Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
Noted the comments below...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110430/...izing_predator

That's consistent with what I've thought from the start: the US effort is less about achieving any specific end state or result on the ground in Libya than about establishing a US position. The administration does not want to be seen in a fully isolationist "doesn't give a $#!t" role, does want to be seen working through multilateral organizations, but does not under any circumstances want to take "ownership" or take over any kind of a lead role that could lead to "ownership". Given recent history it's easy enough to understand why: getting rid of an undesirable government can easily be the start, not the end, of the problems if one accepts that "ownership" role.
What is consistent is the evidence that the Obama Administration does not have the vaguest idea of what's going on and how to proceed in Libya. What we are quite possibly witnessing is the most inept Administration in US history.

Spin the situation as much as you wish but what the world is witnessing is the horror of a US President Leading from behind

But "leading from behind" doesn't produce that outcome. It produces resentful allies who feel we set them up to fail, resentful rebels who feel we would not help them win, resentful victims who continued at great danger to resist despots. It produces governments that ponder whether another powerful state should be assisted because it might prove less aggravating than we are.