RightChange: Gaddafi Is Dead, Complete Troop Withdrawal in Iraq, What is Obama’s Foreign Policy?

It was supposed to “take days, not weeks.”  Seven months later, Gaddafi, Khaddafi, Qaddafi, or however you choose to spell it is dead.  The White House celebrated this victory as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton exclaimed: “We came, we saw, he died."  President Obama also celebrated the death of a tyrant who he was reluctant to call a tyrant in the first place by making the following statement:

"This marks the end of a long and painful chapter for the people of Libya who now have the opportunity to determine their own destiny in a new and democratic Libya.

"Our leadership at NATO has helped guide our coalition. Without putting a single U.S. service member on the ground, we achieved our objectives, and our NATO mission will soon come to an end," Obama said in a televised statement to a U.S. public already weary of long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

How can he claim we achieved our objective when he did not make it clear what that objective was in the first place? When news broke in March that the Arab dictator Gaddafi was committing atrocities against his own people, Mr. Obama made the U.S. the last country to speak up on Libya.  Once he finally did, he said Gaddafi’s actions were “unacceptable” and the U.S. was “exploring options” on how to handle it.  One month later, Mr. Obama initiated 100 American missiles at Libya’s air-defense system – a move that infuriated Congress.  And for good reason.  He disregarded the constitution by violating the War Powers Resolution and let NATO take the lead in backing the rebels in capturing Gaddafi.

Obama used the selling point that our involvement in Libya would last for days in hopes of distracting the American people into ignoring that fact that he violated the Constitution.  The fact that it took NATO seven months to catch a leader who frequently appeared in plain site it telling to its inefficiency.

Now that he is finally dead, Mr. Obama has dubbed this event “a new and democratic Libya.”  How do we know how Democratic it will actually be?  Judging by recent events in Egypt, the answer to that question is unknown.  President Obama demanded that the long-time ally of the United States and former leader of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak step down to satisfy rebels participating in the Arab Spring.  After Mubarak resigned, “armed forces” took over and violence erupted again:

“At least 24 are dead, and hundreds more are wounded, in the bloodiest clashes since the beginning of the revolution that toppled Hosni Mubarak eight months ago.

It all began Sunday afternoon with a large peaceful march from the Christian neighborhood of Shubra toward the Radio and Television building in the capital’s downtown. The march was organized by young Coptic activists to protest a string of attacks on churches since the revolution. The latest incident occurred in a village in southern Egypt, where Muslims destroyed a building used for Christian services.”

President Obama vowed to pour billions of dollars of U.S. aid into the Middle East in support of these revolutions.  The same revolutions Osama bin Laden called a “great revolution.” Cairo, Egypt received $1 billion in U.S. aid.  The fact that we are funding revolutions when we have no idea who will be in control after them is a travesty and extremely dangerous.  Speaking of dangerous:

As we are writing this, CNN reports breaking news that President Obama plans to pull ALL troops out of Iraq by the end of this year.  President Obama’s foreign policy has been a complete failure and if this move doesn’t scream reelection, we don’t know what does.

Back To Blog