Fair and Unbiased - Right!
The President delivered an excellent speech Monday night on the situation in Libya. He covered the reasons, thoughts, negotiations with allies etc. that explained very well why he took the action he did. You actually didn't need to watch the speech. You don't even have to read the transcript today. All you have to do is look at where the story is positioned in the papers to see how good it was. The Wall Street Journal, one of my daily favorites and as close to a bible as the investment business can get, reported the President's talk on page 9. Don't give a partisan inch, ever. The New York Times gave it a banner headline on the front page. Subtle, right?
The President acted cautiously, but decisively when the time came. NATO has, or shortly will, take over the military operation. What would be very helpful politically is if more Arab nations followed Qatar's lead and recognized the rebels as the legitimate government. In fact, it would be helpful if we did. The US was the first nation to recognize Israel in 1948. We should be at the forefront this time as well.
Well, if Libya, why not Syria?
It is absolutely not because Assad, Jr., despite being a London trained eye doctor is, as Secretary Clinton said, a reformer. Is simply we intervened in Libya because we could. The argument that it would be consistent to follow through and intervene in Syria holds no water. You don't intervene to be consistent, you intervene because you can, and when it is in your interests to do so.