R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Rich, I just can’t give you a cigar for this. Sorry.And the follow-up? How many boots on the ground?
If he did so, what’s wrong with that? Isn’t Libya the one country whose people demonstrated in sympathy with the U.S. because of our ambassador’s death?
An act of war is an act of war, no matter whether there are regular soldiers assigned to walk on the enemy’s soil. There were “boots on the ground”, though; military and intelligence people who provided “spotting” for bombing and aided the insurgents with tactical advice.
And so, some unknown number of Libyans demonstrated sympathy because some other unknown number of Libyans murdered our ambassador, and that retroactively justifies the War on Libya? There were plenty of Iraqis who welcomed Gulf War Phase 2 and the American presence (some still want us there), but you wouldn’t say that about Iraq.
And, of course, the War on Libya preceded the murder of the ambassador. One might argue that his death was due to removing a nasty but non-threatening government in favor of people we did not know but had strong reason to believe included elements of Al Quaeda. If so, the responsibility for his death stops where Truman said the buck stops.