out, we were the only ones with the manpower and equipment to pull off the initial stages. I have some concerns about the exit strategy here as well, but I view that as a UN problem to deal with, not a US problem to be honest.