Time Magazine just ran a story titled “Why the U.S. Went to War: Inside the White House Debate on Libya.”
It’s remarkable only in that the unabashedly liberal magazine admits that President Obama and his minions “exaggerated” a detail or two in order to bolster their case for going into Libya:
President Barack Obama says he’s intervening to prevent atrocities in Libya. But details of behind-the-scenes debates at the White House show he’s going to war in part to rehabilitate an idea … the president and some of his advisers are so eager to rehabilitate the idea of preventive intervention that they’re exaggerating the violence they say they are intervening to prevent in Libya. “The effort to shoe-horn this into an imminent genocide model is strained,” says one senior administration official. That’s dangerous. Americans deserve an honest explanation when their leaders take them to war.
Obama and his aides know they are taking a big risk. “It’s a huge gamble,” says the senior administration official. The administration knows, for example, that al Qaeda, which has active cells in Libya, will try to exploit the power vacuum that will come with a weak or ousted Gaddafi.
Bush lied and people died, but Obama exaggerated and people were exterminated. Probably too long for a bumper sticker, huh?
Source: Time.com
