UN Will Intervene In Libya

[Wedgebuster]

Without the ability to use air strikes or armor against the rebels, the pro-government forces are likely outnumbered, and bound to lose the initiative. They were getting their asses kicked before the armor and planes came out. Not likely Gaddafi has made more friends in his country in that time frame.

Gaddafi is likely to end up in a noose with UN air power keeping Libyan air forces grounded and having their armor columns being bombed.

[YoUDeeMan]

I agree that this is a no win situation for the USA. Let the UN impose their will without us for a change. It is too little, too late and not something we should have been involved in to begin with. I'm not sure what Obama thought was going to happen when he moved a ship and 400 marines off their coast in the first place. Either go in to win, which we can't or stay out, which we should.

Ghaddafi has ordered a halt to military operations.

At the risk of offending Cluck I'll withhold judgement on this until the dust settles.

Hey, as long as they institute a no fly zone over Bahrain, and bomb Saudi troops tht are oppressing the Bahraini people's will, it's all good.

[LeadBolt]

Ghaddafi has ordered a halt to military operations.

At the risk of offending Cluck I'll withhold judgement on this until the dust settles.

Hey, as long as they institute a no fly zone over Bahrain, and bomb Saudi troops tht are oppressing the Bahraini people's will, it's all good.

The Lybian situation appears to be internally driven, while the Bahrain situation appears to be driven by Iran. Mixing apples and oranges.

[CID1990]

What a joke.

What UN-affiliated military power is capable of enforcing a no-fly zone in Libya?

Here's a hint: there's only one.

All others will provide token assistance, like allowing us to tie up a ship or two in this port or that port. Maybe refuel a destroyer or two in Italy. Pakistan will provide 6 trucks.

you realize the french, british and italians have air forces, don't you?

the british have 1,100 planes
the french have around 900
the italians have 500
the egyptians have 884 (including 300 helicopters)

TTBF, this is not amateur hour. Of course I know those countries have air forces, a$$hole.
(Not to mention the fact that you conveniently left out the actual breakdown of aircraft types and capabilities in your post which was derived from a quick look at Google or Jane's).

Your comment shows that you know nothing about what it takes to maintain a "NO FLY ZONE". And, if you think for one second that those other countries are going to commit to a long-haul military operation (which this will certainly be), then you need to have your head seriously checked.

It means round-the-clock overhead patrols. The amount of aircraft a country possesses has absolutely no bearing on what kinds of operations they can sustain. Italy is the ONLY country that is within operational range of Libya to maintain full time combat air patrols as well as on-call strike capabilities without the use of naval air power. However, NATO aircraft flying from Italy will not have the requisite loiter time to provide on-call air strikes that will be the bulk of the mission (we can take out all the air defenses we want, but Qaddafi will still roll with the tanks and artillery). The UK is not in a position to provide much help because if you follow the news, you will know that the UK's ability to project power has been severely downgraded by the decomissioning of the bulk of their carrier force. They do not have a long range strategic bomber force anymore, and rely on theater-based attack aircraft. The only way to successfully do this without the ability to project naval air power (and we are the ONLY country that can effectively do that) is to keep the tankers in the air 24/7. It will be a major drain on personnel an equipment (50% of which is never in combat ready status... so you can cut your Google number in half from the start) not to mention money.

Egypt can well assist, but their capability at maintaining the type of 24 hour cover needed for this is severely limited. Plus, Egypt is NOT going to allow the UN (read: the US) to set up operations in Egypt at this point. Not going to happen. In fact, Egyptian involvement might well be what could crack this thing open for the Libyan rebels, but it would be through direct ground forces intervention by the Egyptians, not the use of their air forces. I will withhold judgment on whether or not that kind of intervention is in the cards from Egypt. I would assume that they would not exceed the UN mandate, which will not be for a ground op.

At the end of the day, this is going to be a US operation with just token assistance from those other countries. They'll fly a few sorties to claim participation and then your hero Barack Obama will strut out and talk about how THIS is the way to do this kind of thing; with international assistance and support. There will be no talk about how Libya did not attack us, Libya is not a threat to us, or how Al Qaeda is not in Libya.

One other thing: if we do this thing, we must kill Qaddafi. Under no circumstances can we attack Libya and leave him in power. The insurgent forces in Libya do not have the capability to take Tripoli, much less rounst Qaddafi. Do you think this new "Coalition of the Willing" will really be in for that kind of long haul? Nope, they won't. It will be the United States that carried the water for the rest of the world on this, so you just keep on thinking that the skies over Tripoli are going to be swarming with Eurofighters and Mirage IIIs.

I'll defer to you on matters of political organizing and campaigning, but you are in the deep end of the pool without water wings on this one, Bubba.

[YoUDeeMan]

Hey, as long as they institute a no fly zone over Bahrain, and bomb Saudi troops tht are oppressing the Bahraini people's will, it's all good.

The Lybian situation appears to be internally driven, while the Bahrain situation appears to be driven by Iran. Mixing apples and oranges.

The Vietcong were not interested in reclaiming their country from a Western imposed oppressive minority governemt. They were driven by the desire to topple Western civilization.

Look out, the Domino Effect is taking hold in the Middle East.




PS - you must have just watched the same show that my Liberal neighbor watched. Spin city...Iraq had WMDs (so did that guy who put the backpack out for MLK day) and Bahrain's oppressed minority is controlled by the evil world wreckers in Iran.



You must be f*cking kidding me.

[kalm]

you realize the french, british and italians have air forces, don't you?

the british have 1,100 planes
the french have around 900
the italians have 500
the egyptians have 884 (including 300 helicopters)

TTBF, this is not amateur hour. Of course I know those countries have air forces, a$$hole.
(Not to mention the fact that you conveniently left out the actual breakdown of aircraft types and capabilities in your post which was derived from a quick look at Google or Jane's).

Your comment shows that you know nothing about what it takes to maintain a "NO FLY ZONE". And, if you think for one second that those other countries are going to commit to a long-haul military operation (which this will certainly be), then you need to have your head seriously checked.

It means round-the-clock overhead patrols. The amount of aircraft a country possesses has absolutely no bearing on what kinds of operations they can sustain. Italy is the ONLY country that is within operational range of Libya to maintain full time combat air patrols as well as on-call strike capabilities without the use of naval air power. However, NATO aircraft flying from Italy will not have the requisite loiter time to provide on-call air strikes that will be the bulk of the mission (we can take out all the air defenses we want, but Qaddafi will still roll with the tanks and artillery). The UK is not in a position to provide much help because if you follow the news, you will know that the UK's ability to project power has been severely downgraded by the decomissioning of the bulk of their carrier force. They do not have a long range strategic bomber force anymore, and rely on theater-based attack aircraft. The only way to successfully do this without the ability to project naval air power (and we are the ONLY country that can effectively do that) is to keep the tankers in the air 24/7. It will be a major drain on personnel an equipment (50% of which is never in combat ready status... so you can cut your Google number in half from the start) not to mention money.

Egypt can well assist, but their capability at maintaining the type of 24 hour cover needed for this is severely limited. Plus, Egypt is NOT going to allow the UN (read: the US) to set up operations in Egypt at this point. Not going to happen. In fact, Egyptian involvement might well be what could crack this thing open for the Libyan rebels, but it would be through direct ground forces intervention by the Egyptians, not the use of their air forces. I will withhold judgment on whether or not that kind of intervention is in the cards from Egypt. I would assume that they would not exceed the UN mandate, which will not be for a ground op.

At the end of the day, this is going to be a US operation with just token assistance from those other countries. They'll fly a few sorties to claim participation and then your hero Barack Obama will strut out and talk about how THIS is the way to do this kind of thing; with international assistance and support. There will be no talk about how Libya did not attack us, Libya is not a threat to us, or how Al Qaeda is not in Libya.

One other thing: if we do this thing, we must kill Qaddafi. Under no circumstances can we attack Libya and leave him in power. The insurgent forces in Libya do not have the capability to take Tripoli, much less rounst Qaddafi. Do you think this new "Coalition of the Willing" will really be in for that kind of long haul? Nope, they won't. It will be the United States that carried the water for the rest of the world on this, so you just keep on thinking that the skies over Tripoli are going to be swarming with Eurofighters and Mirage IIIs.

I'll defer to you on matters of political organizing and campaigning, but you are in the deep end of the pool without water wings on this one, Bubba.

Msnbc is reporting that the French have already conducted airstrikes.

[Ivytalk]

I've seen lesbians with better 'staches than Qaddafi.

Turn in your balls, Moammar!

[TwinTownBisonFan]

I've seen lesbians with better 'staches than Qaddafi.

Turn in your balls, Moammar!

13 year old Puerto Rican boy stache...

[CID1990]

TTBF, this is not amateur hour. Of course I know those countries have air forces, a$$hole.
(Not to mention the fact that you conveniently left out the actual breakdown of aircraft types and capabilities in your post which was derived from a quick look at Google or Jane's).

Your comment shows that you know nothing about what it takes to maintain a "NO FLY ZONE". And, if you think for one second that those other countries are going to commit to a long-haul military operation (which this will certainly be), then you need to have your head seriously checked.

It means round-the-clock overhead patrols. The amount of aircraft a country possesses has absolutely no bearing on what kinds of operations they can sustain. Italy is the ONLY country that is within operational range of Libya to maintain full time combat air patrols as well as on-call strike capabilities without the use of naval air power. However, NATO aircraft flying from Italy will not have the requisite loiter time to provide on-call air strikes that will be the bulk of the mission (we can take out all the air defenses we want, but Qaddafi will still roll with the tanks and artillery). The UK is not in a position to provide much help because if you follow the news, you will know that the UK's ability to project power has been severely downgraded by the decomissioning of the bulk of their carrier force. They do not have a long range strategic bomber force anymore, and rely on theater-based attack aircraft. The only way to successfully do this without the ability to project naval air power (and we are the ONLY country that can effectively do that) is to keep the tankers in the air 24/7. It will be a major drain on personnel an equipment (50% of which is never in combat ready status... so you can cut your Google number in half from the start) not to mention money.

Egypt can well assist, but their capability at maintaining the type of 24 hour cover needed for this is severely limited. Plus, Egypt is NOT going to allow the UN (read: the US) to set up operations in Egypt at this point. Not going to happen. In fact, Egyptian involvement might well be what could crack this thing open for the Libyan rebels, but it would be through direct ground forces intervention by the Egyptians, not the use of their air forces. I will withhold judgment on whether or not that kind of intervention is in the cards from Egypt. I would assume that they would not exceed the UN mandate, which will not be for a ground op.

At the end of the day, this is going to be a US operation with just token assistance from those other countries. They'll fly a few sorties to claim participation and then your hero Barack Obama will strut out and talk about how THIS is the way to do this kind of thing; with international assistance and support. There will be no talk about how Libya did not attack us, Libya is not a threat to us, or how Al Qaeda is not in Libya.

One other thing: if we do this thing, we must kill Qaddafi. Under no circumstances can we attack Libya and leave him in power. The insurgent forces in Libya do not have the capability to take Tripoli, much less rounst Qaddafi. Do you think this new "Coalition of the Willing" will really be in for that kind of long haul? Nope, they won't. It will be the United States that carried the water for the rest of the world on this, so you just keep on thinking that the skies over Tripoli are going to be swarming with Eurofighters and Mirage IIIs.

I'll defer to you on matters of political organizing and campaigning, but you are in the deep end of the pool without water wings on this one, Bubba.

Msnbc is reporting that the French have already conducted airstrikes.

Good for them!

Did the military experts at MSNBC say how effective they were, or if the French are actually orbiting over Tripoli... prepared to deliver on call strikes as Qaddafi's forces?

This changes nothing. As I said before, this is going to be a primarily US operation with other UN forces giving token assistance.

You guys keep on watching MSNBC and be sure to buy your potassium iodide pills while you're at it.

[houndawg]

All that oil in play and here we sit with our troops bogged down in two quagmires......

[kalm]

Msnbc is reporting that the French have already conducted airstrikes.

Good for them!

Did the military experts at MSNBC say how effective they were, or if the French are actually orbiting over Tripoli... prepared to deliver on call strikes as Qaddafi's forces?

This changes nothing. As I said before, this is going to be a primarily US operation with other UN forces giving token assistance.

You guys keep on watching MSNBC and be sure to buy your potassium iodide pills while you're at it.

Jeeez your defensive. Is everything ok?

[CID1990]

Good for them!

Did the military experts at MSNBC say how effective they were, or if the French are actually orbiting over Tripoli... prepared to deliver on call strikes as Qaddafi's forces?

This changes nothing. As I said before, this is going to be a primarily US operation with other UN forces giving token assistance.

You guys keep on watching MSNBC and be sure to buy your potassium iodide pills while you're at it.

Jeeez your defensive. Is everything ok?

Nope, not defensive at all.

I do find it puzzling how you libtards can be so flippant about all this. I suppose it is because your boy is in the White House.

BY THE WAY- we have fired 112 Tomahawk missiles into Libya as of this writing. Has France flown 112 sorties? Have they spent multi millions of dollars on each sortie they HAVE flown? No, they haven't.

Italy is not a member of this 'coalition', so TTBF has yet to respond although I eagerly await the creative spin.

As I said before (and what nobody has cared or been able to address).... the US is carrying the water on this UN mission AS USUAL. All others are also rans at best. Quite frankly I am surprised the French even know how to drop bombs, much less in a precision manner.

How many French, British, Canadian (HAH HAH the Canucks are a part of this "coalition") or QATARI aircraft carriers are in the Med right now? Those are your coalition members.

[houndawg]

Libyan oil will pay for the whole thing.....

[kalm]

Jeeez your defensive. Is everything ok?

Nope, not defensive at all.

I do find it puzzling how you libtards can be so flippant about all this. I suppose it is because your boy is in the White House.

BY THE WAY- we have fired 112 Tomahawk missiles into Libya as of this writing. Has France flown 112 sorties? Have they spent multi millions of dollars on each sortie they HAVE flown? No, they haven't.

Italy is not a member of this 'coalition', so TTBF has yet to respond although I eagerly await the creative spin.

As I said before (and what nobody has cared or been able to address).... the US is carrying the water on this UN mission AS USUAL. All others are also rans at best. Quite frankly I am surprised the French even know how to drop bombs, much less in a precision manner.

How many French, British, Canadian (HAH HAH the Canucks are a part of this "coalition") or QATARI aircraft carriers are in the Med right now? Those are your coalition members.

Oh good, cause I really liked what you were saying minus the occasional Turrets-like spasms of msnbc, libtards, and iodine tablets, you were coughing up.

[kalm]

Nope, not defensive at all.

I do find it puzzling how you libtards can be so flippant about all this. I suppose it is because your boy is in the White House.

BY THE WAY- we have fired 112 Tomahawk missiles into Libya as of this writing. Has France flown 112 sorties? Have they spent multi millions of dollars on each sortie they HAVE flown? No, they haven't.

Italy is not a member of this 'coalition', so TTBF has yet to respond although I eagerly await the creative spin.

As I said before (and what nobody has cared or been able to address).... the US is carrying the water on this UN mission AS USUAL. All others are also rans at best. Quite frankly I am surprised the French even know how to drop bombs, much less in a precision manner.

How many French, British, Canadian (HAH HAH the Canucks are a part of this "coalition") or QATARI aircraft carriers are in the Med right now? Those are your coalition members.

Oh good, cause I really liked what you were saying minus the occasional Turrets-like spasms of msnbc, libtards, and iodine tablets, you were coughing up.

Update: Italy is now a member of the coalition. The Brits flew a 3000 mile round trip bombing mission. CNN is reporting that American and British ships and submarines fired 110 Tomahawk missiles. Obama has stated we will be directly involved for only a few days and then step back into more of a support role.

We"ll have to wait and see.

[native]

... this isn't being initiated by the US... it's being led by the arab world and the europeans...

[Chizzang]

The Liberal cognitive dissonance is alarming on this thread... Masked as sarcasm I guess

It makes NO sense to this Liberal why we would fire one missile in this situation
The Libyan peoples need to create their own revolution
If it's not fought and died for by themselves and for themselves in the early stages it'll turn into a disaster


Mark my words...

[kalm]

The Liberal cognitive dissonance is alarming on this thread... Masked as sarcasm I guess

It makes NO sense to this Liberal why we would fire one missile in this situation
The Libyan peoples need to create their own revolution
If it's not fought and died for by themselves and for themselves in the early stages it'll turn into a disaster


Mark my words...

I'm not saying I agree with any of this, but:

1) Oil - the rebels at one point controlled several key oil towns and pledged to work with the west
2) Ghaddafi was about to lay the hammer down and kill a bunch of people
3) Take out a few bad guys with a relatively minimal amount of air strikes and no ground forces, and Ghaddafi's army will crumble rather quickly.
4) Somebody is going to have to replace those Tomahawks

The fact that Britain, France, Italy, etc are on board suggests some legitimacy to some if not most of these.

Again, we shall see.

[OL FU]

It makes NO sense to this Liberal why we would fire one missile in this situation


Mark my words...

Count me as a Chizzang Liberal.










Of course I am a lot more liberal than most on the board would think.

[citdog]

It makes NO sense to this Liberal why we would fire one missile in this situation


Mark my words...

Count me as a SCALAWAG.

[kalm]

CID1990 could be right on this one:

None of this to say that the international political support for the Libya intervention is not significant. But NBC Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski today knocked down the talk that what is going on militarily is a "huge coalition effort." Here's what he said in a remarkable segment this morning:

"Despite the White House attempts to make this look like it's a huge coalition effort -- obviously it required coalition political support -- but for now the U.S. military is not only in the lead but conducting almost all military operations, with only minor participation from the French, as you mentioned, even British fighters over night. There's a U.S. commander. And even this morning I talked to senior military officials, when I asked them how soon will the U.S. turn over the command to the coalition -- and the indication is the U.S. military is in no hurry to do that."

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staffs, this morning delivered a very different message than Miklaszewski's reporting suggests. Mullen insisted in a Sunday show interview that while the U.S. is "leading it now, we're looking to hand off that leadership in the next few days." It will be interesting to see if that happens.

http://www.salon.com/news/libya/index.h ... _coalition" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[CID1990]

I have never been so sure about anything before.

NOW was a golden opportunity for Europre to criticize us for not being belligerent enough. (maybe prompt them to take stock of what has made their European social utopia so possible since the 1950s)

NOW was a golden opportunity to demonstrate to the world what a wet sock the UN is without the US carrying the pail. (They already know it)

Here's the rub: even an idiot knows that a no fly (or no drive) zone is not going to solve the problem. If we don't kill Qaddafi, he is going to win in the end. He will kill all the people he wants to and all we will have done is delayed it. The UN is never going to endorse a plan that includes killing Qaddafi, and nobody is going to act against Libya without the blessing of the UN. There's the Catch 22 that is going to have us (and when I say 'us' I mean "U.S.") spending a lot of time and money on a situation that has no real strategic value to us.

How long will we need to enforce this no-fly zone before people start to see that it was a stupid idea?

Oh and by the way... how many of those 3000 mile bombing missions do people think the Brits can sustain? It is window dressing. The White House is pushing hard for those kids of things so their apologists can point to the 'broad coalition'.

Where are all the people who scoffed at the "Coalition of the Willing", or Albania's contribution to Operation Iraqi Freedom? Come on out and try to spin this. TTBF where are you?

[Ivytalk]

It's all bogus unless Luxembourg commits ground troops.

[kalm]

It's all bogus unless Luxembourg commits ground troops.

[GannonFan]

I have never been so sure about anything before.

NOW was a golden opportunity for Europre to criticize us for not being belligerent enough. (maybe prompt them to take stock of what has made their European social utopia so possible since the 1950s)

NOW was a golden opportunity to demonstrate to the world what a wet sock the UN is without the US carrying the pail. (They already know it)

Here's the rub: even an idiot knows that a no fly (or no drive) zone is not going to solve the problem. If we don't kill Qaddafi, he is going to win in the end. He will kill all the people he wants to and all we will have done is delayed it. The UN is never going to endorse a plan that includes killing Qaddafi, and nobody is going to act against Libya without the blessing of the UN. There's the Catch 22 that is going to have us (and when I say 'us' I mean "U.S.") spending a lot of time and money on a situation that has no real strategic value to us.

How long will we need to enforce this no-fly zone before people start to see that it was a stupid idea?

Oh and by the way... how many of those 3000 mile bombing missions do people think the Brits can sustain? It is window dressing. The White House is pushing hard for those kids of things so their apologists can point to the 'broad coalition'.

Where are all the people who scoffed at the "Coalition of the Willing", or Albania's contribution to Operation Iraqi Freedom? Come on out and try to spin this. TTBF where are you?

I don't think I normally agree with a Citadel guy, but I agree with this post. Where's the end game if we don't kill Qaddafi? Are we just going to be enforcing a perpetual stalemate? Luckily, it won't be us doing the enforcing after we do all the work over the next few days and then move away and let others handle flying over a country with no planes and no AA, but how long will France and GB want to do this? I think we had to do something, but I think we should've done something sooner. Qadaffi is unlikely to be going anywhere now and all he's done is strengthen is hold on the part of the country he still has while letting things stalemate right now until Europe grows tired of paying attention.