Obama has, at last, spoken publicly on why the US has been "involved" in the military activities in relation to Libya.
Unfortunately, he hasn't made things any clearer, as AlJazeera explains:
"Obama spoke on the eve of a 35-nation conference in London to tackle the crisis in the North African oil-exporting country and weigh political options for ending Gaddafi's 41-year rule.
Obama's challenge was to define the limited purpose and scope of the US mission in Libya for Americans preoccupied with domestic economic concerns and weary of costly wars in two other Muslim countries, Iraq and Afghanistan.
The US took the initial lead in the Western-led military action against Gaddafi, before NATO agreed to take over the operations. Obama said the US will transfer control to NATO on Wednesday.
Obama said once that transfer occurs, the risk and cost to American taxpayers will be reduced significantly.
But Al Jazeera's Patty Culhane, reporting from Washington, said Obama's speech had two striking contradictions.
"The president said we must stand alongside those who work for freedom and at the same time he said we cannot be the policemen of the world only when it applies to our national interest.
"The president [seem to] be trying to explain why we have seen a lesser response to allies like Bahrain or Yemen," she said.
Also, he said nothing about the exit strategy, our correspondent said.
"He said nothing about ... how does this end for the US military and he did not really mention anything about the cost, so this was a broad speech to the American public. but for those people, especially members of congress who have some very pointed questions, I don't know if they are going to feel if they got the answers they were looking for," she said."
Unfortunately, he hasn't made things any clearer, as AlJazeera explains:
"Obama spoke on the eve of a 35-nation conference in London to tackle the crisis in the North African oil-exporting country and weigh political options for ending Gaddafi's 41-year rule.
Obama's challenge was to define the limited purpose and scope of the US mission in Libya for Americans preoccupied with domestic economic concerns and weary of costly wars in two other Muslim countries, Iraq and Afghanistan.
The US took the initial lead in the Western-led military action against Gaddafi, before NATO agreed to take over the operations. Obama said the US will transfer control to NATO on Wednesday.
Obama said once that transfer occurs, the risk and cost to American taxpayers will be reduced significantly.
But Al Jazeera's Patty Culhane, reporting from Washington, said Obama's speech had two striking contradictions.
"The president said we must stand alongside those who work for freedom and at the same time he said we cannot be the policemen of the world only when it applies to our national interest.
"The president [seem to] be trying to explain why we have seen a lesser response to allies like Bahrain or Yemen," she said.
Also, he said nothing about the exit strategy, our correspondent said.
"He said nothing about ... how does this end for the US military and he did not really mention anything about the cost, so this was a broad speech to the American public. but for those people, especially members of congress who have some very pointed questions, I don't know if they are going to feel if they got the answers they were looking for," she said."
Comments