Could Libya Be the Next Iraq for the United States?

Some fear the no-fly zone in Libya could mean another war in the Middle East

March 18, 2011 RSS Feed Print

Last night, the United Nations Security Council approved a resolution to establish a no-fly zone over Libya. Military forces are preparing for airstrikes against Libya’s air defense system. The move comes after weeks of battles between long-time Libyan autocrat Muammar Qadhafi and rebels. In response to the U.N. resolution, Libyans took to the streets to celebrate, and imams used mosque loudspeakers to should, “Allahu akbar,” God is great. Qadhafi’s regime declared a cease-fire on Friday, with Libya’s foreign minister announcing the “stoppage of all military operations.” It’s unclear what will happen next, but some in the United States have said they fear intervention could escalate into a repeat of the Iraq War.

A no-fly zone is not too many steps ahead of military boots on the ground, U.S. News blogger Alvin Felzenberg argued before the U.N.’s decision. “Televised coverage of American bombs falling on Muslims in but a third Muslim country will not improve the U.S. standing in the world, whatever its intentions,” Felzenberg writes, questioning the wisdom and motivations for intervention. “Should great nations go to war on behalf of ‘new beginnings’ and a ‘chance’?”

Lawmakers have also been drawing a line from Iraq to Libya. “You have to think these things through,” South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham told reporters earlier this month. “One thing I’ve learned from Iraq and Afghanistan, you have to think these things through.”

The New Republic’s Lawrence Kaplan argues that this is a false comparison. He says U.S. leaders should recognize the major discrepancies between Libya today and Iraq when President Bush was looking for weapons of mass destruction. He writes:

The difference between an essentially American enterprise and an undertaking that has the sanction of the Arab League, the Gulf Cooperation Council, and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, … the difference between a dictator whose crimes (presumably) belonged to the past and one who vows to “cleanse Libya house by house” and, by all accounts, has proved himself keen to do so; the difference between Iraq, with no viable opposition movement, and Libya, which boasts an active and well-armed rebel force; the difference between a country frozen in the amber of authoritarianism a decade ago and an entire region awash in a wave of successful popular uprisings today.

What do you think? Could Libya be the next Iraq for the United States? Take the poll and post your thoughts below.

Could Libya be the next Iraq for the United States?

View Results

Previously: Should the United States temporarily put the brakes on building new nuclear power plants?

 

Tags:
Muammar Qadhafi,
Lindsey Graham,
UN,
George W. Bush,
national security terrorism and the military,
Iraq war (2003-2011),
Libya,
republican party

Reader Comments Read all comments (16)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I cannot understand why we keep involving ourselves in places where we have no business. Although he was arguably mistruthful didn't LBJ once about Vietnam that "I'm not going to send American boys 10,000 miles away from home to do something Asian boys should be doing."? While I sympathize with those Libyan who want to overthrow Gaddafi, let them do it. If this is a civil War, then let them fight it out. If memory serves, didn't we have a Civil War? President Lincoln certainly didn't want any foreign power involved, although the Confederacy did. What is so different about today. Although the weapons are arguably more lethal, so what. General Sherman said that "war is cruelty, and you cannot refine it."

Europe wants us involved because Libya exports most of her oil there. I think I speak for many Americans when I say that I'm tired of being the world's policeman. We expend far too much money enforcing a Pax Americana that much of the world resents. We send too much money to the U.N. only to have many member states of that organization who do not share our core values use it as a forum to attack and propagandize against us. Note how Germany pulled out of the coalition operation when actual fighting did not suit their tastes. We need to withdraw from NATO and quit fishing around for reasons to make it relevant. Americans have for too long bore an inordinate cost in both blood and treasure in this organization. We do nearly all the fighting and dying while the other member countries perfrom mostly non-combat support operations. NATO accomplished its mission. Europe was spared the Red plague. It's time to bring the boys home.

Pax Americana - we can't afford it, the world does not need or want it - END IT.

Mike of PA 12:00PM March 24, 2011

I bet you weren't singing this song when President Bush was in office and that was my point. We eight 8 years of disgraceful disgusting comments and protest against the President and now that "your" guy, Mr. Hope and Change" is in charge he is not “solely responsible".

Then you tell me to "try educating yourself" maybe it's time to take a look in the mirror.

And for your information the President of the United States is the solely RESPONSIBLE person. Nothing happens without his approval and in the far chance it does then heads should roll, publicly. Just remember that the people around the President serve at the pleasure of the President and he is responsible for their actions, period.

The Buck Stops at the White House.

Larry of CA 10:32AM March 21, 2011

#1 Powell Doctrine. 1. Military action should be used only as a last resort and only if there is a clear risk to national security by the intended target.

As with Iraq, there is no risk to the U.S. from Libya. At least not before we start killing Libyans. Qadaffi might well return to terrorism.

I'm not against war myself, only dumb wars where US interests are not involved.

Luther of LA 2:21AM March 21, 2011

advertisement

Debate Club

Was 2011 One of the Worst Years for the U.S. Government in American History?

Experts debate where 2011 ranks among Washington's worst years.

Latest Video

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

Obama Flops Against 'Uncommitted' in Arkansas, Kentucky Primaries

Obama stands to lose voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia due to his coal regulations.

Mitt Romney Brought Bain Capital Criticisms on Himself

Romney might be a fixer, but he isn't a job creator.

Mitt Romney's Bain History Deserves Scrutiny

Voters deserve to know about Romney's work history before they hire him for the job as president.

Mitt Romney Can’t Afford to Lose Obama's Bain Game

Romney needs to showcase the jobs he created at Bain and why Obama can't fix the economy.

Rutgers Bullying Case About Gay Rights, Privacy

The Ravi-Clementi case raises the deeper issues equal rights for gays and the right to privacy.

The House of Representatives Is the Scariest Circus on Earth

There's a new circus in town, and it's called the House of Representatives.

Obama Discovers Lobbyists Are Hard to Get Rid Of

Lobbying is a constitutionally protected activity and lobbyists have become a permanent part of the Washington policy process.

Obama Catholic Contraception Fight Isn't Over As Church Sues

The "evolution" in Obama's thinking on the issue of religious freedom is disappointing.

advertisement