Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
I'm on the road, but managed to catch the audio feed of President Obama's Libya address at the National Defense University in full. I'll save more detailed observations for later, but here's a quick summation of my first impressions: the president did one thing well, one thing poorly, and one thing that was unnecessary.
He succeeded in making a compelling case for an intervention on humanitarian grounds. Of course, this is the most emotionally appealing aspect of the pitch he had to make, but I still found it effective (the "stain the conscience of the world" line was the one marginally memorable passage in the text).
He did not even come close to presenting a strategic justification for our intervention. The one tangible reference -- to refugee flows into Tunisia and Egypt -- had zero to do with American interests, and its inclusion only underscored that point.
The misstep came in the final third of the remarks, when the president saw fit to lay out a unified theory of his administration's foreign policy. Complete with an ungracious and analytically unsound comparison of Libya to Iraq, this was incoherence on parade. After being told that human rights were an inviolable priority of the U.S. and that Gaddafi's departure was non-negotiable, we were also told that the mission would only go as far as the coalition would bear. If that sounds a little more like a formula for the U.N.'s foreign policy than the U.S.'s ...well, that's because it is.
- Comment (17)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jan '11
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Obama said the military mission would only go so far. He said the US was committed to regime change through non-military means.
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Thanks, Troy. Fine analysis; lovely, lucid prose. And you saved my having to read the speech myself.
Edited on Mar 28, 2011 at 6:56pmJul '10
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Peter Robinson: Thanks, Troy. Fine analysis; lovely, lucid prose. And you saved my having to read the speech myself. · Mar 28 at 6:55pm
Edited on Mar 28 at 06:56 pm
My thought, too, Peter. Ricochet spares me ever having to watch an Obama speech.
May '10
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Kenneth
Peter Robinson: Thanks, Troy. Fine analysis; lovely, lucid prose. And you saved my having to read the speech myself. · Mar 28 at 6:55pm
Edited on Mar 28 at 06:56 pm
My thought, too, Peter. Ricochet spares me ever having to watch an Obama speech. · Mar 28 at 6:58pm
Yes...my thanks as well. His pontifications, and inability to resist taking a shot at Bush in every address, make his speeches a powerful emetic.
Oct '10
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
I watched. Combine the worst of Bill Clinton’s emotional clap trap, along with “hope and change,” sprinkle in Bush-bashing, and you pretty much got it.
This was the speech of a valedictorian attempting to pull on heart strings, and not a serious policy stake in the ground. The vacillations and contradictions will be dissected in the coming days. The bottom line is that the US is now subservient to the UN.
The entire expedition in Libya reminds me of a drunk looking for his keys under the lamp post: because that’s where the light is best. Libya’s population is near a major body of water and European operational bases. Listening to Obama’s rationale, one could slot any number of countries in place of Libya (Syria, Bahrain, Yemen…).
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Non-military means, Tristan? And what, aside from saying, "Pretty please," would those be?
Jan '11
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Peter Robinson
Non-military means, Tristan? And what, aside from saying, "Pretty please," would those be? · Mar 28 at 7:13pm
Well, now, Ronald Reagan and Bill Casey managed to come up with some non-military means to effect regime change in the Soviet Union. Economic and financial sanctions; covert action. The latter could be support to the rebels (paramilitary, weapons, training, equipment) and attempts to sow dissension in Qaddafi's camp.
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Ah, actual tough stuff, not fine words. I feel better, Tristan, knowing that, a couple of years after serving as my research assistant, you're still thinking clearly. I'd feel still better, though, if I thought Obama had the personal wherewithal to pursue your suggestions.
Jan '11
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Admittedly some of the commenters didn't watch the speech, but I wouldn't advertise the fact: Although ignorance may be bliss, its quotient of illumination is small.
Obama did a superior job this evening. Out of the usual morass of contradictions and self-serving that are Democratic statecraft, Obama molded a forceful, serious and presidential address that will do nothing to diminish him in the eyes of the public.
The man has presence. When he looked directly into the camera you saw power and conviction, not ambiguity or diffidence. He was persuasive. People will not remember his words, but they will remember that the President of the United States believed what he was saying, and that will go a long way.
If certitude is a suit of clothes, Obama is haute couture.
Looking back on Bush 41, Bob Dole, W and John McCain, and forward to Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty and Mitch Daniels, I can only envy the Democrats for finding this nonpareil snakeoil salesman for the 21st Century.
And to quote Chief Brody from "Jaws:" I think we're going to need a bigger boat."
Jul '10
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Peter Robinson
Non-military means, Tristan? And what, aside from saying, "Pretty please," would those be?
He could start by threatening to establish diplomatic relations. Assign Nathan Lane as ambassador. Raffle off RPGs at the embassy opening.Threaten to repair local mosques with that $700M USAID nest egg. Neighborhood rec centers, a federally funded pool hall on every corner. Then send in SEIU thugs to organize the hookah parlors and mendicants. Don't sell these community organizers short, they've got a big, big bag of tricks.
Jul '10
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Peter Robinson
Ah, actual tough stuff, not fine words. I feel better, Tristan, knowing that, a couple of years after serving as my research assistant, you're still thinking clearly. I'd feel still better, though, if I thought Obama had the personal wherewithal to pursue your suggestions.
But would you accept such riff raff for an intern position?
Mar '11
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
I only heard part of Obama's Libya speech and the part I heard I wasn't able to devote complete attention to. But the words that seem to describe the speech I did hear are tautology or deja vu or Groundhog Day. He seemed to reiterate the point repeatedly (did I mention tautology?) that this is a humanitarian mission and he offered no explanation on what defines a situation that warrants kinetic US involvement. Perhaps he did offer an explanation, but when it comes to Obama (and his speeches) I prefer not listening to his speech again and thus avoid deja vu all over again.
Jan '11
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Peter Robinson
Ah, actual tough stuff, not fine words. I feel better, Tristan, knowing that, a couple of years after serving as my research assistant, you're still thinking clearly. I'd feel still better, though, if I thought Obama had the personal wherewithal to pursue your suggestions. · Mar 28 at 8:12pm
Thank you kindly! We probably have special operators running around on the ground already -- helping with targeting, liaising with the rebels -- and covert action by the CIA is probably underway, too. Thing is, we won't know the details for years...
Jan '11
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
What you're asking for is a "theory of intervention," but it's always case-by-case. Bush 43 invaded Iraq, but not North Korea or Iran (or Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or any number of other countries that we could've linked with WMD or al Qaeda). Carter let Somoza and the Shah fall, but backed the mujahideen in Afghanistan. Reagan swarmed Grenada but left Qaddafi in power and pulled out of Lebanon.
May '10
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
I'm on record as being four-square in favor of pursuing this golden opportunity to knock off Qaddafi, and as the suspiciously named Tristan says, all interventions require opportunity (the unspoken requirement behind the application of any doctrine, unspoken because it doesn't exactly soar off the page).
However, this Hamlet routine, fuzzy command structure, lip-service to the wording of resolutions and just the pattern of the man himself makes me share Peter's concern that Obama might screw up an otherwise sure thing.
Dec '10
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
Tristan Abbey
We probably have special operators running around on the ground already -- helping with targeting, liaising with the rebels -- and covert action by the CIA is probably underway, too.
I think you can dispense with "probably. I take this as a given
Ground attack aircraft require targetting that in many cases, and to be maximally effective, can only come from people on the ground. Among other things, the CIA and Special Forces find and identify targets. This is how we toppled the Taliban in the fall of 2001, with the Northern Alliance and other opposition forces providing the boots to occupy ground.
What is unknown is if we are coordinating the targeting with any of the Libyan rebel forces. Ideally we are working with ex-Libyan military personnel. I don't think the unorganized and undisciplined guys I see on Al Jazeera English broadcasts, who are driving around in trucks and automobiles and wasting ammo by shooting it in the air for the cameras, would be much help.
May '10
Re: Cursory Thoughts on Obama's Libya Address
We are going to get so punked from this.