Yesterday, Byron York wrote about the staggering incoherence of the decision process that led to our “kinetic military action” in Libya:
Admiral James Stavridis, commander of NATO and overall chief of U.S. and coalition forces in the Libyan war, says American intelligence agents are "examining very closely" the rebel forces for whom U.S. forces have gone to war. So far, Stavridis says, the U.S. has discovered "flickers" of the presence of al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, although Stavridis calls the opposition leadership "responsible."
Stavridis' testimony raises two questions. One is the extent of al Qaeda and other terrorist presence; what is a flicker? The second question is why the United States did not complete its "due diligence" before, and not after, going to war. "I don't say this critically of you, because you didn't make this decision," Inhofe said to Stavridis, "but wouldn't that have been a good idea to find out before we took the steps we are taking?"
Why are we in Libya right now? Who are these rebels that we’re assisting? Do we really know enough about the “opposition leadership” to conclude that they’re “responsible”? Does the Obama administration really care if they are? When is the last time that the U.S. took sides in a civil war, knowing little or nothing about the side we supported?