VFR predicted it: We must lead and rebuild Libya, says Michael Reagan
Yesterday I posted an entry with the title:
Libya has no functioning institutions. Who, then, will now be responsible for creating them from scratch?I continued: “The overthrow of Kaddafi through our military intervention inevitably makes us and our allies responsible for bringing order to the total chaos resulting from his overthrow.”
Guess what? Yesterday, conservative columnist Michael Reagan wrote at TownHall:
With approximately 135 different tribes within its borders, the hard lifting in Libya now begins. It is incumbent upon the United States to take a lead role in this vital area.We must take over the leadership and reconstruction of Libya, Reagan says, to suppress exploding tribal conflict, and to prevent terrorists from gaining control of Libya’s oil money. And he says this without a hint of irony or regret over the U.S.-facilitated toppling of Kaddafi that now makes our leadership of that country necessary. He ends with a cheap shot at Obama for playing golf in Martha’s Vineyard while chaos is erupting in Libya. But of course it’s Obama’s policy—leading inevitably to the need for U.S. governance of yet another tribal Muslim society with no ability to govern itself—that Reagan supports.
I guess that’s what “conservatism” now comes down to: all-out embrace of Obama’s liberal/neocon policy of spreading democracy in the Muslim world, combined with snipes at Obama for taking a vacation in August. It’s the latter that shows that one is still a true conservative.
I notice that in the comments of the TownHall article there is nearly unanimous dissent regarding Reagan’s “nation-building” promotional piece. Is neoconservatism dying before our eyes?LA replies:
No, because the opposition only comes from anonymous commenters. There are no major respected figures who actually oppose the policy (as distinct from grumbling about it), as I pointed out the other day in the entry, “An uncertain trumpet against a criminal war.”LA adds (Aug. 27):
I’ve now read a good number of the commenters at the Reagan column. It’s the usual stuff, “We can’t be policemen of the world, we can’t do everything, we are in that country for no good reason,” etc. These are true statements, but they are the standard comments that would be made about any foreign intervention with which the speaker disagrees. They don’t add up to anything having any force regarding this particular intervention.Aditya B. writes:
Happy days are here again! Once again, our blood and treasure will be squandered on blood-thirsty savages whose claim to fame thus far has been over-representation in jihadi suicide-units in Iraq and a marked tendency to attack white Gentiles and Jews over perceived insults to the pedophilic desert bandit they worship.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 26, 2011 03:17 PM | Send