Palin Blasts Obama Libya Speech

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says President Barack Obama’s address to the nation Monday night was “profoundly disappointing” because he did not articulate the end game in Libya and did not press that Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi must be ousted from power. Palin also said on Fox News that Obama’s inconsistencies are just making the message “worse” and U.S. interests are not met if Gadhafi remains.

“I think that was a profoundly disappointing speech because it proved that the ‘Obama Doctrine’ is still full of chaos and questions,” Palin told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren after the speech. “It’s dodgy, it’s dubious. We’re not hearing from our president what is the end game here.

“And with Gadhafi still in power — if we are not going to oust him via killing or capturing — then there is no acceptable end state,” Palin said. “It’s very disappointing that we did not hear that commitment from our president — that America’s interests lie in Gadhafi being ousted, and without that being met, I have to ask why in the world [is] our military” being deployed.

Obama’s inconsistent messages are making many wonder what the United States actually is doing in Libya, Palin said.

“He’s engaging in inconsistency . . . it’s making many of us distrust what it is that we are doing there in Libya, and making us wonder what is the end game,” she said. “But [also] where do we go next with all the other countries that are certainly suffering from a lot of turmoil.

“The inconsistency tonight articulated by our president just made things worse,” Palin continued. “Another big question that needs to be asked is: Are we at war? I haven’t heard the president say that we are at war. And that’s why I too [don’t know] do we use the term intervention, do we use war, do we use skirmish?

“What I know is: U.S. interests are not being met if Gadhafi stays in power, and if we are merely taking a back seat to the Arab League, to the United Nations, to NATO leadership, while we just put our fingers up in the air and decide what the political winds are around the world,” she said. “Not necessarily knowing and believing that the U.S. interests must come first in this.”