Sunday, March 27, 2011

The War We Can Win?

Is Obama following that old dictum that a new(ish) President should pick a small war he can win? Even the rightly skeptical Andrew Sullivan is starting to admit that Obama (or Obama-Clinton-Powers-Rice) may have made the right choices regarding military intervention in Libya. The latest:
American and European bombs battered Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s most important bastion of support in his tribal homeland of Surt on Sunday night, as rebels seeking his ouster capitalized on the damage from the Western airstrikes to erase their recent losses and return to the city’s doorstep.

Their swift return, recapturing two important oil refineries and a strategic port within 20 hours, set the stage for a battle in Surt that both sides say could help decide the war for Libya.

There were unconfirmed reports early Monday that rebel forces had entered Surt and routed pro-Qaddafi defenders, but there was no corroboration. Even so, rebels in Benghazi, the birthplace of the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi, reacted by running into the streets and firing weapons into the air to celebrate.

The difference between this and the Bush version of Middle East war is that we are very deliberately taking a supporting role (i.e. getting NATO to take command), while surely involved diplomatically behind the scenes.

And if we should be so fortunate that the Administration successfully unseats Qaddafi, I expect the rhetoric that ensues from Fox News and GOP meat puppets will be quite the spectacle.

No comments: