A Libyan rebel prays on the frontline on the outskirts of the city of Ajdabiya, south of Benghazi, eastern Libya, Monday, March 21, 2011. The international military intervention in Libya is likely to last “a while,” a top French official said Monday, echoing Moammar Gadhafi’s warning of a long war ahead as rebels, energized by the strikes on their opponents, said they were fighting to reclaim a city under siege from the Libyan leader’s forces.(AP Photo/Anja Niedringhaus)Many Americans would have a hard time describing exactly where Libya is. Even more would have a hard time explaining why the United States is at war there, supporting NATO’s bombing campaign. But just last weekend, NATO aircraft continued their attacks on Libya.
The big North African country, bordering the Mediterranean, has about the same number of people as Tennessee – more than 6 million – and is ruled dictatorially by Moammar Gadhafi.
But as troublesome as Gadhafi long has been, why, specifically, is the United States involved in Libya’s civil war? What is our objective, since even the Obama administration does not really claim that we have any vital national security interest in helping Libyan rebels overthrow Gadhafi? The American people surely should know, since American forces have engaged in or at least supported the attacks.
And yet no such clear cause for going to war has been offered.
Every time U.S. military forces go into any degree of “hot war” against any enemy, there should be a clear explanation from government leaders to the American people as to why we are doing so, what we expect to accomplish and the prospects for success.
Several months into our involvement in Libya, we still haven’t received that kind of explanation.