Libya Policy Hitches Us with Jihadists

Four days ago, counter-terrorism expert Brian Fairchild of the Intrepid Group, pointed out something that is becoming increasingly obvious: the "side" we are supporting in Libya includes anti-American Jihadists. He offers quite a bit of evidence.

Eastern Libya’s Tribes, Jihadism: Did U.S. Consider Its Own Libya Intel?

"I believe most Americans support military actions that protect the vital interests of the United States. Major American military initiatives, however, especially those involving the military invasion of a Muslim country in the era of the global jihad, have consequences and should only be taken because our vital strategic interests are at stake.

Thus far, no vital American strategic interests regarding Libya have been stated. Rather, official government policy appears to be designed to get rid of Gaddafi because he’s a tyrant, and to protect Libyan citizens on humanitarian grounds.

Our policymakers seem to believe that once this mission is accomplished some benign coalition of pro-democratic leaders will arise and take command, and all will be well.

There seems to be a huge general assumption that anti-Gaddafi forces are pro-American forces that should be armed and organized by the United States, but as you will see below there is documentary proof that at least some of the anti-Gaddafi forces are anti-American and pro-jihadist."

Andy McCarthy is on the same wavelenght as Mr. Fairchild:

"The Libyan mujahideen will exploit us but never befriend us. If they succeed, so be it. But we have no vital interest in orchestrating that success, even if it would mean a thug like Qaddafi finally gets his just deserts. If we empower them, we will eventually rue the day."

And now, from the March 27 Daily Telegraph we learn that al-Qaeda forces

"...who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime."