Last month, The Collegian wrote an editorial which argued this: “Stay out of these Arab conflicts. Quit meddling in faraway lands with people we don’t understand. Build our fortifications here at home.
Let the sheiks, imams, monarchs, ayatollahs, Islamists, indeed all Arabs figure out their governments for themselves.”
Apparently members of the Obama Administration don’t pick up this semi-daily.
On March 19, following the United Nations Security Council’s vote authorizing military action, forces led by the United States began a bombing campaign against the Libyan government in an effort to help the opposition forces.
America’s third war in the Middle East has begun.
What good can come from this?
The “no-fly zone” will not stop Col. Gaddafi in his efforts to suppress the rebellion within his country. He will simply roll in the tanks. What will Western nations do then? They will be forced to send in ground troops of their own. Then a full-scale war will be on our hands.
Say Gaddafi is deposed and a new government may be set up — will we stick around to ensure that the government that is produced is a pro-West one? If we leave the Libyan government solely to the Libyans, the result may be a worse government than the regime that it is replacing. If we stay, for how long? How will we make sure it doesn’t turn into Iraq 2.0?
A policy that results in this many questions cannot be a wise policy.
On top of all this, Obama’s action is brazenly unconstitutional, even by his own standards. In 2007, Obama said, “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”
There is no actual or imminent threat to the nation. So how can the president unilaterally decide to attack Libya?
The Constitution gives the Congress the power to declare war. Of course, this particular constitutional provision has not been followed since World War II, but since then presidents, other than Harry Truman in Korea, have at the very least allowed Congress to vote on giving the president authorization to use force.
In this case there was no such vote of authorization. Obama merely issued a notification, telling the Congress that he was bombing Libya.
This policy is a supreme act of folly, illegal under U.S. law and unjust according to any sense of a just war. It has little chance of ultimate success and, in practice, will be very difficult to carry out.
It is the height of hubris, and makes even less sense than the invasion of Iraq did.
America has no vital interest at stake. We don’t know who in Libya is good or bad. We don’t have a defined end goal in mind. This is the low point of the Obama presidency.
The Collegian’s advice still stands. To stay out of Arabian conflicts would be a wise course of action. The plan currently being undertaken by the United States is not.