We are reminded by several sources that under the military Rules of Engagement the military has authority in life or death situations to use deadly force.The authority was already there.
No one had to order it. No one.
The decision to fire was made by the commander and forces at sea, on site.
But hey - go ahead and have a Grand Obama Moment.
It's OK. Enjoy it.
Because we're all happy that it turned out just fine, for now.
And we all join together in singing: "Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy!"
Just remember, no matter how you spin it it'll never be Reaganesque!
8 comments:
Who's trying to make it look Reaganesque?
And wouldn't you be one of the first to have criticized the president if something had gone wrong?
Yes, I would have been one of the first to criticize him if something went wrong. Absolutely.
Who's trying to make it look Reaganesque? The mainstream media, of course.
But I'm not denying him (and America) a proud moment.
Let me ask you a question, because I'm not getting a clear picture through my reading. How was the media fragmented during the Reagan years? Did he get it as bad as Bush has, or was his personal appeal a mitigating factor?
Reagan's personal appeal was always a mitigating factor.
Reagan's persona was that of a friendly, helpful neighbor - the fella who never spoke ill of anyone and was always around to lend a hand. His "Aw, shucks . . " demeanor appealed to everyday Americans.
Still, the elites in DC, NYC, LA and academia didn't hesitate to dump on him and attempt to caricature him as a reckless cowboy and/or an amiable dunce. Even as he succeeded, they still did their best to undermine him.
But he didn't get the title "teflon President" for nothing. It just wouldn't stick.
Trust an amiability (or likeableness) went hand-in-hand with Reagan.
For many people it was a case where personality transcended politics. That doesn't happen very often.
And use of force is an issue that had to be clearly defined, since this was not a combat situation. We don't have rules of engagement that apply to piracy as of yet, because they're not technically covered under the war on terror, or any other theater of operations.
Was it legally required. Probably. Was there any hesitation by the president. No.
And, just to point to a glimmer of hope, I was stunned and pleased by Bernard Goldberg's response to this argument on Hannity last night.
Thanks for the perspective.
As was I. Was Hannity stunned is the question?? It looked it at first.
At first, but he stuck to his arguments. Goldberg's gonna pay for that, I imagine. I posted the video because it makes me laugh and it's a slow day at work.
It's so silly when you start to think about it.
Post a Comment