●Into Libya: The birth of an Obama doctrine(5)_自考专本|专升本|高升专|高升本|在职研究生-学历教育网

With no authorization from Congress, the anti-war, Nobel Peace Prize-winning President bombed a country that was not a threat to American interests and unnecessarily added a third war of ill-determined duration to an overburdened Unitied States military.

Now, the President has put the possibility on the table that the United States may intervene in any Arab country where the people decide to overthrow their rulers. This is not the best signal to send to critical allies like Saudi Arabia, who America relies on for over ten percent of its imported crude oil.

And if the Iranian people attempt to overthrow their regime, which might be the only positive development from the Libyan attack, America would unlikely have the resources to intervene given its three other wars.

The Obama Doctrine gets an "A" for aspiration and an "F" for realism.

Hope is not a method.

Recommend (107)

wrote:

Mar 29th 2011 4:02 GMT

@jomiku

Something to consider - if Gaddafi manages to reunite Libya through destructive means, there would be many more hungry babies, all desperately in need of food as well as medicine, shelter, clean water, etc.

War's not always a bad thing.

Recommend (86)

wrote:

Mar 29th 2011 4:07 GMT

It is all well and good, but I really would like to know if Mr.Obama actually truly believed his own speech. The man always had the gift of the gab...Yes, I know, it sounds glib and flippant, but I would rather have a straight and honest assessment of the situation than all the treacly disingenuous reasonings about our heritage and all that. I watched the speech, and his body language did not say what his mouth said. I'll probably bang my head against a wall after writing these lines, but at least that semi-literate accidental president of ours, W, believed what he said. I must be possessed, I just wrote something decent about W. The whole thing is just surreal.

Recommend (100)

wrote:

Mar 29th 2011 4:21 GMT

@RationalRepublican

Iran and North Korea were never going to give up their nuclear programs anyway. North Korea is certifiably insane, rendering negotiations useless.
The threat of Iran is overstated. Iran does not have any nuclear weapons nor will they have long-range weaponry for a long time to come. On top of that, Iran has a slew of domestic problems to consider if the government wants to maintain its legitimacy in the eyes of its people. The economy is incredibly unstable given the high unemployment rate. Furthermore, their population has swelled with pro-democratic youth over the past few decades, many of which have staged protests and rallies against the current government. On top of that, more and more government officials are beginning to express dissent against the theocratic authorities, including elements of the militaristic Revolutionary Guard. Trust me, Iran is a basket case waiting to implode sooner or later.

And Obama's a practical man. Just because he intervened in Libya does not mean he's looking to do the same in just about any other Arab country. Logistics and circumstances will be considered before any serious military campaign. Part of the reason Obama involved himself in Libya is because Libya is 'doable'. We're seeing this right now, what with government forces already fleeing from eastern cities out of fear of missile strikes.

Recommend (104)

【免费咨询报名电话：010-6801 7975】

咨询报名MSN:xueliedu@hotmail.com
试一试网上报名
咨询报名QQ：