It’s a joke. And if that’s not enough, this morning I read they were debating the legality of assassinating Kadaffi. Really? “He’s a genocidal asshole,” isn’t good enough for the European electorate? Sometimes it seems like European countries need to get permission from the UN before their generals take a dump in the latrine. I’d say, under the circumstances, this kind of debate should last about as long as it takes to arm the missiles. This guy has been a prick since I was a kid. I’m tired of seeing his ugly mug on TV.
You really have to wonder, without American leadership of NATO, if Soviet tanks had ever rolled through the Fulda Gap, how far they would have gotten before the Europeans got their UN resolution, then debated the legality of blowing up the tanks, and argued over who’d lead the endeavor?
He’s a colonel, commanding an army. He’s fair game, just like Yamamoto was fair game.
Speculation alert…
There is a reason leaders don’t assassinate other leaders…
They don’t mind troops, or even civilians being in harms way, but when it’s their life being risked, they suddenly find diplomatic solutions. It’s one reason we don’t go to war with nuclear nations. Leaders wont pick a fight if they might personally be harmed.
So no, we don’t assassinate leaders. They are part of the special protected class. Even if they are insane genocidal dictators.
I was there in Germany for the heyday of the Cold War…..and we weren’t planning on asking any permission from the Germans, or the frogs….
The real issue is their fear of becoming strong again. The Soviets spent an enormous amount of time trying to teach them that the cause of WWI and WWII was nationalism and national strength. They taught the Europeans to fear themselves in order to keep them weak. It worked.
Seeking the sanction of hierarchical authority is deeply embedded in the European psyche. Priests, kings and tyrants have exploited this feature since time immemorial.
People sanctioning their own authority was one of the filters that folks had to pass to get here, and so America tends to have a bias towards independent action. Nonetheless, this bias is decaying, as people are losing their grip on the once bright line between personal prerogative and the consensus required for collective action.
Europe squabbles… Not exactly a new thing.
But that assassination thing, yes, it has long been discussed but almost never for two hundred years has a government im power gone on record as wanting to do it, for fear of reciprocal action. Support any locals who accomplish it (Mussolini?) perhaps, certainly during military action (deliberately, as when kings/pretenders/Napoleons swung a sword themselves, or “inadvertently” as bombing Hitler’s bunkers was “meant” to take out his generals rather than him…), but not avowed policy.
@GeekWithA.45:
It’s for this reason I don’t fear illegal immigration so much, but it masks the *real* problem we have: welfare, in all its forms. It annoys me to no end when people talk about how Illegals are dragging us down by emergency room visits, sending their children to public school, getting food stamps, etc, while ignoring the natives that do the exact same thing.
And, ultimately, it’s those of us who accept welfare who are dragging the country down. Not just because it takes away from the productive–but also because it destroys the individual initiative of those who accept the welfare.
We need more individuals willing to be free!
On BJ Clinton’s watch, we ( NATO ) bombed parts of Yugoslavia back to the stone age to “force” Slobodan Milosevic to quit slaughtering his people. I never understood the logic and I still don’t.
Some pricks just need killing.
On the other hand how does NATO have a dog in that fight?
Which member state is being attacked by Libya?
Not seeing it here, boss.
However, I am LOVING the hypocrisy of former senators Obama Biden and H.Clinton, who spent much time slamming executive military action without congressional “oversight” .
How’s that hope and change workin out for ya?