Washington’s Blog strives to provide real-time, well-researched and actionable information. George – the head writer at Washington’s Blog – is a busy professional and a former adjunct professor.
~~~
Gaddafi is a lying psychopath who is slaughtering his own people.
So is the imposition of a no-fly zone a good thing?
Perhaps. The Arab League called for it. And even some Libyan rebels pleaded for imposition of a no-fly zone.
But if someone is going to stop Gaddafi, it should be Arab League nations – like Saudi Arabia, which is armed to the teeth.
America should not be involved, because:
• Most Americans are strongly against U.S. intervention in Libya
• America was already involved in 2+ wars costing the U.S. many trillions of dollars (Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz says that the Iraq war alone will cost $3-5 trillion dollars.) Indeed, America’s engagement in multiple wars is bankrupting our country – despite the claims by the military Keynesians
• We are creating more terrorists than we’re stopping by bombing and invading Arab countries
• And both conservatives like Ron Paul and liberals like Dennis Kucinich have pointed out that American intervention is unlawful without a Congressional resolution of war … which no one bothered to ask for.
So I don’t care whether or not someone imposes a no-fly zone or takes out Gaddafi … but the U.S. shouldn’t be the one to do it, even as part of a coalition with France and Britain.
Indeed, Gaddafi has accused the efforts by the three former colonial powers – U.S., France and Britain – as being “neo-colonial” aggression and a “crusade“.
If Arabic countries were the ones to intervene, Arabs wouldn’t be able to make those charges.
And if Arab countries are not willing to intervene themselves, that speaks volumes as to their true priorities … especially since Saudi Arabia just sent 1,000 troops to Bahrain to help the tyrants in that country brutally put down a pro-democracy protest
What's been said:
Discussions found on the web: