The guy who’s future political career depends on bringing President Obama down a couple of notches…
“This is about as badly run as any foreign operation in our lifetime… This is as badly executed, I think, as any policy we’ve seen since WWII, and it will become a case study for how not to engage in this type of activity.”
Or a random commenter at Tom Ricks’ blog…?
“The air campaign has been about as perfect as can be…”
I’m going with the random commenter.
2 thoughts on “Who to believe?”
Could it be that Newt is talking about policy while the commenter is talking about the performance of our military? But that might make too much sense and preclude the stock "Republicans are TEH STOOPID" argument.
Right. Newt's totally credible…see herehttp://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/03/23/an_epic_flip_flop.html"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."– Newt Gingrich on March 7 explaining what he would do in Libya."Let me draw the distinction. I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi. I think there are a lot of other allies in the region we could have worked with. I would not have used American and European forces."– Newt Gingrich, earlier today. And there's a difference between being stoopid and a tool.