Benghazi and the coming aftermath

Benghazi was the result of a tragically-failed foreign policy of meddling in foreign affairs, and this was done at the behest of HRC, no matter what lies the “progressive” Left tries to perpetuate. Clinton as SoS supported the undermining of the Ghadaffi government in Libya. Ghadaffi was not a threat to Western powers, nor was he likely to engage militarily with his neighbors. He was, in the words of the Democrats, “contained.” Now remember: the Democrats are big proponents of keeping rogue leaders “contained.” And it is not a bad policy, either.

So here is Ghadaffi, an anti-Western leader who nevertheless rescinded all claims to nuclear ambitions and even shipped nuclear hardware out of his country under the watchful eyes of the French. He did this as a result of pressure put upon him primarily by the US, and after he saw what happened to Iraq. He did this with the expectation that we would then “leave him alone,” mainly because that is what we led him to believe. And that was a good policy, too.

So along comes HRC. She looked at this leader who did what we wanted him to do, who willingly gave up him WMD as we wanted him to do, who ceased the large scale exportation of terrorism as we wanted him to do – and then she still supported the overthrow of his government.

So the next time we go to an anti-Western foreign leader – of which there are many – and tell them “hey, if you stop harassing Western interests and agree to WMD disarmament, we will not interfere with you,” do you really think they are going to believe us? Would you?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s