Scrutinizing Intervention

On Saturday, US and coalition forces attacked several supposed military targets in Libya in order to weaken the forces of dictator Muammar Qaddafi's government. What was first a discussion of a UN-imposed “no-fly zone” over the country has become a multi-phase military operation. The Pentagon reported that over 100 missiles were fired from offshore US and British ships at Libyan air bases on Saturday. Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes at a press conference Monday explained that these actions are an attempt “to degrade the regime's capability to resist the no-fly zone” that US officials are looking to implement following the UN resolution authorizing intervention in Libya.

While the nation debates this action, we cannot be blindsided by the hollow arguments we heard during the march to war with Iraq 8 years ago. It angers me that my government would engage in an act of war in response to another sovereign nation's internal affairs without the consent of the People's body, Congress. As this plays out, we need to ask ourselves a few questions:

What is the problem with the Libyan situation? From a global/international community perspective? From the US perspective?

Are we (US, UN, NATO) obligated to act? For what reason(s)?

What is the appropriate action to take? Private charity vs. government force?

Will military intervention solve the problem?

I will be revisiting this subject frequently over this week. This is of special concern given Congressman Ron Paul's visit to UNH this Thursday, I suspect he'll use a good bit of his time to speak on US military intervention.