TightWind is written by Kyle Baxter. Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.

The British and French were “completely puzzled” by what the U.S.’s position on Libya is:

Clinton stayed out of the fray, repeating the administration’s position that all options are on the table but not specifically endorsing any particular step. She also did not voice support for stronger action in the near term, such as a no-fly zone or military aid to the rebels, both diplomats said.

“The way the U.S. acted was to let the Germans and the Russians block everything, which announced for us an alignment with the Germans as far as we are concerned,” one of the diplomats told The Cable.

And:

On the same day, Clinton had a short meeting with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, in which Sarkozy pressed Clinton to come out more forcefully in favor of action in Libya. She declined Sarkozy’s request, according to a government source familiar with the meeting.

Sarkozy told Clinton that “we need action now” and she responded to him, “there are difficulties,” the source said, explaining that Clinton was referring to China and Russia’s opposition to intervention at the United Nations. Sarkozy replied that the United States should at least try to overcome the difficulties by leading a strong push at the U.N., but Clinton simply repeated, “There are difficulties.”

This happened on Monday. The U.S., of course, decided Tuesday night to support military action in Libya, but let’s remember what happened in the last week. Before this week, the rebels were largely on the offensive; they were gaining ground. But this week, Gaddafi counter-attacked and advanced all the way to the rebel’s makeshift capital in the east, Benghazi. So, our dithering on the issue gave Gaddafi the opportunity not only to shift momentum in his fight, but come to the brink of finishing off the opposition entirely.

While the British and French pushed everyone to support the rebels, our official position was not that we should give them our support and try to convince anyone who opposed action—our position was “there are difficulties.” While the people of Libya rose up against a regime willing to use the full power of its military to murder its people, our position—the United States of America, the first nation to rise up, throw off its oppressors and build a stable, democratic government based entirely on the right to freedom of the people—our position was there are difficulties.

If the Obama administration had decided that enforcing a no-fly zone risked full military intervention on our behalf, and that risk was just too great, I would respect that. I fear that, too. But that wasn’t their position. They had no position, either in supporting action or in staying out of the conflict. For weeks, the administration did nothing at all, apparently arguing amongst themselves about intervention.

That’s unacceptable. While for most issues fully debating it is a positive thing, some issues require a decision to be made quickly. This is one of those cases. And Obama seemed paralyzed with indecision.