Obama Flexes Military Muscles Against The Weak

Under the premise of protecting the Libyan people, Obama inserted the United States into a foreign civil war, costing taxpayers nearly a trillion dollars.  I believe that a flexing of American military muscle is needed from time to time because it keeps our enemies at bay. However, picking on a weak, third world country is simple bullying and Obama has a lot of explaining to do.  The reality is Libya poses posed zero threat to the United States. Additionally, our trading policy with them is extremely lopsided, as we import more than we export in monetary terms.  So what does the United States gain by toppling Gahdafi?  Will it force Libya to buy more American goods?  Probably not.  It simply appears Obama manufactured a way to appear strong militarily by pushing around a small fry in Africa, while ignoring real threats, such as North Korea, Iran, China, as well as feigning deaf to the veiled threats from the Soviet Union Russia.  So what happens now that Libyan rebels have captured Tripoli?  Who knows.

Since February, the message from the White House has been clear: Moammar Gadhafi had to go.  Now that the Libyan dictator has been removed, is the United States free to pack up and leave the region?  Does the United States turn its attention to Syria, or another Middle Eastern regime that is guilty of crimes against humanity?  Do we act on the behalf of the people of Bahrain?  Yemen?  Do we free the oppressed in Sudan?  These are valid questions given the reasons Obama stated for our intervention in Libya; one of which is his desire to bring democracy to that region.

I believe in the final analysis, our intervention in Libya will be proven to be a costly non-win for the United States because nothing will be gained in political or economic values.  What American intervention did prove is that Obama is quick to use military power to settle conflicts with weaker powers, but yet remains soft with powerful countries who threaten us and our interests.