Talk about missing the forest for the trees.

Sean Hannity takes perverse pleasure in calling Barack Obama “Spectator-in-Chief” (rather than Commander-in-Chief) for not taking the lead in the multilateral attack on Libya.

Democrats bellyache that Obama has soiled his Nobel Peace Prize. Republicans bellyache about Obama’s mission creep.

The polls showed the American people to be less than enthusiastic about their president’s decision to initiate military action than they have been about any other president’s similar action.

On it goes.

Talk about missing the forest for the trees.

Good morning! President Obama prevented an act of genocide. It was perfectly, clearly, seriously broadcast in advance by Libya’s Muamar Qaddafi. No mercy on my opponents. And his opponents, Qaddafi did not refer to as human beings.

1994.

Genocide in Rwanda.

What does the president of the United States do?

Nothing.

2011.

Intended genocide in Libya.

What does the president of the United States do?

He acts.

Whether he acted just in the nick of time, we don’t care.

Whether he acted with just the right machismo or leadership or aplomb or timeliness, we don’t care.

Whether he came off as a spectator-in-chief or a commander-in-chief, we don’t care.

Whether he explained himself too late, we don’t care.

Whether’s he’s right about regime change in Libya, we don’t care.

He acted.

Soon enough to stop the bloodshed.

That, we care about.

In the context of previous American failures — such as indifference to the Rwandan genocide of 1994 — Obama’s action was a shining moment for himself, for his presidency, for his country.

Obama said: “I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.”

Exactly.

And exactly what President Clinton didn’t get.

That Obama put together a multilateral coalition, from the EU to the UN to the Arab League, is to his credit, not his detriment. George H. W. Bush put together a broad-based coalition in 1990, and the subsequent attack on Iraq in 1991 went relatively well. George Bush did not put together a broad-based coalition in 2003, and the subsequent attack on Iraq went relatively poorly. Getting people on your side is a plus, not a minus, provided the tyrant is stopped before he can carry out his evil plans. Maybe just in the nick of time, but Obama’s efforts stopped Qaddafi before Qaddafi’s guns and planes and men could “show no mercy.”

People say, “never again” almost as a mantra, as if merely stating it will guarantee it. The circumstances under which FDR failed to act against the genocide of the Jews were complicated. So it will be in every similar instance. Complicated. That Obama may have been entangled in the complications of the Libyan affair is of no moral consequence because he acted before Qaddafi could act.

Obama got the job done.

He prevented the massacre of we don’t know how many thousands or hundreds of thousands of people.

A repetition of Rwanda, 1994, thwarted.

Maybe the decision-making process wasn’t pretty or confident or complete. We don’t care. We care about the results.

Maybe Obama will not get the rest of the job done well. Maybe his critics will be right about his leadership. Even if and even so, that will pale in comparison to his major move: to prevent an act of genocide.

Kudos, Mr. President.

Copyright © 2011 by the Intermountain Jewish News