So, it wasn’t okay to bomb Iraq, but it’s okay to bomb Libya? How is it that people are making the exact same arguments about Libya that some were making about Iraq (which were deemed not good enough to try to stop him), and the hypocrisy goes unmentioned except by non-liberals? The UN endorsed the no-fly zone, and Hillary says let the bombing commence.
“A no-fly zone requires certain actions taken to protect the planes and the pilots, including bombing targets like the Libyan defense systems,” Clinton said as she neared the end of a Middle East trip dominated by worries about Libya, where a rebel offensive is apparently flagging.
Necons. Hawks. Warbloggers. You know who’s got the best item about this phenomenon? Michael Totten.
As forces loyal to Libya’s cruel and deranged tyrant Moammar Khadafy reconquer one rebel-held city after an other, the Arab League and the Arabic press are calling for a no-fly zone over the country to tip, or at least even, the odds. While I’m inclined to help the Libyans on humanitarian grounds and to advance our own national interests, the American public’s appetite is low for intervening on behalf of the rebels — and it’s largely the Arab world’s fault.
Last time Americans led a coalition to topple a mass-murdering dictatorship in the Middle East, the Arab League and the Arabic press hysterically denounced us as imperialist crusaders fighting a war for oil and Israel. Egged on by al-Jazeera, they cheerleaded the “resistance” that killed thousands of our soldiers with roadside bombs in the years that followed.
Not that I want Madman Gaddaffy to stay in office, mind you. I want him and his evil spawn as dead as Saddam and his evil spawn. But let’s take note of the utter hypocrisy of the left. They apparently aren’t nearly as anti-war now that we have a Democratic president as they were when he was a Republican.