|Maxwell Smart of Get Smart?|
As the debate grows over the wisdom of our interference in Libya - and Obama's very own authority to impose that sort of meddling - there is also the prospect that the same rebels we endeavor to aid may be members of the same group that attacked us a decade ago. It has even been recently acknowledged by the Libyan "rebel leader" that al Qaeda is active in that countries dispute. We may be fighting alongside our enemy. But don't despair just yet.
Despite the curious motives of Obama's illegal action in Libya, and regardless of the bald hypocrisy of the Democrats who defend his actions, there may be a positive outcome in Libya when all is said and done.
Remember back to a decade ago. It was al Qaeda who hijacked our own planes and attacked the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon in Washington, and an empty field in Pennsylvania, thanks to Todd Beamer and his fellow passengers. That was September 11th, 2001. On September 18th, a week later, the 107th Congress issued a joint resolution - Public Law 107-40 [S. J. RES. 23] - which stated, in part, "Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States."
In October, we were in Afghanistan hunting al Qaeda and bin Laden, but it was rough work. Trying to find certain individuals in mountainous terrain and determining whether they were shepherds or the enemy was problematic. It was akin to a police academy shooting test where a disproportionate amount of the pop-up targets were pigtailed school girls or grandmas pushing grocery carts with an occasional bad guy springing up.
The lament was that al Qaeda had no country, no flag and no uniforms, making them quite the unconventional adversary. What if they were to have these things, then? What if we inadvertently hand them Libya?
I would suggest that they also rename the country. Something appropriate. Does anyone know the Arabic translation for Very Large Target? Sphere: Related Content