I’m republishing the following short piece written on March 17, 2011, that shows how wrong most American and European liberals were about the intervention in Libya.
By Con George-Kotzabasis
This comment of Steve Clemons is a master penning in political frivolity. While the UN now backed by the U.S. and its major allies, Britain and France, is considering “armed intervention,” Clemons with remarkable insouciance cogitates about worse case scenarios and pots of quicksand that the U.S. could be bogged in with sapped strength. And what does he do to boost his ‘serious’ argument? He ludicrously remarks that such intervention by the U.S. will be at the expense of “slashing school teachers, cops, fire responders, and American pilots “shot down and held by Gaddafi”, all the populist scarecrows that appeal to and scare the crowd.
But he still has the backing of the two Dons and the litterateur from Norway, Paul Norheim, who continue to expatiate too on their frivolous concerns about a U.S. intervention, since they lack the moral strength to admit that they might have been wrong on their initial stand on the issue of non-intervention.
I’m republishing this short piece that was written at the earliest stages of the “Intervention” by NATO and the U.S. in Libya, illustrating how wrong the Liberal-Pacifists were about the outcome of the intervention that led to the collapse of the Gaddafi dictatorship.
By Con George-Kotzabasis
Distortion and lack of imagination are not a good way to make your case. On your first point, where in the world has there been even a blip of demonstrable opposition to the Coalition’s intervention in Libya? On your second point, only one bereft of a modicum of imagination cannot see that despite the fact that the “goal of the coalition” is not the “defeat of the dictator,” nonetheless the implementation of the no-fly zone by the Coalition nolens volens enervates the loyalist forces and invigorates the Opposition forces with the great potential to overthrow the dictator. On your third, isn’t a fact that Gaddafi and his military personnel fled the compound which was a command and military control centre just before it was hit by a tomahawk missile? And on your fourth and last point that Obama breached the constitution and should therefore be impeached, is a fiction and should be rejected as such. You deliberately and misleadingly leave out the sentence of the War Powers Act, 1973, which is relevant to the current military engagement of the U.S. in Libya. “The War Powers Resolution of 1973 requires the president to notify (M.E.) Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days…without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war.” Only at the passing of 60 days, and if he did not seek an authorized extension for the military deployment would Obama be in breach of the War Powers Act. It seems therefore to me that your ditty about Obama breaching the constitution and should be impeached, is out of tune with the reality of the situation.
You have said to me before that you are some sort of a musician playing the mandolin. It amuses me therefore to see why you switch your talent from ditties to war and strategy that are beyond the depth of a mandolin player.
Further, you will find out at your cost that the land of Australia is not only the land of the kangaroos but also the land of the boomerang that just struck you.