House Condemns Libya Conflict For Real Reasons Iraq War Was Awful

Ruh-roh, House lawmakers have found time in their busy day avoiding debt talks to scold Obama for sending a few shiny war toys over to Libya, where NATO is still busy bombing Dictator Death for whatever reason that makes him worse than the guy killing all the Syrians. Oil, probably? Yeah, so quit doing that, you're wasting all our money, the House cried to Obama by a vote of 295-123. It's been too long (3 months), and you've spent all this money ($716 million)! And what's your problem with dictators, anyway? The Libyansdidn't ask you to come over and help them install a democracymight have asked you to help them overthrow their murderous dictator and his horrible sons to establish a democracy, but whatever,they are not freedom-loving Muslimsthey're freedom-loving Muslims that House lawmakers don't care about.

Here is something about the Iraq war: it cost over $3 trillion. The U.S. deficit hovers just under $15 trillion, so you might say, if you liked math, that this is the equivalent of somewhere around one-fifth of the current U.S. debt!

From McClatchy:  

They were thwarted by an unusual combination of anti-war Democrats, as well as most Republicans, who argued that the three-month old mission has become too murky and too costly. 70 Democrats joined 225 Republicans to vote against the measure.

Haha, "too murky and too costly." Is that possibly the most cynical thing any lawmaker could ever surmise about the Libyan conflict if that lawmaker also voted for the Iraq war? No, probably you would have to add in some glib comments about how it is not the job of the United States to fight someone's battle for democracy, or whatever. Meanwhile, almost half of the world's conflict refugees are people who have been displaced by American wars. [ McClatchy ]