“Romantic revolutionary?” That’s it?

Victor Davis Hanson is getting warmer, though six years is a long time to get only this far. But, then, it is dangerous territory. If you are actually making the case that a President of the United States is an orthodox Marxist, however, you ought not stop at “Revolutionary Romance.”

Stopping there you miss the pure malice involved and wind up attributing major geopolitical delinquencies to wearing rose-colored glasses:

“Moammar Qaddafi was a monster and a thug. But in fear both of radical Islamists and of the implications for Libya of the Western military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, and eager to have Western knowhow rehabilitate his ailing oil and gas industry, he had reached out to the West and ceased his support for international terrorists. But ridding Libya of the cartoonish and geriatric Qaddafi and allowing it to be overrun by stern revolutionary Islamists was again in tune with Obama’s rose-colored view of the Middle East.”

How would I revise that? I would say that Qaddafi was eliminated, given a death sentence, precisely because he had been cooperating with the West. Now Libya is again a major training facility for terrorists, like in the good old days of the 1970s and 1980s, when Qaddafi was a Soviet client. That was when he was a major terror sponsor.

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.