Goldberg: Obama wears a white hat
President Obama is right to send troops to advise African forces going after the leader of the Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda.
Very late in the day on Oct. 14, the Obama administration released a lot of politically problematic information, including the news that the deficit for 2011 hit $1.3 trillion (the second biggest ever, after 2009) and that it's abandoning the CLASS Act, one of the more expensive and unwieldy appendages of "Obamacare."
One other thing: The White House announced we're putting boots on the ground in sub-Saharan Africa.
President Obama notified Congress that he's sending about 100 combat-equipped troops to advise African forces on how best to kill or capture (but hopefully kill) one of the truly hideous villains breathing today, Joseph Kony, and destroy his militia cult, the Lord's Resistance Army.
And Obama is absolutely right to do it.
The news was so sudden, unexpected and just plain odd that the reaction from both left and right has been hurried and confused. Many claims are simply wrong. For instance, the LRA is not a "Christian" militia. The LRA routinely burns down churches and slaughters the congregants, but usually not before raping and mutilating them.
Kony is a classic example of the charismatic terrorist cult leader. He blends indigenous witchcraft with bits of Christianity and Islam (soldiers pray the rosary and bow to Mecca) to brainwash his uneducated, terrified flock of hostages and child soldiers, many of whom were forced to murder their own parents.
Here's a graphic passage from a 2006 report from Christianity Today on the LRA:
"Under threat of death, LRA child soldiers attack villages, shooting and cutting off people's lips, ears, hands, feet, or breasts, at times force-feeding the severed body parts to victims' families. Some cut open the bellies of pregnant women and tear their babies out. Men and women are gang-raped. As a warning to those who might report them to Ugandan authorities, they bore holes in the lips of victims and padlock them shut. Victims are burned alive or beaten to death with machetes and clubs. The murderous task is considered properly executed only when the victim is mutilated beyond recognition."
It's also worth noting that Obama is acting in compliance with a bill unanimously passed by both houses of Congress in 2009, which called for "increased, comprehensive U.S. efforts to help mitigate and eliminate the threat posed by the LRA to civilians and regional stability."
Obama says that he's sending troops to protect our national security. Yes, the LRA is a terrorist group, but it's not at war with us. One could argue that improving our standing in Africa, particularly given China's rising influence and jihadism's spread, is a worthy foreign policy goal. But that's all a stretch, given Obama's past skepticism toward interventionism (as a presidential candidate, he said it was worth risking a potential genocide in Iraq to pull our troops as quickly as possible) and his almost incomprehensibly incoherent principles for where we should intervene (Libya, Yemen) and where we should not (Iran, Syria).
No, this is really just do-goodery, pure and simple.
And for that reason, the only serious argument against the deployment is that our troops are spread too thin to be distracted by charity work. It's a fair argument, and one that will rightly come up again when Democrats lobby for debilitating defense cuts.
Still, assuming the military can handle the load and the strategy's been properly vetted, the only reasons for the White House to be embarrassed have to do with its own convoluted rationales, precedents and political constituencies.
Under President George W. Bush, critics might have called this sort of thing an instance of "cowboy foreign policy." I never understood why the term was an insult. Cowboys do good when they can and where they can. They may not go looking for trouble, but they don't hide from it either. Yes, in movies and books, cowboys usually only shoot when somebody else has shot at them first. But every now and then a villain comes along who is so vile, so repugnant, so contrary to decency that the cowboy does what he has to do on the grounds that some men just need killing.
Joseph Kony strikes me as such a man.
jgoldberg@latimescolumnists.com
Comments (66)
Add / View comments | Discussion FAQThe United State of America is the beacon to the world. When the Rwanda genocide was occurring in just 100 days 800k people lost their lives senselessly and under absolutely horrific circumstances which depicted true evil abound in man. Rwandan's were asking where was the United States ? Where were the heros they see in the movies which we are so good at portraying on the silver screen? Despite your resolve to your party, wars happen for senseless reasons, but genocides and such brutal carnage need to be stopped immediately by everyone with the ability to do so.
I am nut sure were in the CONSTITUTION it gives the POTUS the authority to SEND any ground troops into any country in the World WHEN it is not a issue of National Security.
Obama and the Liberals may think they have they type of Authority... BUT what about the Africain Situtaion is a NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE to the United States.
This would be like China sending in troops to run out the protesters in NY.
Exact same concept EXCEPT for all the slaughter of civilians ON BOTH SIDES of the issue.
They have had the SAME HARDCORE despot in charge for over 25 years..
To me this is more of a Photo OP for his re-electiong than PROVIDING a HIT SQUAD to get rid of one side or the other.
Please be advised... that the US PROVIDE Billions of dollars in AID for the War in Libya... not the French and England footing the bill.
Stop and think they only thing they got was first in line for Oil.. BUT OBAMA put the Muslim Brotherhood in charge there... 2000 surface to Air missles missing... AND WEAPONS OF WMD are missing as well..
Connect to the dots and it goes back to Obama providing aid to the Muslims faor attacks against ISRAEL.
what an idiotic commentary. obama has NO RIGHT to send troops without the permission of the people.
furthermore, congress had NO RIGHT to appropriate millions of taxpayer dollars for this action-money that could have been put to good use here in the united states.




Letters »