What Obama Should Say About Libya In Monday’s Debate
Submitted by Gene Greissman
Monday night Mitt Romney will almost certainly bring up Benghazi. But it could turn out to be a weapon that harms the user more than it harms the target.
It already inflicted a wound on Romney when he tried it in the second debate. And who knows, a top-secret Bin Laden-like op is already underway. Then who is going to look silly?
That probability aside, how should Obama respond?
I recommend invoking the name of Ronald Reagan.
Yes, Ronald Reagan.
Something like this.
When Ronald Reagan was president, terrorists attacked the Marine barracks in Beirut; and 241 Americans were killed.
Governor, Do you think this happened because Ronald Reagan was weak, and his weakness invited attack? Governor, do you think this happened because of an intelligence failure?
The most Romney can say is to claim the Obama people did a coverup, which can be easily refuted. You can be sure that Romney will say nothing to besmirch the legacy of Ronald Reagan.
The comparison is apt. And the lesson is obvious: sometimes the enemy succeeds.
Our enemies are not all stupid, and Americans are not omniscient. The enemy succeeded at Pearl Harbor and on 9/11. And they will again, hopefully later, not sooner–no matter how diligent and wise the occupant of the White House may be.
Abraham Lincoln is on Mount Rushmore, but in his day there were intelligence failures and military blunders and battles lost. Lincoln had to deal with blamers all the time. What counts most is not who wins a battle, but who wins the war.