Gingrich Explains Libya Flip

He says that in the first interview, he was answering a question about how to further Obama's stated goal of "Qadaffy must go," which was not in fact his own goal. That is, he considered the US policy to now have been set by an ill-considered presidential commitment, and was explaining that "diplomacy" could not achieve this but only intervening on the side of the rebels.

Meanwhile, in the second interview, he was speaking of his own preferences -- no intervention, and of course therefore no presidential statement that "Qadaffy must go."

It's actually plausible, but I'd have to hear the whole of that first statement.

Wait... From this quote from his earlier remark...

VAN SUSTEREN: What would you do about Libya?

GINGRICH: Exercise a no-fly zone this evening, communicate to the Libyan military that Gadhafi was gone and that the sooner they switch sides, the more like they were to survive, provided help to the rebels to replace him. I mean, the idea that we're confused about a man who has been an anti-American dictator since 1969 just tells you how inept this administration is. They were very quick to jump on Mubarak, who was their ally for 30 years, and they were confused about getting rid of Gadhafi. This is a moment to get rid of him. Do it. Get it over with.

... he does not sound to me like a man who's merely accepting Obama's predicate that Qadaffy must go. It sounds very much like he's criticizing Obama for being "confused" about that conclusion.

posted by Ace at 05:13 PM

| Access Comments