Sweethearts Candy Blog's

The architects of 911, the fanatical Muslim extremists called Al Qaeda, are now fighting alongside the Libyan rebels.  Some of these vermin are veterans of the Iraq war, where they fought against American troops.

Now, thanks to Barack Obama, Al Qaeda and other Muslim fanatics have a much greater chance of overthrowing the current government of Libya and replacing it with one that is worse, one that is more aggressive and openly at war with the United States.

Like I said in an earlier post, we don't know enough about the Libyan rebels to know if they are friend or foe, and for that reason (and others), our intervention in Libya was naive and reckless.

Those on the right who have enthusiastically supported Obama's ill-advised adventurism should take note.

I supported the war in Afghanistan:  we were attacked from there by Osama Bin Laden and his Taliban hosts.  Our attackers needed to pay for their evil deeds.  I just wanted them dead, I never wanted to turn them into democrats.  Nation-building is too expensive in terms of both money and American blood.

I was puzzled and less than lukewarm by the decision to invade Iraq, as I didn't see any compelling need for it.  (Once in, however, I supported and continue to support our troops and their mission.)

However, I have been against the intervention in Libya from the start, and for these reasons:
1.  It isn't our fight.  I don't see that there is anything to gain for American interests.
2.  We don't know who the players are or what they represent.  We don't know if they rebels are better, the same or worse than the dictator they seek to overthrow.  Talk about "democracy" is likely to just be propaganda and not a firm basis for our intervention.
3.  We have no clear-cut role or mission.  What exactly are we trying to accomplish there?  How do we know when we're finished?
4.  If the rebels cannot defeat Gaddafi by themselves, we will be pressured to commit troops.  If we don't commit the troops and the rebels lose, Gaddafi will be out for revenge and a large massacre of the rebels will follow (like what happened following the first Iraq war when we abandoned those who had relied on us).
5.  If the rebels cannot win on their own and we do not commit troops, the rebels will be defeated and it will be a major propaganda coup for Gaddafi and militant Islam.  They can brag that they defeated a western-backed force.
6.  If we do commit troops, there will be more American deaths and billions more spent on war.  Libya isn't worth the price.

In short, we have very little to gain and a lot to lose.  I am all for a long-term plan for disempowering militant Islam (pardon the redundancy), for isolating Muslim nations from the west and taking away their economic power (through energy independence), and for separating the civilized world from the barbaric, so the latter cannot harm us further.  This plan would probably include military action in certain circumstances, but we should choose our fights carefully.  The Libyan intervention is not one of these.

See report linked from Drudge here.