Obama Condemns Violence in Libya; Somehow Manages to Not Mention Moamar Qadhafi

Present.

Weak sauce as far as action:

Obama said his staff will work with the international community to discuss the volatile situation and the administration is "doing everything we can to protect American citizens," calling it his "highest priority."

I love a discussion.

Although I should be fair: I don't think I want tangible American action here. Arabs have enormous chips on their shoulders about the West and like slightly-demented loser little brothers they sort of need to make their own way, even it it's a bit pathetic. American involvement gives them what they most need -- a scapegoat, someone to blame their failures on.

I could be wrong.

On CNN... A guy is saying that Libya, the state, may not survive Qadhafi's ouster; the state may split into tribe-controlled regions.

Does anyone care about this? Is there a single good reason to champion these arbitrary lines and larger-than-needed-or-wanted states which unite tribes that don't want to be under a single authority?

Do we have some sentimentalism about our old maps? Do we fear having to draw new ones?

This expert wasn't necessarily against Libya splitting into smaller states, but his general tone was one of alarm.

I don't get that. Why do we care if Libya splits into seven more homogeneous tribal regions?

Given the huge amount of trouble in this part of the world, and their inability to run functional modern-style governments, shouldn't we be in favor of smaller states?

Oh, right, the dream of multiculturalism. We have to champion multiculturalism not only in our own peaceful country but in barbaric tribal semi-states.

posted by Ace at 05:58 PM

| Access Comments