Missing Hillary's Libya forest for the Benghazi trees

Deplorable as were the deaths in Benghazi, a much larger disaster can be laid at Hillary's feet, and the just-released emails prove the point. By far the most interesting take on the nearly 300 Hilary emails released in a classic pre-holiday weekend document dump comes from John Hinderaker of Powerline.  He points out that while critics of Clinton have understandably focused on the horrifying deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, the really big picture that comes out from the emails is that Hillary saw herself as the architect of our policy toward Libya, a policy that has been an unmitigated disaster.

Why were Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans murdered? Because by September 2012, Libya was a terrorist playground. Since then, things have only gotten worse. Libya has become a failed state, a 21st century source of boat people, as refugees from ubiquitous violence stream across the Mediterranean. Libya is now a haven for ISIS and other terrorist groups; it was on the Libyan coast that ISIS beheaded 30 Christians. Some of the “refugees” now making their way into Europe are, in fact, ISIS agents. In short, Libya is a disaster.

Whose disaster? Hillary Clinton’s. It was Hillary who, more than anyone else, pushed to overthrow Moammar Qaddafi. Why? No compelling reason. Qaddafi had been tame ever since the Iraq war, which he interpreted as a threat to his rule. Almost incredibly, Clinton and her cohorts in NATO overthrew Qaddafi (who was subsequently murdered by a mob) without having a plan for what would come next.

Indeed, the overthrow of Qaddafi was an example of naïve bungling diplomacy at best. Sure, he had been a very bad guy, but he had been brought to heel. What, other than a general belief that democracy would triumph (the very critique leveled against Bush policy in Iraq), was the reason to push for his overthrow?

We may never excavate the incriminating details of the Benghazi slaughter and subsequent lies to the American people. But there is already plenty of evidence to indict Hillary as responsible for a terrible disaster in Libya. That should be the focus of such questions to her as can be shouted from a distance at choreographed campaign events in Iowa and New Hampshire, and will surely be grist for presidential debates, assuming the unexpected doesn’t happen and someone else is the Democrats’ nominee (which I still think quite possible).

Deplorable as were the deaths in Benghazi, a much larger disaster can be laid at Hillary's feet, and the just-released emails prove the point. By far the most interesting take on the nearly 300 Hilary emails released in a classic pre-holiday weekend document dump comes from John Hinderaker of Powerline.  He points out that while critics of Clinton have understandably focused on the horrifying deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, the really big picture that comes out from the emails is that Hillary saw herself as the architect of our policy toward Libya, a policy that has been an unmitigated disaster.

Why were Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans murdered? Because by September 2012, Libya was a terrorist playground. Since then, things have only gotten worse. Libya has become a failed state, a 21st century source of boat people, as refugees from ubiquitous violence stream across the Mediterranean. Libya is now a haven for ISIS and other terrorist groups; it was on the Libyan coast that ISIS beheaded 30 Christians. Some of the “refugees” now making their way into Europe are, in fact, ISIS agents. In short, Libya is a disaster.

Whose disaster? Hillary Clinton’s. It was Hillary who, more than anyone else, pushed to overthrow Moammar Qaddafi. Why? No compelling reason. Qaddafi had been tame ever since the Iraq war, which he interpreted as a threat to his rule. Almost incredibly, Clinton and her cohorts in NATO overthrew Qaddafi (who was subsequently murdered by a mob) without having a plan for what would come next.

Indeed, the overthrow of Qaddafi was an example of naïve bungling diplomacy at best. Sure, he had been a very bad guy, but he had been brought to heel. What, other than a general belief that democracy would triumph (the very critique leveled against Bush policy in Iraq), was the reason to push for his overthrow?

We may never excavate the incriminating details of the Benghazi slaughter and subsequent lies to the American people. But there is already plenty of evidence to indict Hillary as responsible for a terrible disaster in Libya. That should be the focus of such questions to her as can be shouted from a distance at choreographed campaign events in Iowa and New Hampshire, and will surely be grist for presidential debates, assuming the unexpected doesn’t happen and someone else is the Democrats’ nominee (which I still think quite possible).