Arab world watching U.S.-Libya action closely

There's been some confusion and a lot of debate about U.S. goals in Libya, with some questioning whether we should even be there.

CBS News correspondent Wyatt Andrews reports that, after scores of cruise missile and bombing attacks, the President still calls the US mission in Libya humanitarian, with the goal of stopping Muammar Qaddafi from attacking his own people.

"Not only was he carrying out the murders of civilians, but he was threatening more," Mr. Obama said.

The UN resolution was also about civilians, saying the mandate was to take "all necessary measures to protect (Libyan) civilians."

Complete coverage: Anger in the Arab World
U.S. F-15 fighter jet down in Libya, crew "safe"
Libyan city terrorized by shells, snipers

However the real goal in Libya is the downfall, death or departure of Muammar Qaddafi. It's what the Europeans, most Arab countries, and the President all say they want.

All of which means America is fighting in another Muslim country, but this time with the unusual support of most of the Arab world.

"The Arab public for the first time is open to American intervention," said Shibley Telhami, a Mideast expert at the University of Maryland.

Telhami takes opinion polls in Arab countries. Because Gaddafi threatens and embarrasses most Arabs, Telhami calls this a one of kind moment for the President to build Arab good will

Telhami says success in Libya - seeing Qaddafi regime change - is essential important for Mr. Obama.

Regime change in Libya is also important to the protest marchers on every Arab street. After peaceful protests took down two dictators - first in Tunisia, then in Egypt - Qaddafi changed tactics and made war on the crowds. Since then, shooting the protestors has been the rule.

Government crackdowns have killed at least seven protestors in Syria, 20 in Bahrain and some 40 demonstrators in Yemen. Many fear that if Qaddafi survives and clings to power, his way wins.

"What will happen is a lot of other governments may draw the same lessons (from) Qaddafi, which is (to) shoot the people," Telhami said.

Confronting Qaddafi also highlights what some see as a double standard. The U.S. is protecting the civilians in Libya but not the protestors against allied regimes in Yemen and Bahrain. The U.S. is staying close to Yemen because the same regime that's killing protestors is keeping the lid on al Qaeda.

"We consider al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which is largely located in Yemen, to be perhaps the most dangerous," U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said.

Overall the Administration wants to be in front of the Arab awakening and the quickest way is through the showdown with Qaddafi, a showdown that ends with him gone.

[ksmit2]

US objectives in actions like this are too poorly defined, and too
expensive when you are spending hundreds of millions of dollars
in military action to exlploit civilian uprising with the goal
of unseating a country's leader who has been hostile to our interests. Let's say Ghaddafi packs his bags and moves to the
Bahamas. Now what. Are the leaders of the insurgency qualified to
set up a government, pay the light bills and write the paychecks?
You-know-who will be paying for this, and for a very long time.

[Alex452]

US presidents make the same mistake over & over. Shah to Thieu to Mujahideen to Mubarak to Iraq. All went wrong. Back of bus only, for Libya -- incredible satellite view of Middle East ; Balkingpoints / www

[167irishboy]

Our military is in so many countries, the whole world has got to be getting burned out on us regardless of the white horse we feel we are riding on like John Wayne as Rooster Cogburn in "True Grit." Rogue nations like Iran just keep gaining credibility among Arab nation everytime we get involved in more middle east wars.

[rafaeldrc]

It all seems like a reoccurring nightmare about to restart, same patho-logic as before, humanitarian relif, protecting the public and a short interval.

Qaddafi is drawing the US into a fight, a fight that will tax our already fragile economy, an over-extended military and our reputation, not as a just nation, but yet another act of aggression. Even Hitler could be convincing to the masses with his hidden agenda unbeknownst to all. What is the true reason we're involved? Could it be the redistribution of oil wealth? Why did we go into Iraq?

Qaddafi is drawing us in and we're taking the bait. How long will other Arab states not realize our ploy, if they haven't already and divided the booty that lays wait?

Americans love heroes, they see themselves as a Supermen but the reality is that all resources are limited and a nation can only do so much. Somewhere, sooner that later, we'll reach our breaking point. I would argue we reached it during the Bush years and are living in delusion.

We can't afford another era of uncontrolled patchwork diplomacy with guns blazing and no exit strategy.

[Sky017]

One factor I haven't heard anyone mention: Qaddafi has somewhat sunk into the background and it is his son who has been commanding the army against the civilians.

And while some people thought that yeah, Qaddafi was delusional and he'll slink off the scene, it's become clear that his son and likely heir is going to be none the better. Hence... drastic action required.

[spaceatoms]

But yet in the little hypocritical U.S.A., we have homeless people freezing tonight, unreal!

[trimrider]

So by the reasoning of the UN then Yemen is next and then Bahrain, then China, then Myanmar and who else who knows. Of course it will always be the USA that pays the cost , losses the lives, and gets criticized for helping out. And of course if this was a Republican president that did this then the Media would be demanding his impeachment. However since it is Obama their GOD they will move heaven and earth to protect him. Thy cannot protect him from his own words.
READ:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/226200-Obama-President-Does-Not-Have-Power-Under-Constitution-to-Unilaterally-Authorize-a-Military-Attack-
Obama's own words "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,"

[skeeterandbucky]

The following congressional delegation was briefed on Friday March 18th by the President either at the White House or on secure phone, as to the U.S. role in Libya pursuant to the UN resolution of March 1st. Not one STOP whining!of these gas bags was b####ing then!!!!!

Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.

Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.

Rep. Mike Rogers, D-Mich.

Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, D-Md.

Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio

Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va.

Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D- Calif.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

Sen. John Kyl, R-Ariz.

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla.

Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif.

[Nmmrng]

We know we shouldn't be there when we find ourselves supporting the idiots who fire straight into the air!

[ludvig1-2009]

I hear that some of the rebels don't like Kadafy because they say he likes Israel. It seems to me when two sides that mostly have a negative view of the U.S. start killing one another, we should watch from the sidelines.

[cruises44]

F-15 $23 million
Cruise Missiles $150 million
Deployment Cost $20 million
Having the leader of the free world not having a clue "Priceless"