Obama: He Broke Them. He Owns Them.

"I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism.   What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war."
 
- State Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), October 2002

Obama decided, rashly, to engage in a "dumb war" in Libya where he put this country on the side of Al Qaeda, among other radical Islamist groups.  We had no national security interest in driving Qaddaf'fi out-of-power.  Whether we like it or not, foreign policy and national defence are not first conducted with "the best interest's of the 'PARTY, 'NOT THE UNITED STATES' in mind.  It may sound selfish, greedy, lacking in compassion, but it is also true.

Benghazi was the best supplier of foreign-born Al Qaeda in Iraq fighters.  This was well-known long ago.  We all knew that the "rebels" were either affiliated with or infiltrated thoroughly by Al Qaeda members and AQ-related terrorist groups.  It was a stated fact...by them. 

Democracy for democracy's sake is not noble or righteous...the Nazis came to power through elections.  For the most part, democracy can't be declared via statements, elections, or laws, sua sponte.  It is dependent upon a culture.  

A civil society is a prerequisite for a democracy and that is one thing that the Middle East, as it is currently situated, lacks.

Further, it cannot be said that it is "a good thing," pro se, that one dictator is removed and replaced by another or authoritarian regime.  Regardless of how one feels about dictators, Qaddaffi did keep Islamists and radical terrorist organisations from flourishing.  

Then, per “The Pottery Barn of Foreign Policy,” Obama “rashly” inserted the United States “broke” Libya. Thus, he “owns” it.

 

Choosing sides in a dispute between one dictator, Qaddaf'fi, and a possible-probable-actual other is not "Smart Power."  It is "dumb."

The same is true regarding Egypt.  Obama took sides, demanded the departure of the Mubarak regime, and believed, naively I might add, in the promises of the Muslim Brotherhood to not run a candidate for the Egyptian Presidency.  Now, the MB is going to try Americans in abstentia for blasphemy.  A guilty verdict = a fatwa, not that the former is necessary for the latter.  He exchanged an ally, who was a dictator, for a country, Egypt, that is or is not, depending upon the day, an ally of America.
 

 Per "The Pottery Barn of Foreign Policy, "SCOAMF "broke" Egypt and that means he "owns" it.