But fear not, my friends, for there's one thing you can always count on America being really good at—blowing shit up.
Our latest target, of course, is Libya. Our cruise missiles are pitting the landscape as we speak. And man, those explosions would make Michael Bay proud.
Our mission over there? Not important.
Congressional authority? Not needed.
Our strategic interests being protected? Unclear.
But don't go telling me that America is in decline when we can make multiple buildings disappear with the push of a single button, safely located hundreds of miles away the target.
Kaboom, bitches!
So today is a day to stand tall, my fellow countrymen. Because while our nation may appear to be crumbling around us, we can take solace in the fact that we are not going down alone.
kaboom bitches, that's good.
ReplyDeletebut seriously folks, i couldnt agree more. its looking super scary for my kids future right now.
And what strategic interest did we have in our involvement in Kosovo? The protection of Greece?Clinton's impetus was to put the brakes on a situation that had spiraled out of control and force Milosevic to the peace table. And it worked. I believe Clinton's instincts were right. Like Obama, he too faced opposition from all sides of the political spectrum. Obama is trying to prevent what could be intensly brutal conclusion to what is, albeit, a very strange episode. I agree with you that domestic self-neglect is dangerous for America's future. I do believe however that standing idly by while events like this unfold has potentially damaging ramifications to America too.
ReplyDeleteThe strategic interest in Kosovo related to keeping post-communist Europe stabilized and showing a weakened Russia that we were prepared to take the lead role. There were also economic interests related to mining that played a part. I don't see any significant strategic reason for getting involved in Libya. They are a small oil producer, relatively. They are not a significant terror exporter. Other countries (iran, pakistan, north korea, russia) pose a much greater threat. Plus we still have significant involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan that pose a more immediate need for US attention. Are there humanitarian reasons to get involved in Libya? Sure. But if we got involved in every worthy humanitarian mission we would drain our resources pretty quickly. We'd also be bombing Saudi Arabia on a regular basis. But I think we know that won't happen any time soon.
ReplyDeleteI don't remember "mining" as a rationale for US intervention in Kosovo, but do recall ethnic cleansing. I also remember that the war in the Balkans raged for years before serious Western military involvment and included the failed attempts of NATO at securing a peace without force of arms(see Srebenica). The Russians, Pakistanis, North Koreans and Iranians are all part of the nuclear club and each has a unique set of circumstances. Consequently, they must all be dealt with under very different terms. If the United States is to have any hand in the future long-term peace and security in the region, then working alongside the Europeans in Libya my aafford us a chance. And, as Obama is oft heard to say, isn't it better to be "on the right side of history" when the opportunity presents itself?
ReplyDeleteMining wasn't highly publicized but natural resources are almost always at the heart of conflicts. Ethnic cleansing was a very valid humanitarian concern for sure. But that was also the case in Rwanda and we did nothing because we had no strategic interest. Same is true today. Atrocities happen a the time but I don't think we have the resources to deal with all of them. It's my belief that most politicians resort to war as a means of distraction from domestic issues. That's how I see what's happening in Libya now. But I certainly hope things work out in a way that works best for the Libyan people.
ReplyDelete