Libya

Anytime a President makes a decision to kill terrorists I will support it.  In my opinion, killing terrorists should be a foreign policy priority for anyone who occupies the Oval Office.  In fact, I would support making it a part of the Oath of Office.  Killing terrorists makes the world a better place, a safer place.  And it makes our country safer.  So when President Obama first decided to commit American military forces to the conflict in Libya I felt the need to support him.

But there are many things about this that bother me.

1) There was no plan.  The community organizer seemed to be bullied into this by the French and the British.  It is obvious that he didn't want to do it and that shows in the fact that he has no real plan for executing a mission that doesn't seem to be defined.  That's not the way to start a military campaign.

2) There is no objective.  What the community organizer so obviously doesn't understand is that whenever the military is sent into battle they MUST be given a clear, definitive objective.  A task must be carried out.  You have the tools, the training, the leadership, now go do it.  But in this case there is no objective.  We don't know why we're there and what we're supposed to be doing. 

3) References to "humanitarian".  I've said this many times, American forces ARE NOT humanitarian forces.  They are trained to kill and destroy.  When you blur those skills with "humanitarian"-type stuff that's when problems arise.  The United States has no business sending our forces into humanitarian problems.  When you do that you risk losing A LOT of support on the homefront.

4) No congressional involvement.  Anytime a military action is carried out then it's imperative that Congress is in the loop.  They represent the people.  They appropriate the funds.  They must know what's going on.  The community organizer failed at this.

5) No target on Qaddafi.  If Obama had come out and said that Qaddafi is the target then I would be on board.  In short, we owe him one.  He is responsible for Lockerbie and there are many Americans who still mourn their dead loved ones who were murdered at the hands of this monster.  He should've been eliminated a long time ago.  But Obama has made it clear that eliminating Qaddafi is not the objective.

6) No leadership.  I've never seen a US President so hesitant to be a world leader.  He is passing that role to others like a hot potato and I'm not sure what to think about it.  But it just doesn't seem right.

7) Who are we helping?  There are some indications that the rebels engaged in combat with Qaddafi may be sympathetic to al qaeda, and in fact may be supported by al qaeda.  That's a key piece of intelligence don't you think?  Seems to me that if we're going to fight a "humanitarian" mission to protect people in the Middle East we should at least ensure that those we protect are supportive of democratic ideals and NOT friends of the extremists who seek to destroy us. 

So, American forces are in harms way and I support their efforts.  I hope this ends well and everyone returns home safely.  Meanwhile, my lack of confidence in Obama's command ability has been validated. 

Most US presidents would commit to battle with a plan, an objective, the support of congress, a clear definition of the enemy and the resolve to lead a coalition of democracies.  Obama failed in all of these.  At the very least he should have gone on television and talked to the American people.  He should've told us what we're doing, why it must be done, who we're helping and why they must be helped.  He should've made his case.  But he didn't

The community organizer has proven himself unfit to command.  As each day goes by it becomes more clear that this gamble by the American voter has been a colossal failure, the worst this side of Jimmy Carter. 

It's bad enough that he's running our economy into the ground and has all but ruined the world's best health care system.  Now, he's putting American pilots in harm's way for no clear reason. 

November 2012 can't come soon enough.