Debate: Hillary Clinton’s Judgment, as Secretary of State

The most outrageous statement on foreign policy in the Democratic debate was that Hillary Clinton defended the overthrow of Libyan Muammar Gaddafi by saying that it involved no U.S. ground troops and led to the first democratic election ever in Libya.

She forgot to mention that because of a vacuum of leadership after the dictator was toppled, the country is now experiencing chaos, tribal civil war, and the creation of terrorist enclaves and bases. Not only that, fighters and weapons from Gaddafi’s sizable storehouses are flowing into neighboring countries, destabilizing them too.

Although it is true that Republicans focusing on the Benghazi incident is political and nonsensical, the real issue is Hillary Clinton’s judgment, as Secretary of State, in pushing for such a disastrous military intervention in Libya in the first place. It seems analogous to George W. Bush’s equally catastrophic invasion of Iraq. Oops, Hillary supported that fiasco too!

Ivan Eland is Senior Fellow and Director of the Center on Peace and Liberty at the Independent Institute. His Independent books include The Empire Has No Clothes, Recarving Rushmore, and No War for Oil.
Posts by Ivan Eland | Full Biography and Publications
Comments
  • Catalyst
  • MyGovCost.org
  • FDAReview.org
  • OnPower.org
  • elindependent.org