(5 of 11)
Besides, there was a growing feeling that the Administration had exhausted every other alternative for taming Gaddafi. Said President Reagan, addressing a meeting of lawyers on Wednesday: "We tried quiet diplomacy. We tried public condemnation. We tried economic sanctions. And, yes, we tried a show of military might (the Sixth Fleet's skirmish in the Gulf of Sidra with Libyan patrol boats and missile batteries last month). But Gaddafi intensified his terrorist war, sending his agents around the world to murder and maim innocents."
The Administration's case drew vigorous agreement across almost the full spectrum of American political opinion. House Speaker Tip O'Neill, usually a leader of opposition to what his fellow Democrats see as an overly adventurous Reagan foreign policy, declared that "we just can't let this madman of terrorism (Gaddafi) keep threatening." Indeed, said O'Neill, if Libya continues to foment terrorism, "I think the American people would demand that we go in again." The New York Times and Washington Post, whose editorial writers are often skeptical about military action overseas, voiced approval of the raid. The most notable dissenter was former President Jimmy Carter, who predicted that the raid would make Gaddafi "a hero" in the Arab world and a worse menace than ever. But, Carter acknowledged, "mine is one of the lonely voices." It certainly seemed to be; polls indicated that the military strike against Libya was about as popular with the American public as any action Reagan has ever taken. An overwhelming 71% of 1,007 adults polled for TIME by Yankelovich/ Clancy, Shulman last week approved the strike, vs. only 20% who disapproved and 9% who were not sure. Some 60% went further to agree with the statement that the raids "made me feel proud to be an American."
Something more than jingoistic pride seemed to be involved in the public's attitude. Many respondents approved the strike despite a sober appreciation of the dangers involved. Three out of five declared themselves to be "afraid of what will happen in the future," and 48% agreed that "the bombing will only make the situation with Libya worse, not better." But the majority looked for eventual gains; 56% agreed that "in the long run, the bombing will help stop terrorist attacks on Americans."
The Reagan Administration's attitude toward an air strike had been years in the making. The President has been preoccupied with the problem of terrorism since his early days in office. Two events in Reagan's first year helped to fix his thoughts on Gaddafi as a symbol of virtually everything he hates. One was a Libyan attack on U.S. jets in the Gulf of Sidra that resulted in the shooting down of two of Gaddafi's Soviet-built Su-22 fighter planes. Later in 1981 U.S. intelligence picked up information that Libya was sending hit squads to the U.S. to assassinate Reagan and some of his close aides. No such attacks occurred, but the scare contributed to Reagan's revulsion toward the Libyan dictator, which has been fueled since by Gaddafi's long series of boasts, taunts and public threats against Americans and open encouragement of terrorism around the world.