I was engaged in a conversation with other bloggers and students regarding Libya, and thought I would share my feelings about this matter here at The Professor.
I do believe, as I stated to others, that the United States overreacted to the Libyan matter. Sure, I might be wrong in the long run, but to take action in this fashion is a bit suspect (i.e., the hint of military intervention). Mr. Obama cannot win this; if he does nothing, folks will continue to attack his perceived weakness: too much diplomacy and befriending the world with very little action. But, on the other hand, folks such as myself and others are pointing to his hypocrisy. That is, he attacked Bush for advocating the conflict in Iraq and, made a decarlation to return American troops. But, the hint of flirtation into the current crisis adds to greater conflict. Though, the initial indication is that the USA will focus less on ground troops and more on air raids. But again, I ask this question: why Libya and why now? I suspect there is some international pressure for American intervention. I question Obama’s motives here; I am wondering if he is looking to 2012. And if so, I am not sure this helps.
As for Iran, we will not attack them due to the Chinese and the Russians. Both of these states have little interest in the affairs of Libya. Plus, much of this is a bit of a show driven by the French (my opinion). As a matter of conjecture, I am thinking the French are too concerned with migratory matters vis-a’-vis Algeria. The British PM saw what happened in the last election to take an aggressive stance on this. In the end, I am not sure we know who we are endorsing. Libya has been stable for a good period of time. And yet, a few weeks of an armed rebellion has shifted Obama’s foreign policy. Why not wait and see if the current matter turns into the Egyptian resolve?