the nagasaki atom bomb drop. fire and fury the world has never seen before in response to threats. not in response to actions. you ve seen since then in every statement from secretary of state tillerson or jim mattis, put out a statement that sounded harsh, every clause had that condition if they start something. we ll all relearn the language of the pre-iraq war. preemptive strike, maybe? on the launch pad. will point the out, not a case. preventive. military action trying to knock out the program. absent an imminent threat. i don t see them doing that. what s striking to me is that this really should and has opened up a debate on just what the powers of the president are in this situation. that he can order this and his military advisers either have to follow through, follow his commands, or resign. and it is the single greatest
he said gadhafi must go. he did. how do you get him out thereof. you tell me. put cia agents on the ground and have them take him out. oh, wait. there are a few points to make here, though. obama is really going to have trouble keeping his coalition here. andrew sullivan at the atlantic, he wrote a scathing blog post, what he is doing? this say stupid war. secondly, there s a cost element. $373 million every six days is what the congressional research survey says. during a budget crisis that s a lot to spend. thirdly, i m glad the media is being skeptical about this. it s what was needed pre-iraq. i think obama will have to answer the questions. the bottom line is you should never go into war, mika, unless you know what the exit strategy is. you don t go in until you know when you ll come out. george bush didn t have the answer to that in iraq. we still don t have the answer to that in afghanistan and barack obama doesn t have the answer to that in libya. it s not a war,