Gutfeld: The Naivety of the Anti-War Left
Written by Greg Gutfeld / Published March 22, 2011 / Red Eye
So by bombing Libya, Obama succeeds in pissing off his key supporters, the anti-war left. Which shows you how naive the anti-war left is.
If you actually believe a president will not go to war because he promised you, then you're like every girl on "Rock of Love" -- hopelessly disappointed and high as a kite.
People who campaign on peace, often wage war in office. They'll just drag their feet a little longer, which is what Obama did.
But I support the president because I try to be consistent on military matters. And to be fair, so are some on the anti-war left. Compare the currently angry Michael Moore to those lefties who, after reaming Bush for eight years, are now oddly silent on Obama's war. That's kinda weird.
Anyway, after Obama's behavior toward Egypt, he had little choice. Avoiding Qaddafi after kicking a meeker Mubarak out the door would smack of weakness.
But here's why bombing Libya may be good. For 40 years we've had to deal with Qaddafi's vile mug. It may not be a "vital interest" to "get" him, but it's justice.
Think of all the crap he's done to innocent people, including Americans.
Lastly, the action angers the right people. I dislike the anti-war movement because we as humans are all anti-war. It creates a false opposition; that the rest of us are pro-war.
But we're not. I'm pro military. It's the high speed rail with actual, awesome purpose.
More important, if the anti-war movement succeeds, evil all over would increase, because without threat of punishment, the brutal will blossom, and inevitablyAmerica falls.
Which, to the left, is better than putting up a fight.
And if you disagree with me, you sir are worse than Hitler!
-- Greg Gutfeld hosts "Red Eye" weekdays at 3 a.m. ET. Send your comments to: firstname.lastname@example.org