Speaker Gingrich initially stated in an interview with Greta Van Susteran that he would institute a no-fly zone over Libya and then communicate that Ghaddaffi was no longer in power to convince the Libyan military to switch sides. He stated that the most generous comment that he would give to President Obama's actions was ineptitude.
Later in March of 2011, Speaker Gingrich stated on the Today show that the standard of humanitarian intervention could apply to Sudan, to North Korea, to Zimbabwe, to Syria this week, to Yemen, and to Bahrain. He stated that it wasn't a serious standard, but was simply a public relations conversation. He stated that he would not have intervened and there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi.
In a press statement that Congressman Gingrich released after the initiation of the no-fly zone, stating that it was impossible to make sense of the standard for intervention in Libya except opportunism and news media publicity. He asked questions about what the standard was for invasion, and what the definition for success was in Libya.
Speaker Gingrich was asked about the apparent contradictions in his statements in the Presidential debates, and stated that his words were taken out of context.
Greta Van Susteran Interview
In March of 2011, Speaker Gingrich was interviewed by Greta Van Susteran and spoke about Libya and the developments there. He states that he would exercise a no-fly zone in Libya and tell the Libyan military that Ghaddaffi was out and they should switch sides soon.
VAN SUSTEREN: ... But first let me ask you about Libya. It's in the news. The president has said that military options with NATO are not off the table. What would you do about Libya?
GINGRICH: Exercise a no-fly zone this evening, communicate to the Libyan military that Qaddafi was gone and that the sooner they switch sides, the more like they were to survive, provided help to the rebels to replace him. I mean, the idea that we're confused about a man who has been an anti-American dictator since 1969 just tells you how inept this administration is. They were very quick to jump on Mubarak, who was their ally for 30 years, and they were confused about getting rid of Qaddafi. This is a moment to get rid of him. Do it. Get it over with.
VAN SUSTEREN: And why do you think -- you say you think it's ineptitude is why the pause or there's different political...
GINGRICH: Look...
VAN SUSTEREN: ... or different diplomacy?
GINGRICH: I think the most generous comment would be ineptitude. It's also an ideological problem. The United States doesn't need anybody's permission. We don't need to have NATO, who frankly, won't bring much to the fight. We don't need to have the United Nations. All we have to say is that we think that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we're intervening. And we don't have to send troops. All we have to do is suppress his air force, which we could do in minutes. And then we have to say publicly that he is gone, that the military should switch sides now, and we should help the rebels. And if that means getting them weapons or whatever it means, the fact that there's no more Libyan air power and the fact that the United States has publicly come out for decisively replacing him, I suspect the military will dump him.
The Today Show
In March of 2011, Congressman Gingrich appeared on the Today Show and discussed the recent military intervention into Libya. He states that he would not have intervened and that he would not have used combined US and military forces.
GINGRICH: The standard [Obama] has fallen back to of humanitarian intervention could apply to Sudan, to North Korea, to Zimbabwe, to Syria this week, to Yemen, to Bahrain. This isn't a serious standard. This is a public relations conversation.
...
LAUER: Do you think Moammar Qaddafi has to go as a result of this intervention?
GINGRICH: Let me draw the distinction. I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi. I think there are a lot of other allies in the region we could have worked with. I would not have used American and European forces.
Amateurish
In March of 2011, Speaker Gingrich issued a statement to Politico in which he noted his oppositon to intervention in Libya by stating that he saw no point in military action.
It is impossible to make sense of the standard for intervention in Libya except opportunism and news media publicity.
Mugabe has killed more people, the Sudanese dictatorship has killed more people, there are a lot of bad dictators doing bad things.
What is the Obama standard [for deciding to intervene]?
What is success?
What are we prepared to do to achieve that success?
What supplemental is the president prepared to ask for to pay for all this?
New Hampshire Debate
In June of 2011, Congressman Gingrich participated in the Republican debate in New Hampshire. He was asked about the cost of Libya and it's strategic importance. He stated that we should have a totally new strategy in the region.
Should the price tag be a factor when you're the commander in chief of the United States?
GINGRICH: Sure. The price tag is always a factor, because, as General Eisenhower once he was president pointed out, as Abraham Lincoln understood, as George Washington understood, that's part of the decision.
But I think what Congresswoman Bachmann just said ought to really sober everybody about how much trouble we're in. Ten years after 9/11, our intelligence is so inadequate that we have no idea what percent of the Libyan rebels are, in fact, al Qaeda. Libya was the second largest producer of people who wanted to kill Americans in Iraq.
I think that we need to think fundamentally about reassessing our entire strategy in the region. I think that we should say to the generals we would like to figure out to get out as rapid as possible with the safety of the troops involved. And we had better find new and very different strategies because this is too big a problem for us to deal with the American ground forces in direct combat.
We have got to have a totally new strategy for the region, because we don't today have the kind of intelligence we need to know even what we're doing.
Iowa Debate
In August of 2011, Congressman Gingrich participated in the Republican debate in Iowa. He was asked about previous statements made on Libya and his current view on Libya.
BAIER: Speaker Gingrich, as President Obama was deciding what to do in Libya, you were asked what you would do. You said, quote, "exercise a no-fly zone this evening, communicate to the Libyan military that Gadhafi was gone, and that sooner they switched sides the more likely they were to survive."
After the president launched military action a few days later you said, quote, "I would not have intervened. I think there were other ways to affect Gadhafi." Are you certain about the way forward in Libya and where it stands now?
GINGRICH: Let me suggest -- this is a good example of a gotcha question.
BAIER: No, it is not.
GINGRICH: No, yes it is. No, go back previous to Greta Van Susteren two weeks earlier, when I said what we should do go in covertly, use Egyptian and other allies not use American forces.
BAIER: But Mr. Speaker, you said these two things.
GINGRICH: That's right. I said that thing specifically after the president that day announced gloriously to the world as president of the United States that Gadhafi has to go. And I said if the president of the United States is serious about Gadhafi going, this is what we should do.
The following interview came after the same president said, well, I didn't really mean go meant go, I meant go meant maybe we should have a humanitarian intervention. Now, the fact that I was commenting on Fox about a president who changes his opinion every other day ought to be covered by a Fox commentator using all the things I said, not handpicking the ones that fit your premise.
BAIER: Mr. Speaker the question was are you now certain the way forward in Libya?
GINGRICH: I have a red light, but if I'm allowed to answer.
BAIER: You're allowed to.
GINGRICH: I talked recently to General Abizad (ph) who is probably the most knowledgeable senior general who speaks fluent Arabic who said to me we have a bigger strategic deficit than our fiscal deficit. I think we need to rethink everything in the region.
I think we need to rethink Afghanistan, we need to rethink Iraq and I think we need to recognize that right now Iran is on offense and our troops are in danger everywhere in that region. And I think we need a very serious national debate about it.
Sponsored and Cosponsored Legislation
This representative has not been identified as sponsoring or cosponsoring significant legislation related to this title.
