Corpses stinking of sh%t and p%ss. The dogs will be well fed.

I just wonder what will be next?

Setting aside the wisdom of the intervention, Obama’s entry into Libya’s civil war is troubling on at least five counts. First is the legal and constitutional question. Second is the manner of Obama’s announcement. Third is the complete disregard for public opinion and lack of debate. Fourth is the unclear role the United States will play in this coalition. Fifth is the lack of a clear endgame. Compounding all these problems is the lack of trust created by Obama’s record of deception.

I find the legal and constitutional question most troubling, particularly since the Obama administration time and again has shown itself willing to bend, ignore and suspend the law on behalf of ideology.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/262725/president-reticent-stanley-kurtz

So on this reading, Obama is cementing Samantha Power’s pet “Responsibility to Protect” principle with a kind of “pilot intervention.”

Not sure about that, though it’s as plausible as anything else at this point. And it does account for all of the weirdness – ignoring Congress, curtseying to the UN, etc.

Dunno.

– we back out of this in a couple of weeks, leaving c&c in place for the europeans

– The Europeans back out after a few more weeks, citing mission accomplished

– Daffi moves in without air and slaughters the same number of civilians that he would have slaughtered with air support

– Daffi stays in charge

– American media just drops coverage and we all forget about this before summer.

My Latin is as rusty as Barack Obama’s actual writing abilities, but “Bellum interruptus” is quite clever. I love it (the phrase, not the practice).

I’m on board with you not being able to figure this thing out. I had a long discussion with my brother last night to that end, and we were still stumped when we finished.

I don’t see what Obama gets out of it, aside from some cheap validation of his multilateral, un-bush, internationalist bona fides. I’m not sure what Libya gets out of it. The mission sends no message at all to anyone we’d like to send a message to. Obama ignored Congress, for reasons I can’t fathom, thus unnecessarily setting himself up to fall hard if things go bad.

On this one, I’m thinking “fool” is the explanation. The only account I can come up with is bumbling incompetence and lack of concern. It feels really weird not being able to understand why Obama chose to intervene, to what end, and how exactly he plans to secure it. I can’t even feel strongly “pro” or “con” – I’m just mystified.

Anyone got any clue about the TOTUS’s thinking here?

I really can’t make head or tail of this Libya affair. If Obummer really wanted to stop him from killing his people, why didn’t he? I mean, before he had the chance to do it?

Also, I want to kick him in the fanny every time he gives our enemies a “date certain” when we will pull out. Bellum interruptus is impotence indeed. (Erm, feel free to correct my Latin: I know it’s a highly inflected language, but I never studied it.)

2. What’s the absolute dumbest thing Obama can do under the circumstances? Blame the military for botching the implementation of his strategic genius.

Just sayin’.

I’ve always thought it would be a good modern application of this old, old story to allow people who are oppressed and marked for slaughter to be armed and permitted to defend themselves, rather than being forced into the uncertain, undignified, and supplicant position of being dependent on the sketchy good-will and alleged protection of such worthless outfits as the UN and, yes, even the U.S. It was the ultimate in being self-congratulatory and patronizing to refuse the Darfur refugees arms against their Sudanese-government-sponsored Janjaweed persecutors. Instead, we herded them into refugee camps and gave them a bit of food between attacks. How awful it all was–and yet we want to repeat it again and again.