View Single Post
Old 03-31-2011, 01:37 PM   #21
VrQsgM7c

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
511
Senior Member
Default
Oh, I absolutely do.

Unfortunately, the UN Resolution was passed to protect innocent civilians, wasn't it? By arming the people who Ghadaffi is fighting, we're changing the game. Once we help the rebels, we're no longer in it to protect innocent civilians. We're in it to topple Ghadaffi, and that's very different than what we signed up for...
Well, that's all assuming that the UN intended to stay neutral.

I don't think this is entirely Obama's decision. The West in general saw an opportunity to remove Gadhafi, and they're taking it.

Granted, this method of removing him has been done time and time again by multiple administrations. Obama is obviously not the first president to arm a rebel group we have assumed acts in our interests.

Of course, this also proves that he's not an agent of change but rather just part of the status quo.

And any claims that Obama is a leftist are laughable at this point. He's clearly of the neoliberal persuasion -- which is very similar to neoconservatism as well, when it comes to foreign policy.
VrQsgM7c is offline


 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:46 AM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity