• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Morning Bell: Obama Leaves Libya Questions Unanswered

    Last night, nine days after U.S. military operations against Muammar Qadhafi began, President Barack Obama took to the stage at the National Defense University to finally explain his rationale for intervention in Libya’s civil war. He described the brutality of the Qadhafi regime, the United States’ interests in the conflict, the limited nature of U.S. military involvement, and the role the “international community” would undertake in finishing the job in Libya and rebuilding the country. It was a speech more appropriately delivered at the onset of Operation Odyssey Dawn, and unfortunately it’s a speech that leaves a fundamental question unanswered: what’s the way forward?

    From the outset of operations in Libya, the best option was always “to minimize the commitment of the U.S. military, look after the best interests of Libya’s civilian population, and limit the spread of terrorism and instability throughout the region.”  While the president promised last night to pursue such a course—the real challenge now begins—and there are still far too few details of how the White House will deliver on these promises.

    The tasks going forward that must be accomplished are clear: (1) keeping Qadhafi isolated until he is brought to justice; (2) maintaining a military presence to keep Qadhafi’s forces from going back on the offensive; and (3) identifying, supporting and sustaining a legitimate opposition that brings democracy to Libya, fights the spread of terrorism, and looks after the humanitarian needs and the human rights of the peoples under its control. We knew these before the president’s speech—it is still no clearer on how they will be accomplished other than to turn the responsibility over to the “international community.”

    Though the president noted that on Wednesday NATO will assume greater responsibilities for operations in Libya, it remains that U.S. forces are still engaged in combat—and administration officials have acknowledged that will likely continue for months. The Administration has had ample time to develop its plans for the employment of U.S. forces and should be briefing leaders in Congress on them now so that a determination can be made if a resolution to employ force is now required or should be in the future.

    While President Obama used last night’s speech to explain (or justify) his Libya rationale, he also used it to take a shot at President George W. Bush’s actions in Iraq, likely in an effort to assure his liberal allies that he is not his predecessor. “Regime change [in Iraq] took eight years, thousands of American and Iraqi lives and nearly a trillion dollars. That is not something we can afford to repeat in Libya,” Obama said. This dig on President Bush was gratuitous, unnecessary, and could well be a statement the president comes to regret as much as the “Mission Accomplished” banner draped on the carrier deck after the invasion of Iraq. The president has promised that the “international community” will do all the dirty work from here on out. Before the President takes a bow, he ought to be pretty confident he can deliver on this tall order.

    There are some who are likening President Obama’s actions in Libya to President George W. Bush’s foreign policy—the Bush Doctrine. But unlike his predecessor, President Obama has not consulted Congress, has generally failed to communicate his mission, and has demonstrated a willingness to bow to the will of the “international community,” rather than act in the best interests of the United States. The president last night bent over backwards to describe his strong leadership on Libya, but the commander in chief protests too much and has promised a great deal. It will be no small task to build a coalition that can keep Qadhafi isolated until he is brought to justice, prevent his forces from going on the offensive, and bring stability and democracy to Libya while preventing the spread of terrorism. That will take more than a speech and rhetorical reliance on the “international community.” It will take real leadership to deliver on those promises.

    Quick Hits:

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    69 Responses to Morning Bell: Obama Leaves Libya Questions Unanswered

    1. Jim --New Haven, Ct. says:

      I've never heard any president use the word "I" as often as this egomaniac.

      His shot at Bush was unnecessary. He should have acknowledged that it is quite possible that Bush's venture in Iraq has ignited the desire for democracy in the rest of the Middle East.

      Obama's silence on Iran last year allowed that regime to squelch any thought of democracy while killing thousands of the protesters.

      He should consult a history book and read up on Carter's horrible mis-reading of the ayatollahs' ascent in Iran after he(carter) helped kick out the Shah.

      We have no idea whether we will be dealing with Islamist governments throughout the ME long after this idiot is gone.

    2. joecool says:

      Well, so far I have seen Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Barack Obama on YouTube explaining this is an impeachable offense. What's that? They didn't mean THIS president? Oh, surely the principle argument would apply to ANY president, then. No, they meant THAT president, but not THIS president? Surely that's wrong. Surely. Surely??

    3. Frank Watkins, Silve says:

      It is becomming all to clear to me now that there is a big difference between a politician and a leader. A politician does what is best to get reelectted and a leader does what is best for the country. We need a leader!

    4. Steve says:

      As usual Obama wants to have it both ways. He spent half the speech bragging about his leadership and the other half saying we are taking back seat to NATO. I guarantee when this thing fails Obama has protected himself from criticism by doing a modern day pontius pilot and washing his hands of his involvement

    5. Richard Morton IL says:

      Our community organizer from Chicago just voted present again.

    6. Karen, MA says:

      Actually, the actions of President Obama have made it much clearer to me how CORRECT President Bush was to keep our troops in Iraq and assist in the change, as well as train Iraqis. We've seen quite clearly how ready the Muslim Brotherhood is to step into power.

    7. Jeanne Stotler,Woodb says:

      My mother always said "Talk is cheap", this was when I would say SORRY after doing something bad when I was a small child. What we have in the WH is a boychild that enjoys playing a role, but has no idea how to do the real job. We are "BROKE" and now we are spending money we don't have on another military act. It does not make sense for us to keep spending money on foriegn countries and neglecting our own citizens,ie: seniors had no COLA for 2 years, we have seen Congress vote themselves raises , states trying to balance budgets and POTUS keeps finding new ways to spend, and refuses to cut any substantial anywhere, he just keeps talking about new private sector jobs, and all the items in his pot of gold and how he's the answer to all our problems and YES all this was caused by Geo. W. Bush/ Now he says Bush was thecause for Lybia. IMPEACH BHO NOW

    8. Warriogal says:

      Why didn't the president respond to the cries of the Iranian people? Americans know and understand Iran is behind most of the terrorism in the world. Why all of a sudden Mr. Obama chooses to "aid" the people of Libya. This is ridiculous.

    9. John, New Jersey says:

      The president's speach apparently introduced an entirely new concept in how he is able to use our military without consulting congress. Some type of moral imperitive is all he needs to deploy troops or engage a foreign country, provided the UN approves. This is mind boggling. From where does he obtain the authority to engage in regiem change?

      I am not a fan of Gaddafi (sp) in any way, shape or form but I cringe at the unbridled actions this guy takes without any respect for the limits on his authority. Where is our national media or, for that matter, congress?

    10. James Maropoulakis D says:

      You state: "and unfortunately it’s a speech that leaves a fundamental question unanswered: what’s the way forward?"

      You have missed or ignored the real fundamental question: Why has Obama relinquised U.S. soveriegnty to the U.N. by ignoring the U.S. Congress and the constitution. I realize that a declaration of war is irrelevant and unneeded, but since when does the President have the authority to use military force in an act of war against an existing recognized government, to intervene in a civil war that does not affect our vital strategic interests, when the U.S. has not been threatened or attacked?

    11. William Person says:

      Have we elected a juvenile for Presiddent? How old is he? When is going to grow up and take responsibility for his actions?

      There a kids younger than he who fight and die in wars who demonstrate more honesty about what they are doing than this child!!!

    12. Benjamin O. Azeredo says:

      It is a total waste of time to listen to Obama speak in any manner it has been nothing but lies from day one and these moves are all in the big plan to eat away at the strength of the USA. We do not need to be in Libya and need to win in Iraq and Afghanistan.One of the biggest problems is how can this country allow a president turn this country upside down who was not born in this country. All these world going ons are a great diversion to the great diversion to many people in the USA.

    13. RUTH SC says:

      I can't help but remember how many people bashed GW Bush for his involvement in the middle east, so, now the shoe is on the other foot. Where is the liberal outrage for Obama's behavior? Maybe now they will better understand why we were at war with the middle east. For those who think it is all about oil, they should get their heads out of the sand and ask their leader to do what is right for all involved, not just a handful. Does our president not believe we are at war with these third world countries? Let us pray that Obama will get together with more experienced people who can advise him with common sense and not rhetoric. He has bitten off more than he can chew, and I think he now knows it.

    14. Blair Franconia, NH says:

      Obama's inaction on Libya gives him street cred among the anti-colonialists. It took him nine days to give a speech. No wonder this country's in decline. Compared to

      Obama, Jimmy Carter was a better President. At least he got the Camp David Peace

      Treaty between Israel and Egypt. Clinton tried to get Camp David II, and Bush tried to

      get the road map. Nothing worked.

    15. Doubleace62 says:

      When I read this article I have to laugh. The liberals are so far left they named a combat mission Oddessy Dawn? That sounds more like some name given toi a flower power child of the 60's. If I was a Marine I would resign rather than support this in name only Commander in chief. He can't explain what is going on because he doesn;t know. He is taking advice from other leftistsd who have no idea what the hell they are doing as well. Now they want to arm the rebels (Al Queda) in Libya. What are they going to say when these weapons show up in Afghanistan and Iraq and are used to kill American soldiers there? Explain that one to your adoring public Mr. Obama.

    16. John Olofson, Graeag says:

      Two issues that do not seem to warrant much mention, let alone scrutiny:

      1) Obama is relying on a United Nations resolution instead of the U. S. Congress' "approval" or "authorization."

      2) Few, if any, of Obama's advisers (with the exception of Clinton) have been vetted by the Senate (as Cabinet Officers are required to be). Thus we have government by rogue interlopers whose agenda are completely unknown to the American public.

    17. charli coon, washing says:

      Actions speak louder than words. Since Obama has taken office we have seen him weaken the image of the United States worldwide. He is determined to teach "imperialistic" America a lesson. He acts as though he is ashamed of America. This is in stark contrast to Reagan who exuded patriotic pride in the United States.

      Obama may want other countries — the international community — to "like" us. I would rather have them respect us!

    18. Jim Delaney says:

      No one is asking the burning question nor taking the time to honestly and objectively research this question: though presidents before Barack have launched undeclared wars without congressional approval, does that make the intervention in Libya any less unconsitutional?

      Lamentably, the Constitution is virtually d-e-a-d and our framers' words but distant, inconvenient obstacles to be circumvented and ignored. Increasingly, our "leaders" pay lip service to a document few have read, and fewer still understand. It has become a useless prop to cynically advance political "careers" vs political "service" in what should be a Constitutional Republic.

      I fault both self-serving political parties and their mindless me-first adherents for our Republic's demise. Frankly, we've careened so far afield from the Constitution that I genuinely fear that our restoring constitutional order is likely unachievable. It was great while it lasted.

      Welcome to the Democratic Socialist Republic of America.

    19. ThomNJ says:

      Get out of Libya. NOW.

      I'd offer a variant of this statement fromt he article: "It will be no small task to build a coalition that can keep Qadhafi isolated until he is brought to justice, prevent his forces from going on the offensive, and bring stability and democracy to Libya while preventing the spread of terrorism."

      How about this: It will be no small task to build a coalition that can keep obama isolated until he is brought to justice, prevent his SEIU forces from going on the offensive, and bring stability and the representative Republic back to America while preventing the spread of terrorism.

    20. Jack Krohn, Colorado says:

      did I miss it or did he not say the word 'war' one time? what about oppressive regimes in China? are we going to darfur anytime soon? Is he at odds with secdef on what is a vital national security issue?

      more questions than answers. Community organizer indeed.

    21. Sara, Florida says:

      Why can we have him impeached? He is destroying America. He is like a little kid , that if he doesn't get what he wants he gets a tantrum. One thing for him , he has brought CHANGE to this country, but not a GOOD CHANGE. I always wanted to know what CHANGE meant when he was running his campaign but he never gave an answer. So many people don't do their homework, it is sad. I come from a communist country and is started with CHANGE and many cute words that didn't mean anything, but sounded good. Americans better start waking up soon or we are doomed.

    22. Jim Hodge, Susanvill says:

      I felt that the President's speech last night did not answer a lot of questions. I thought it was a pure play on his part that he did not speak from the Oval office but in front of a mostly military crowd that could not ask questions like: we have fired 199 1million missles so far–how many more will we send and how many are coming from other countries like France and England?? Who exactly is going to take over (not a vague answer) and will they be worse than MQ ? What decides victory? In Bush's cases he had 48 countries in his coalition for approval –Obama has only 14. Why isn't China or Brazil for instance, in this fray–they need oil ? This is not, in my opinion, about humanitarian stuff, this is about oil for Europe and to have a war distraction to take the heat off at home about our bad economy and no jobs. This President manipulates every thing.

    23. F.D. O'Toole, C says:

      I'm afraid the President is in over his head. Perhaps another vacation is in order. His claim that HE decided to stop the killing is an example of his self-infatuation and is laughable on its face. He dithered while Libyans died. His State Department and Defense Department contradicted each other. Hillary seemed to be the one with her head screwed on while Gates assured the West Point Cadets that any commitment of US troops to a land war i the region should have his head examined. Then Hillary assured us that Assad of Syria was a "reformer" and we knew that she too was clueless.

      Altogether, it's amateur night in Washington and we look like fools on the world stage.

    24. Robert, North Richla says:

      The real "unanswered questions" come from our "missing in action" republicans in Congress, and particularly in the House of Representatives. Yet, Eric Cantor and John Boehner claim to have fulfilled over half of the promises in their ridiculous, Pledge to America. They have spit in our faces. To respond, stop sending money to the republican party; tell their phone solicitors that you are not interested and to take you off their call list; then tell your friends, co-workers, neighbors and relatives that you are sick and tired of being lied to and misled.

    25. Kyle, MD says:

      The last thing this incompetent (BO) should be doing, is pointing fingers at anyone except himself, considering the utterly dismal job he's done since stepping into the White House. A leader he is not, and the sooner he is removed from office, the better America will be!

    26. George Colgrove VA says:

      "It will be no small task to build a coalition that can keep Qadhafi isolated until he is brought to justice, prevent his forces from going on the offensive, and bring stability and democracy to Libya while preventing the spread of terrorism. That will take more than a speech and rhetorical reliance on the “international community.” It will take real leadership to deliver on those promises."

      But where in DC can you find that leadership? We have spent about a $100 million a day on this action. Tomorrow we will have spent one of those $10 billion dollar bills we saved earlier this month and last month. This was supposed to be days, this Sunday, we can start counting weeks. Two weeks after that we can start counting months. By then, we will have spent three times what we have saved.

      I see this nation slipping away. Uncontrolled spending, self-serving politics, and military engagements that will last a lifetime. There is no restraint with the feds. Next month congress will betray the American people by increasing the debt limit to well over $15 trillion. We are in three wars, Non-government househoolds lost 23% of their earnings. Housing is at rock bottom. Over 10 million people are out of work. Public workers are rioting against the taxpayer. From this vantage point, it does not look good!

    27. Matt, Marlton, NJ says:

      Our Commander-in-Chief is in so far over his head. He is a total embarrassment and keeps digging his own hole deeper and deeper. Unfortunately, he is dragging the greatest nation in the history of the world down with him. When will the true Americans stand up and demand impeachment? Libya is just the latest in the laundry list of assaults on our country, our Constitution, and our personal liberties perpetrated by a willing puppet of the radical left. I have not really seen Heritage address the impeachment issue. After 2-plus years, it is obvious this president could care less about our founding principles. I fear that what it means to be an American is lost on a majority of people in this country and the fear was confirmed with the election of this impostor. I would like to request an analysis be done of the constitutionality of President Obama's actions from Day 1 of this nightmare.

    28. Ken Jarvis - Las Veg says:

      How would you – Grade Obama's Speech on Libya?

      I give him an F.

    29. Matt Atlanta Ga says:

      The hubris of this President and those left of center is disturbing. This same type of foolish thinking extended our engagement in Vietnam under Kennedy and Johnson. This makes me very angry as a citizen of the United States. It also makes me grieve for the soldiers in the field who must serve under this man.

    30. Steven Ridings Arizo says:

      March 15, 2011 on Al-Libiya TV Anis Al Dgheidi called Obama a political adolescent. One must wonder if they are playing him. Weakness is a game that must be understood in the arab world. I doubt Obama really understands.

    31. Ricardo Alonso says:

      That's an irefutable argument… even for our left-handed President Zapatero; a shamed one for spanish people.

    32. Peter, Reston, VA says:

      So the fact that the ill advised war in Iraq really DID take "eight years, (cost) thousands of American and (hundreds of thousands of) Iraqi lives and nearly a trillion dollars", the important thing for this writer is that mentioning these lame stats is a gratuitous dig at Bush?

      8 years from now, if this conflict has wreaked a similar damage, I look forward to the Heritage Foundation exercising kind restraint in not mentioning this unkind fact.

    33. Inverbrass, Kansas says:

      What do you expect from one such as Obama. We do not have a leader, we have a community organizer for president. Weak, cowardly, arrogant, inept, etc… When his time in office is chronicled, the text should be titled Mr. Dithers.

    34. John in Az says:

      Obama says the brunt of the action in Libbya will be the responsibility of NATO, and will lessen the cost to AMerican tax payer this a false statement. When the charter was drawn up the United States undeer leadership of F.D.R. the funding for NATO fell souly on the U.S.tax payer.

    35. Lloyd Scallan (New O says:

      More of the same lies and distortions of the facts. Obama was dragged into Libya kicking and screaming by France's Sarkozy when he told Obama "we will

      do this with or without you". Obama's declartation "no ground troups" is another example of distortions. We all should know that it takes "ground troups" to "laze" targets so that our missiles and aircraft can hit them. To think that it's just France and U.K. troups doing this job is naive.

      Obama need not fear "deliver on this tall order'" or "provide details or exit plans" because when this all goes to hell and we start bringing our troups and airmen home in bodybags, the main stream media will make up excuses and cover up

      whatever they can't explain..

      "Real leadership" is that a joke or a wish?. Does anyone trust Obama to lead

      on anything but the destruction of this nation? Does any "world leader" trust

      Obama is qualified to be a leader?

    36. Dinah Garrison Fairb says:

      @Robert, North Richland Hills

      If you are a conservative or even any Republican, please be careful what you say. The Democrats would be thrilled to read your post. Remember "divide and conquer?" They are making every effort to divide us–Tea Party vs. other Republicans–and we don't need any other cracks in our unity. Write to your congress members, make phone calls, encourage others to do the same, but do not let us become divided. Just numbers will show you that we can never win any battle against the Democrats without all of our members hanging together. As the number of people on some form of government assistance increases (as it does daily), the number of people to vote FOR Democrat agendas increases as well.

    37. Barb in WI says:

      Both parties in Congress should be screaming from the rooftops!

      We are now in yet a THIRD war with muslims without any American Congressional consultation. What will it gain us and how much will it cost us?

      We spend zillions of our hard earned tax dollars on people that hate us in the world. For what? This is absolute madness. We Americans are so suckered by politicians on both sides. Impeach Obama the incompetent Obama now and audit every member of Congress every year. They may not be paying their fair share of this war cost and based on past scandals, it's likely that they aren't.

      It's all on the backs of honest hard working taxpayers.

    38. Aaron, California says:

      Now "let me be clear" is the statement that our president uses to preface most of his positions especially those which are controversial. Many of which are completely unclear and sprinkled with fairy dust and leaves me walking away scratching my head. Exactly what I have been doing for the last two years; scratching my head in comfusion/disbelief. Arrogance is the mechanism in which one covers up inadequacy and lack of confidence.

    39. John Arizona says:

      What happened to Ken Jarvis? He gave his saviour an "F"???? I guess he couldn't blame the WSJ and R. Murdoch for the speech.

    40. Roger TN says:

      We fund NATO to the tune of 22% of operating cost. At the same time we spend $100M per day to attack a nation that has no special US interest nor are an imminent danger to us. NATO says wait a minute on this transition of command (unspoken: Are you willing to pay?)

      We have no business in Libya and Hillary and her female associates tha convinced our expert war CINC to go in, despite Gates and Mullen precautioning him against it. What was the saying? You break it you fix it. This will come back to seriously bite us in the real.

    41. Robert, North Richla says:

      Amen to Jim Delaney on all points.

      Separately, I do not understand the apologists for Bush (including Heritage) – and it certainly accomplishes nothing toward fixing the multitude of problems (debt, spending, real border and homeland security, energy, jobs, growth) we face. Facts: our government as a % of GDP has never grown faster than under Bush; welfare spending has never grown more than Bush; ineffective and excessive funding of a broken education system has never grown faster in Texas, or the nation, than under Bush. Plus, we are still engaged in two wars, after NINE years. We defeated Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan (fighting both simultaneously) in less than four years – and they were much tougher opponents. Our soldiers are brave, but once again their leadership (civilian and military) falls short, and has fallen short for ten years (not just two). Like his father, Bush was NOT a conservative, but a lying, Rockefeller liberal.

    42. Frank, Florida says:

      Jim Delaney hit the nail on the head with:

      "No one is asking the burning question nor taking the time to honestly and objectively research this question: though presidents before Barack have launched undeclared wars without congressional approval, does that make the intervention in Libya any less unconsitutional?"

      If anyone listens to Judge Napolitano, you know the Judge has said this action was clearly Unconstitutional. Congress neither declared war, nor would the (probably Unconstitutional) War Powers Act allow Obama to act as he did. Our nation was not under immediate threat by Qadhafi and Congress was not consulted prior. The Judge stopped short of saying Obama deserved impeachment for this.

      The problem is most Americans don't know the Constitution & politicians only pay, at best, lip service to it. So the politicians literally get away with murder and the nation continues in steep decline as everyone just "does what seems right in their own eyes."

      If we want Qadhafi removed from office, let Congress issue (as the Judge suggested) a "Letter of Marque" & let private soldiers do the job. Or declare war on Libya. Or stay out of the mess (avoid "foreign entanglements" as many Founding Fathers advised). After the Pan Am bombing, a Letter of Marque on Qadhafi should have been issued or War declared on Libya. I think now is too late for those options. And we cannot be the world's policeman. Anyways, we're broke.

    43. toledofan says:

      This adventure into Libya is very bad mistake; going into Libya without a plan other than to turn everything over to NATO, we are NATO and without our leadership and money, the mission will fail and having no idea of what we are going to have to do next, when do we know it's time to get out and who are we really fighting against? What do we do if the same thing happens in Saudi Arabia or somewhere else, what's the plan. The lack of a cohesive and comperhensive foriegn policy and the leadership to carry it out is a big deterent to success and when American soldiers are in the picture, that is just unacceptable. The Presdiedent and his Administration have been AWOL since January 2009.

    44. Lorraine Allday on M says:

      First thing this morning I turned on the news, FOX. The President had announced he is considering furnishing weapons to the rebels in Libya, Al-Qaeda is infiltrating the rebel forces and, NATO is faltering on taking charge of the allied command, to be announced Wednesday.

      All this in less than 12 hours after the President gave a 30 minute speech explaining to the American people why we are in Libya.

      Are we expected to believe he knew nothing about any of these happenings?

      Who are these rebels? If they should win, who will be in charge? What will happen to the weapons if we furnish them? What is to prevent foreign influence

      from taking over?

      The biggest questions of all, Can We Afford It??

    45. Disgusted, Illinois says:

      As usual "the community organizer" with clipboard in hand, standing on a street corner and spouting his usual lies.The regime change in Iraq took less than two weeks and not the the lieing statement(s) that he indicated in his speech, the preamble to his re-election campaign.This guy is as inept and so over his head and is not fit to be a street cleaner much less the President of this GREAT nation.Remember, AMERICA no greater nation on earth has been or will be.

    46. yidlmitnfidl, Medici says:

      I for one like this incursion in Libya.

      Make another one in Syria NOW!

      Next week one in Iran.

      There is still Jordan, Bahrain & Yemen to clear.

      When we lose these 6 wars too, we'll have to pick a country of our own size.

      Like Liechtenstein. Let's attack this bunch of crooks & tax evaders!

      That should work.

      These guys have zero army!

    47. Dick, NJ says:

      Let's keep in mind that our President is a self-proclaimed "citizen of the world", which obviously supersedes his obligation to we citizens of the U.S.

    48. Katherine says:

      His speech written by others was well read. He did prove that he is a legend in his own mind. Like during the campaign he talks the talk and does not walk the walk. Calling the citizens of Libbya Quadif's people instead of the Libbian people really shows how he thinks of himself in relation to citizens of the United States. The liberals seem to all believe that we were all born at night – what they don't realize is it wasn't last night!!

      When he said being "sensivitve to what his people want" I almost gagged – he does not know or care more of us have said NO to his agenda : Obamacare, cap and tax etc. What a liar!!! In full flight from reality.

    49. Pingback: Morning Bell: Obama Leaves Libya Questions Unanswered | Big Propaganda

    50. GotFreedom says:

      In 2002, BHO made the following comments re: Iraq War. Shouldn't he be applying these same comments to his "war" in Libya?

      http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama%27s_Ir

      "Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances."

      "What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne."

      "That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics."

      "He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

      But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States. . .war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda."

      "Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings."

      "The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. . .Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain."
      http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama%27s_Ir

    51. Geppetto, NC says:

      "[I]dentifying, supporting and sustaining a legitimate opposition that brings democracy to Libya, fights the spread of terrorism, and looks after the humanitarian needs and the human rights of the peoples under its control."

      Under the current threat posed by Islam and the resurgence of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East this is not a realistic goal.

      Libya is a distraction except to those with legitimate international interests which is not the U.S. Iran is the linchpin, the country that must eventually be dealt with, the country that neither George Bush or Obama have demonstrated a willingness to engage in a meaningful way. Both concentrated on Iraq and Afghanistan neither of which is a stellar example of the benefit of the American blood and treasure expended there after almost ten long years.

      America's entire foreign policy needs a major overhaul and there's no evidence that's in the works in either political parties platform.

    52. R. B. Griffiths says:

      Once again, it it not what this man says that counts but what he does. His explanations and rationale ring hollow but if he takes America down the path he describes we are in deep trouble!

    53. Dr. Henry D. Sinopol says:

      The Republicans are dreaming if they think they will defeat this egomaniac and Heritage is also dreaming if they think another paper or editorial will sway the public. Approximately 1/2 of the people pay taxes, the rest want to maintain the status quo because the are getting something for nothing…just like the lifers in the Republian Party. Once elected, they will not rock the boat. They want re-elected.

      Barry O. has entrusted the lives of Americans to the "International Community". This is George 'Sorry' Soros leading our men & women to battle for his grand design and Barry O. is happy to help him. Always…follow the money.

      Good night America, will the last one out turn off the windmill…we don't use coal anymore to produce electricty.

    54. Leon Lundquist, Dura says:

      I am suspicious of the way things are named. If this is the Dawn of Obama's Odyssey, the first Humanitarian-not-war-thingama-ging and knowing Obama lit the fire that swept through the Mid East so it must have been named in light of the Midmorning Odyssey, Noon Odyssey and Night Odyssey yet to come! I felt bad for the young Libyans listening to Obama's call to rise up. Then Obama let Daffy kill as many as he could. 'Perpetual War Quagmire' doesn't sound as good as Odyssey Dawn. They won't let you name these 'actions' truthfully.

      I guess 'Precident' Obama is giving the Defense Department an unauthorized Budget Cut (by blowing a few billion in Libya), that's another precident of the president going around Congress. Maybe when Midnight Odyssey rolls around it will be the USA knocking out the Air Defenses in Israel! It won't be unprecidented, 'Precident' Oh Bomb Ya will have to rule. For some unknowable reason Obama hates America's traditional allies, but he will do anything for Islam! (Even open up our Borders so they can come convert US.) I am sorry if the truth is hateful, if I said the truth would that be "Hate Speech?"

      Well! We can't have Free Speech! RINOs have to be kept blind!

    55. Ronald J. Sakowski says:

      When Obana was in Brazil he stated that Qadaffi had lost his legitimacy. By what standard of international law or otherwise can that statment have any merit?

    56. Thor H. Asgardson says:

      "And Obama usurped that power."

      Patrick J. Buchanan

    57. Bobbie says:

      Broad again with his speech. Humanitarian? That's an issue all over the globe. Rebels? Which are the rebels, Mr. President? Who will replace Mr. Qaddafi? Islamic extremists? You spoke of atrocities in Libya, yet force yours on America. Why didn't you inform America BEFORE you acted? And why did it take 9 days? What American interests and values would be effected? Be specific or don't put words in the mouths of Americans. This man violated the process and Joe Biden says it's an impeachable offense. Lets get the process going.

      I agree with KEN JARVIS. but are you serious?

    58. Ben C. Ann Arbor, MI says:

      At what point do we recognize the fact that society in the Middle East is tribal in nature and far from the threshold of a republican democracy. While we can send in cruise missiles to take out anyone what assurance do we have that it will not be in vain. The more I study the Middle East the more I realize their world is far different from ours and it is unrealistic to assume it can be "Westernized." I look for other, more sinister, reasons for our involvement and wonder "who profits from this adventure?"

    59. Larry Huffman, Piqua says:

      The questions that need answered most, and have been sloughed off by the majority of the media and politicians is, where in the Constitution is the right of this president to take troops to war without the blessings of Congress, and what are they going to do about it?

    60. Geep Boston MA says:

      Ill timed, ill advised and ill planned, this ends in disaster. I'm not even sure that there is legal or moral cover for what we are doing in Libya. Although I personally think that Secretary Gates has done significant harm to the military capability of the US, I strongly support his conclusion that there is no significant national interest in the affair in Libya.

    61. Sherrill, New Mexico says:

      Would someone please tell me why, oh why, do we not impeach this president? He ignores the Constitution he swore to uphold. He ignores the law. He ignores our elected Congress. He ignores the American people.

      He's a dictator and we're allowing it!

      Now, he's entering a war with no real purpose that affects us financially. He and Hilary only agree we should be there, but disagree on why we're there. We all know where this will lead. Then we'll start sending our young men to die for no reason.

      I have never seen such an effort to destroy this country, and I was here for the Carter years. I feel so hopeless and so helpless!

    62. Robert Phillips, Cle says:

      It's amazing how the American people are so apathetic, and have been dumbed down to such an extent that they have no idea what's going on. They haven't a clue how to call for the impeachment of this so-called president, or even the reasons why they should. Obasma stated some time ago that the constitution doesn't allow the president to do what he did nine days ago. And yet not one, not even one member of our spineless congress, calls for his impeachment. And V.P. Biden is a joke. He said that if Obama did what Obama has already done, he himself would call for his impeachment. He doesn't have the testicular fortitude to do it. This immature, irresponsible president has acted contrary to the constitution, has broken the vow he took at his inauguration to "uphold and defend the constitution," and has made the congress of the United States subservient to the United Nations, which also is prohibited by the constitution. Even on that the congress is silent. I heard the other day a liberal media personality refer to the presidential oath of office as a "silly" oath. And we wonder why our country is going to pot! God help us!

    63. Margaret says:

      i think he is just a wanna be ,,,,,, i get the feeling that he is trying to emulsate president Ronaldf Reagan………. obama will never succeed with this play acting he is a theif

    64. Van Peski, Deming, N says:

      Is Col.Qadaffi's actions against his own people ( presently called rebells ), sufficient justification for our intervention? Considering the atrocities these so called Rebels are committing against African inhabitants ( many of them Kenyans). Perhaps it"s merely our non-satiable appetite for selecting sides from an equally maligned group of people, rather than letting water find it's own level. Admittedly, United Nations has approved our present actions, and President Obama has relinquished the lead over to NATO. Which required Secretary of State Clinton to discuss logistics with our British allies. This in itself begs two questions; Is NATO an orphan child ? Is the USA it's foster parent?

    65. Pingback: Must Know Headlines 3.30.2011 — ExposeTheMedia.com

    66. mike hutchings says:

      oil is not a drug…oil is blood…

      energy is not green….money is green

      making money by making energy makes sense..

      consumeing money to make energy makes no sense.

      president obama's so-called policies are eratic at best..

      on libya…on oil…on goverenence

    67. Len, Alexandria, KY says:

      So once again he spoke in tongues and said Nothing in English… then he followed up with his still not explained Enegrgy diatribe once again in tongues ven by showing his inability to read a teleprompter ( aka Off the cuff sponteneity).. whts' next?? Reading the Venezuela Constitution to claim his knowledge and claim of being a Constitutional Scholar???

      He's BOOORRRIIINNNGG!

    68. Ron, Kansas says:

      A reason for the Libyan intervention by the US could be that a civil war there could cause disruption of oil flows to Europe. Our following the European lead (not Obama the leader as he claims) could be his trying to make nice to Europe for some future favors.

    69. Pingback: Morning Bell: A Showdown over the War in Libya | The Foundry

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×