The Western powers achieved violent “regime change” in Libya under cover of a UN resolution to “protect civilians” and by relying mostly on air power to isolate and then kill Muammar Gaddafi – and doing it all at a much lower price than the Iraq War. But Ivan Eland sees dangers in this “victory.”
For a decade now, the American people have been told that only a “long war” against Islamist extremism can keep them safe from terrorism, even at the cost of trillions of dollars and loss of their liberties. Not even the death of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden changed the tune, says Ivan Eland.
With the assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen and al-Qaeda associate based in Yemen, the Obama administration has stepped onto a slippery slope where loosening standards for extrajudicial killings could slide into a terrifying use of government power, the Independent Institute’s Ivan Eland writes.
After the 9/11 attacks, many Americans were ready to surrender constitutional liberties for an extra measure of security – and the Bush administration was more than willing to accept that deal. But the Independent Institute’s Ivan Eland says the trade-offs haven’t changed much under President Barack Obama.
Washington pundits – from neoconservatives through progressives – are celebrating the NATO-backed ouster of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi as a worthy use of the West’s military capabilities. But the Independent Institute’s Ivan Eland sees dangerous pitfalls ahead, both in Libya and elsewhere.
Rep. Ron Paul came in one percentage point behind Rep. Michelle Bachmann in the Iowa Republican straw poll, but – as Jon Stewart has noted – was still excluded from the Big Media’s list of who’s to be taken seriously in the GOP race. The Independent Institute’s Ivan Eland traces the media’s disdain for Paul to his criticism…
The U.S. government talks about its preference for peaceful change in the world and rhetorically condemns violence. But in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, Washington does all it can to stop non-violent actions by the Palestinians and their supporters seeking to challenge Israeli abuses, Ivan Eland observes.
Like George W. Bush’s Iraq War, the Afghan conflict appears grinding toward an American defeat. However, President Obama doesn’t want the voters to recognize that fact until after Election 2012 – to avoid getting the blame – so he is stretching out the war at the cost of more American lives, writes Independent Institute’s Ivan…
Defense Secretary Robert Gates and other Bush-43 holdovers are pressing President Barack Obama to delay a meaningful drawdown of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and continue the counterinsurgency war, but the Independent Institute’s Ivan Eland argues that a rapid withdrawal is in the best interests of the United States and the region.
Holdovers from the Bush administration, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Gen. David Petraeus, boxed President Obama into a counterinsurgency “surge” during the 2009 policy review for Afghanistan. Now, Obama has a chance to go in a different direction, but he may be too intimidated, observes the Independent Institute’s Ivan Eland.