If you’ve read my bio, you know I classify myself as a conservative. I’m sure some of you would equate that to being a warmonger; however, for the record I neither advocate nor abhor war. I believe making a decision to have one group of people actively engage in killing another group of people under the banner of “war” is one if not the toughest decision a leader has to make. I do believe that there are circumstances where that decision has to be made. I also believe that when made it must have a purpose in mind and a goal that can be reasonably understood by those who go off to war and those who must decide to support the effort; something on the order of keeping Hitler from enslaving all of Europe and exterminating a group of people.
What I find most interesting about our current engagement in Libya is the lack of reaction from the people who so viciously attacked George Bush over Iraq. I’m sure the justification is that Bush tricked us into that war by telling us it was necessary because we had to rid the world of a leader who was hoarding and about to use the infamous “weapons of mass destruction”. That’s independent, of course, of the tens of thousands of people Hussein killed as a method of ethnic cleansing. The attack on Libya evidently gets a pass because we are protecting a righteous group of protestors who would otherwise be massacred if we did not intervene. Also, we have world opinion on our side because it’s an engagement by the forces of NATO and not just a U.S. action. The fact that we really don’t have a clue who we are defending and what ideologies may lurk in their hearts is evidently unimportant. Also, we have curiously picked Libya as our target as opposed to the regimes that are killing protestors in Bahrain, Yemen and Syria. Possibly, they are next on our agenda.
I’ll leave with this thought. I’m not judging whether or not this war is more justified than the Bush war. I am extremely curious about how the media has quickly an almost unequivocally done so.