The Triumph of Evil

Try as I might, I could not post the following comment to Bill O'Reilly's article The Triumph of Evil on Towhnhall.com today. I kept receiving a message that the post contained inappropriate language:

O'Reilly usually makes a few good points, but generally misses the mark. I love the quote from Edmund Burke, and it is a truism, but the time to oust Ghaddafi was 20 years ago, not now when there is no hope of an opposition group taking power that does not have the goal of creating another Islamic state.

I've long held that only a brutal dictator can keep a 7th century mentality Moozlum population in check. So what if he was going to slaughter his opposition? Why do we care if one group of America haters kills another group of America haters? Yes, Ghaddafi is a lunatic and a state sponsor of terror. Again, he should have been dealt with 20 years ago, not now when the entire Middle East is aflame in rebellion.

O'Reilly is all high and mighty on the nobility of America preventing massacres. Doesn't the rest of the world have any responsibility? This is an Arab issue and the U.S. shouldn't be doing their work for them. They have the money and the military might, but are afraid to use it. Instead, they want us to be the bad guys. What about the fact that we're basically bankrupt and can't afford to shoot $1.5 million Tomahawk cruise missiles all day long into Libya? No one much cared while the slaughter in Darfur was occurring. No one much cares about the Christians who are being slaughtered around the world. If we really want to be noble, we'd be protecting Christians and seeking justice for their murders.