Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYT: A Very Liberal Intervention

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
dennis4868 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 03:25 PM
Original message
NYT: A Very Liberal Intervention
By ROSS DOUTHAT
In its month-long crab walk toward a military confrontation with Libyas Muammar el-Qaddafi, the Obama administration has delivered a clinic in the liberal way of war.

Just a week ago, as the tide began to turn against the anti-Qaddafi rebellion, President Obama seemed determined to keep the United States out of Libyas civil strife. But it turns out the president was willing to commit America to intervention all along. He just wanted to make sure we were doing it in the most multilateral, least cowboyish fashion imaginable.

That much his administration has achieved. In its opening phase, at least, our war in Libya looks like the beau ideal of a liberal internationalist intervention. It was blessed by the United Nations Security Council. It was endorsed by the Arab League. It was pushed by the diplomats at Hillary Clintons State Department, rather than the military men at Robert Gatess Pentagon. Its humanitarian purpose is much clearer than its connection to American national security. And it was initiated not by the U.S. Marines or the Air Force, but by the fighter jets of the French Republic.

This is an intervention straight from Bill Clintons 1990s playbook, in other words, and a stark departure from the Bush administrations more unilateralist methods. There are no coalitions of the willing here, no dismissive references to Old Europe, no you are with us or you are with the terrorists. Instead, the Obama White House has shown exquisite deference to the very international institutions and foreign governments that the Bush administration either steamrolled or ignored.

This way of war has obvious advantages. It spreads the burden of military action, sustains rather than weakens our alliances, and takes the edge off the worlds instinctive anti-Americanism. Best of all, it encourages the European powers to shoulder their share of responsibility for maintaining global order, instead of just carping at the United States from the sidelines.

The entire editorial is here....http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/opinion/21douthat.htm...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. We love Harvard!
:loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. Liberal just like the Vietnam war.
LBJ's war - his crowning achievement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dennis4868 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. That was not very liberal....
but Johnson is treated like a god here at DU.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Sure, it was about protecting Vietmanese human rights from the Viet Cong.
It was a humanitarian mission started by liberals and championed by them. It was Nixon who abandoned the Vietnamese to the wolves, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dennis4868 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I agree but didn't Johnson....
lied us into that war? If I am wrong, please let me know....he sort of did it the George Bush way....right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woofless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. You're wrong.
Johnson inherited the VietNam situation. What he DID do was escalate our involvement but he did not start it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dennis4868 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. So you are saying Kennedy....
started the vietnam war? Interesting take....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. He sure did. The Gulf of Tonkin?? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dennis4868 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. That's what I thought....
but there are a certain % of DUers that treat him like a god and will never blame Johnson for anything....even a war that he lied us into....I am suprised they are not blaming Obama for the vietnam war - instead they blame Kennedy....hahaha!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Of course. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kucinich Feingold Donating Member (176 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. That more for his work on War On Poverty and Civil Rights
Hell, if it weren't for the war, LBJ would rank in the top ten of presidents list by historians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
3. K&R up to 0...
not surprisingly. Some people just insist on comparing Obama's multilateral approach to helping the Libyan people to Bush's unilateral invasion of Iraq based on lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
7. K&R - Another well stated posit on the situation.
I think it telling that those against the war have so far used the most hasty generalizations and worst logic imaginable in their arguments. They cannot point to issues specific to this action to justify their objections. That to me speaks volumes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oberliner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. FYI - This is an Op-Ed by a right-winger critical of Obama's handling of Libya
Edited on Mon Mar-21-11 11:04 PM by oberliner
Read it all the way through, if you haven't already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Hmmm, good catch. I only had read what the OP posted.
The rest is typical RW drivel.

The irony is, Obama's critics on the left dont even give him partial credit for anything on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oberliner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Obama can't win, it seems
Certainly not with the RW crowd, but frequently not with the left side either.

It's a wonder he is still so popular with the masses!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hulka38 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 05:18 PM
Response to Original message
14. NYT - shit track record on the necessity of war. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Keith Bee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-11 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
15. Dupe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Oct 21st 2017, 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC