March 9th, 2011
06:00 PM ET

Stronger voice on Libya: Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama?



FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The United States is in a very tough spot when it comes to Libya, and President Obama has taken some heat for not being more vocal on the crisis.

The White House has said repeatedly it's weighing its options, and that nothing is off the table. But the president has said little more. And we've been "weighing" for a while now.

The president is walking a tightrope: If the U.S. acts unilaterally - no matter how noble the cause of helping those in Libya fighting for their freedom - we will be seen as interfering in yet another Muslim nation's business. That perception is what got us 9/11.

So, President Obama isn't saying much publicly. He's had strong words for Gadhafi, demanding he step down; but he's stopped short of calling for any other specifics. Gadhafi's still there.

In the meantime, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has emerged as the mouthpiece for the administration. She traveled to Geneva last week to meet with top diplomats and discuss military and humanitarian options.

Clinton told Sky News yesterday that the U.S. wants to see the international community support a no-fly zone. She also said it was important that the United Nations decide what to do about the conflict in Libya, not the United States.

Some of the president's top aides were scheduled to meet today to discuss the situation in Libya, including Secretary of State Clinton, Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen. But the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, was not scheduled to attend.

Here’s my question to you: When it comes to Libya, who has the stronger voice: Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?


March 8th, 2011
05:38 PM ET

When it comes to Libya, what's the right thing for the U.S. to do?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

When it comes to Libya, the United States is in a very tough spot. Not as tough a spot as the Libyan people are in by any means…but difficult nonetheless.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/03/08/art.libya.jpg caption=""]
We are mostly hated in that part of the world. And rushing to the aid of the Libyan rebels trying to overthrow Gadhafi would be played up on the Arab street as the United States again interfering in a Muslim nation's internal affairs.

On the other hand, it's in our national DNA to want to come to the aid of people who are struggling to gain their freedom. Plus there is all that oil, of course, but that's a much more cynical view.

People are laying down their lives trying to get out from under the yoke of arguably one of the world's most brutal dictators. We have the military wherewithal to make their struggle a lot easier, but so far we haven't done that.

Here’s my question to you: When it comes to Libya, what’s the right thing for the U.S. to do?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?


Filed under: Libya • Moammar Gadhafi