Hillary Clinton’s Responsibility for Libya’s Misery

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

Libya is a mess, we are told, worse than when Gaddafi was around. Who was instrumental in attacking Libya in an outright aggression? Hillary Clinton. One headline at the time read “Clinton credited with key role in success of NATO airstrikes, Libyan rebels”.

In that article, we learn that Hillary Clinton patched up a rift in NATO, got backing from Arab countries, and advised rebels.

She boasted “…we set into motion a policy that was on the right side of history, on the right side of our values, on the right side of our strategic interests in the region.”

Whatever ideological tags describe Hillary and her policies, she has shown very, very bad judgment. She speaks nothing but claptrap about American values and interests. She sounds like a groupie spouting the prevalent Washington neocon rhetoric of empire. This rhetoric is devoid of any real understanding of what values and policies are “right” and will work toward the well-being of Americans and the foreign peoples with whom Americans interact. The neocon rhetoric of empire, history, Arab spring, democratism, and war is utterly and completely bankrupt in a pragmatic sense. In practice, it is producing misery and destruction in one land after another: Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Syria, Sudan. More of the same is promised for other African lands.

The U.S. alliance with Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states that have supported the infusion of arms and terrorists into Syria is a large-scale and unheralded American disgrace. The U.S. policies across this entire region and into central Asia have been a complete disaster. Hillary has been right there creating one disaster after another.

8:39 am on January 25, 2014
  • LRC Blog

  • LRC Podcasts