Democrats Make Speeches, Not Decisions
By: Craig Chamberlain
Perhaps it’s their desire to be loved by all, perhaps they’re just wimps, but for whatever reasons Democrat Presidents can’t seem to make a hard decision. Carter couldn’t figure out what to do about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, or the Iranian revolution, Clinton never knew what to do about the Al-Qaeda threat, and Obama doesn’t have a clue about what his administration should do in the middle east. This is a presidency that exudes weakness, that tries for all of its worth to avoid having to make a decision. They think if they avoid the problem they can’t be held responsible. But there is nothing so reprehensible in elected leaders as indecision.
Pakistan seizes one of our CIA operatives and holds him in prison, only releasing him when we pay a ransom. What part of diplomatic immunity don’t those idiots in Washington understand? President Obama was more outraged over Virginia Tech not making the NCAA tournament than he was over Pakistan’s actions and he’s more interested in seeing how far San Diego State will go in the tournament than what will happen in Libya.
President Obama wants it both ways. He wants the world to do what he wants, but doesn’t want to work to get the results he desires. He believes that one of his imperial decrees should suffice. After all this is the man who can heal the planet, why won’t a bloodthirsty tyrant step down just on his say so? He’s made the declaration that he wants Libyan dictator Moammar Qaddafi to step down, but has done nothing to force him out. This is the worst of both worlds. If Qaddafi survives, and it is looking increasingly likely that he will, he will not forget that the United States wanted him out. This could lead to the mad dog of the middle east to being a thorn in the side of the United States again. By publicly declaring his support for the opposition, but not helping them in anyway, he is showing that the United States is a feckless ally who will not back you up when the chips are down, but will make real nice sounding speeches when you’re in trouble.
President Obama can tell the world how much he cares and how he stands with the people. Or more appropriately his teleprompter can. But he has done nothing to show what he his willing to do. Speeches don’t accomplish anything. By declaring his support for the rebels in Libya he is bound to support them in every way he can. That’s what a leader is supposed to do. They’re supposed to lead, they’re supposed to make decisions that might not always be popular. But declaring support for Libyan rebels and then leaving them to be slaughtered by Qaddafi’s forces is like seeing a man being attacked by a pit bull and saying “I’ll help you, buddy!” and then go inside to watch college basketball. It doesn’t do the poor guy getting mauled any good, and it only shows what a wimp you are.
You can argue whether we should be involved in Libya’s affairs, or not. Personally I don’t think it matters to us who is in charge in Tripoli. These rebels haven’t showed any sings that they are going to be a truly democratic alternative to the beast that’s already in charge. But that’s not the point. The point is that President Obama, by his call for Qaddafi to step down, has already gotten the United States involved and has already chosen sides. For the sake of America’s reputation, and the sake of any sane foreign policy, we need to intervene. The establishment of a no fly zone would not put American lives in danger and would cripple Qaddafi’s efforts to take the last few rebel held positions. It would show the people of the Arab world, who are watching, what side we are really on.
Should the rebels win with our help we might actually have a friendly government in Tripoli. If the Rebels win while the US government does nothing it is unlikely that our relations with a new regime will be anything but frigid. It’s too late to declare our neutrality now. That was gone the minute President Obama said that Qaddafi had to go. We can’t insist that the UN take the lead, after all that’s the same organization that had no problem watching the Rwandan genocide and not lift a finger to stop it. We can’t insist that NATO do something, because for all intents and purposes, we are NATO. Are we going to demand that the Spanish take the lead? Or maybe we get the Italians to patrol the skies?
The President, and the State Department, must decide what the want in Libya. Are the all right with Qaddafi running the country for decades to come? If that’s the case they better kiss and make up now, or there could be some awkward diplomatic relations later. Do they want Qaddafi gone? That seems to be the position, for now, and if it is what the geniuses in Washington really want then they have the responsibility to see that something actually happens to get Qaddafi out. We’re not talking about invading Iraq, this is a minimal amount of effort that could produce maximum results.
Nero needs to put down his fiddle, Rome is burning.