Lybia

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Who ever declared early that the US activity would be supportive with all major
rolls completed over a few days must have been the funnie weed.

Which of Obama's statements is true. Gaddafi must go or we are there just to
help the people?

Clearly there's an agreement that France and the UK would pretty much take over once we secured the airspace. While the US has a strategic interest here, France especially has a long history with northern Africa and lasting interests.

As for Obama's statements, I thought they have been pretty clear on this. While the position of the Administration is that Ghaddafi should go, the legal resolution is only to protect the civilians and as such that is the direct mission.

They appear to be very mindful of the slippery slope and also the strategic situation.

Put yourself in Obama's shoes here and I think many would come to the same conclusion.

[striperman36]

Qaddafi will detonate a nuclear device in is country, before he gives it up.

An ancient oracle, actually, many have foreseen the next 12 months as the end of days.

Limits don't count this year.

[spence]

Originally Posted by striperman36

Qaddafi will detonate a nuclear device in is country, before he gives it up.

An ancient oracle, actually, many have foreseen the next 12 months as the end of days.

Limits don't count this year.

So what you're saying is that it has nothing to do with Obama???

-spence

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Clearly there's an agreement that France and the UK would pretty much take over once we secured the airspace. While the US has a strategic interest here, France especially has a long history with northern Africa and lasting interests.

So your feeling pretty good about the French being in charge of our brave men and women????

If I can see through the BS I'm sure we have not duped the Islamic radicals. That is the plan isn't it?????????

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

So your feeling pretty good about the French being in charge of our brave men and women????

Do you think US troops haven't ever participated in UN and NATO actions before?

If I can see through the BS I'm sure we have not duped the Islamic radicals. That is the plan isn't it?????????

Huh?

-spence

[buckman]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

AWe waited for a UN resolution before taking part in this. Quite frankly, I'm glad the US waited for a multi-national resolution as opposed to making the same mistake twice and jumping into a fight on it's own.

It was declared early that US activity would be supportive with all major roles completed over a few days. We aren't holding the reins in this mess and I'm glad for that.

Hmmmm sounds like Iraq!

[Raven]

not all weed is "funny"
there is a certain variety that is and it's referred to as "giggle grass"
OR, you might as well have polished off a large bottle of WINE
because you'll be so silly after wards...

Most weed is: read fast, introspective ,sound enhancement, semi chuckle.

[scottw]

heh...heh...

Politico
By JOHN BRESNAHAN & JONATHAN ALLEN | 3/19/11 4:27 PM EDT

A hard-core group of liberal House Democrats is questioning the constitutionality of U.S. missile strikes against Libya, with one lawmaker raising the prospect of impeachment during a Democratic Caucus conference call on Saturday.

Read more: Liberal Democrats in uproar over Libya action - John Bresnahan and Jonathan Allen - POLITICO.com

I wonder if they were "hard core" or just "mainstream centrists" when they questioned the previous pres.

[striperman36]

Gadahfi doesn't care about the people that live there. Never did never will. His family will nuke the place before we kill them all

And no it has nothing to do with Barry. He's in Rio, as far away from current events as possible.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by striperman36

Gadahfi doesn't care about the people that live there. Never did never will. His family will nuke the place before we kill them all

which is why I'm sure he's not above laying some bodies in front of a destroyed building with a big hand written sign that says "BABY MILK FACTORY" in english for media consumption...part of the routine in these situations...that was my point

The head of the Arab League Amr Moussa, has condemned the allied bombing outside of Benghazi, saying the action "differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone," and what he wants is "the protection of civilians and not the shelling of more civilians."

The Washington Post:


Moussa's declaration suggested some of the 22 Arab League members were taken aback by what they have seen and wanted to modify their approval lest they be perceived as accepting outright Western military intervention in Libya. Although the eccentric Gaddafi is widely looked down on in the Arab world, Middle Eastern leaders and their peoples traditionally have risen up in emotional protest at the first sign of Western intervention.
A shift away from the Arab League endorsement, even partial, would constitute an important setback to the U.S.-European campaign. Western leaders brandished the Arab League decision as a justification for their decision to move militarily and as a weapon in the debate to obtain a U.N. Security Council resolution two days before the bombing began.

[Raven]

because the international community all voted YES
to stop daffy

there is no such thing as zero civilian casualties in WAR

although our Present technologies keeps that to a minimum
it is still going to happen and is unfortunate.

DAFFY just like sadam insane coulda walked with big bucks
instead they wanna be dead....and have stuck around.

seeing their heads on a pike will be a GOOD horror

[spence]

Originally Posted by striperman36

Gadahfi doesn't care about the people that live there. Never did never will. His family will nuke the place before we kill them all

And I think that's exactly the concern...another Rwanda like slaughter.

-spence

[Bronko]

The only question being actively debated in and around the oval office is 'how do we hang this on the prior administration?'
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Bronko

The only question being actively debated in and around the oval office is 'how do we hang this on the prior administration?'
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Another huh?

-spence

[JohnnyD]

I'll be curious if this actually happens:
"In the coming days, U.S. officials said they plan to hand over operational control of the military mission. The coalition has nine other announced partners: Belgium, Britain, Canada, Denmark, France, Italy, Norway, Qatar and Spain.

"One of the things that was very much on (U.S. President Barack Obama's) mind is the importance of a meaningful coalition, meaning other countries making serious military contributions so the United States isn't carrying the preeminent responsibility for an indefinite period of time," Gates said."
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa...pt=T1&iref=BN1

The British, French and Italians are taking a major role in this effort. From reports, it seems that those three countries have been the major players of the aerial assault with the US providing support mostly with Tomahawk Missiles and the occasional Stealth Bomber.

I'm glad the US didn't jump into being the spearhead of this operation. Right now, the UN has the support of the Arab League. I highly doubt that would be the case if the US initiated the assault without full UN approval.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

"One of the things that was very much on (U.S. President Barack Obama's) mind is the importance of a meaningful coalition, meaning other countries making serious military contributions so the United States isn't carrying the preeminent responsibility for an indefinite period of time," Gates said."

Wishfull thinking on the part of the Administration.

Gut feeling tells me we will end up, as usual, picking up most
of the military action and expense.

[Raven]

as used in the term FisherCAT

because it has a tail + climbs trees
my what big teeth you have
-the better to eat you with....

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

The British, French and Italians are taking a major role in this effort. From reports, it seems that those three countries have been the major players of the aerial assault with the US providing support mostly with Tomahawk Missiles and the occasional Stealth Bomber.

I'm glad the US didn't jump into being the spearhead of this operation. Right now, the UN has the support of the Arab League. I highly doubt that would be the case if the US initiated the assault without full UN approval.

Hopefully all our involvement will be the part where we kick the door down; Command and control, Integrated Air Defenses, etc. Big difference in US capability versus the the other countries. I hope it works.

As for Arab League support, don't count on much, for long.

Originally Posted by justplugit

Wishfull thinking on the part of the Administration.

Gut feeling tells me we will end up, as usual, picking up most
of the military action and expense.

This is what I fear will happen.

Hopefully Col Q's military and Mercs flip on him. Of course at this stage of the game even if Q is gone and the rebels take over we'll have one of 3 things happen:

1) Rebels will go all fundamentalist anyway.

2) Rebels will fall under Iranian influence and follow the pattern somewhere along option one.

3) We might have some semblance of a modern democracy that remembers help from the west.

Don't expect the latter.

It dawned on me the other day when / where I do most of my philosophical thinking / reading, one great difference between the regions involved based on phrases is:

• Islam: the shout "Insh' Allah" If God Wills It.
• Christianity: "God helps those that help themselves"

No knocking, not going into great humor, but why did the (supposed) maturation of society / civilization seem to jump over large swaths of land between Morocco and western China?

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by JohnR

• Islam: the shout "Insh' Allah" If God Wills It.
• Christianity: "God helps those that help themselves"

No knocking, not going into great humor, but why did the (supposed) maturation of society / civilization seem to jump over large swaths of land between Morocco and western China?

My understanding of it was that Constantine became a Christian and it
spread under his influence in Rome and then Northward.
Why Northward? Maybe better communication, roads etc.
What always blows my mind is how quickly it spread through the
world by word of mouth as there was no formal communication
system, newspaper, radio or TV.

Just a guess on my part, but being there were so many different tribes with
their religious believes in the South, it wasn't fertile ground for conversion?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by JohnR

No knocking, not going into great humor, but why did the (supposed) maturation of society / civilization seem to jump over large swaths of land between Morocco and western China?

A good friend always jokes: "Those people in the Middle East should be like the Jetsons by now. They had thousands of years of a head start over the rest of the world. The problem is that their religion is screwed up and they can't keep killing each other in the name of Allah."

There's definitely some truth to it.

In business, I've always felt "if we aren't moving forward, we're moving backwards." The Middle East hasn't moved forward in the last few thousand years.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

2) Rebels will fall under Iranian influence and follow the pattern somewhere along option one.

Why do you believe a bunch of Sunni Arabs would fall under Iranian influence?

-spence

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Wishfull thinking on the part of the Administration.

Gut feeling tells me we will end up, as usual, picking up most
of the military action and expense.

Personally, I don't think so. Gates has been pretty consistent in stating every day that the major US role will be only a few days long and then we will be handing the reins over to the other countries. After the initial destruction of the Libyan SAM sites by B2 Bombers, it seems that most missions, including active enforcement of the No-Fly Zone, are being carried out by other countries. This, I like.

As I said before, it's yet to be seen.

[The Dad Fisherman]

When did it become a War?

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

When did it become a War?

Aside from war does anyone know what it's called except maybe a Police Action
by the Political Steering Committee?

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Aside from war does anyone know what it's called except maybe a Police Action
by the Political Steering Committee?

Generally speaking war is a legal term. Vietnam, Korea...not wars...yikes.

I wouldn't call this a "war"...yet...although I doubt (i.e. hope) it doesn't go there. Depends on how we don't react to Ghaddafi's provocations.

-spence

[PNG]

[spence]

Originally Posted by PNG

Context.

-spence

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by spence

Generally speaking war is a legal term. Vietnam, Korea...not wars...yikes.

I wouldn't call this a "war"...yet...although I doubt (i.e. hope) it doesn't go there. Depends on how we don't react to Ghaddafi's provocations.

-spence

I wonder if the pilot and the gunner of that plane that when down thought it was a war as they parachuted down into unknown territory?

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

I wonder if the pilot and the gunner of that plane that when down thought it was a war as they parachuted down into unknown territory?

Oh Jesus...

-spence

[buckman]

This is a war and if ever a war was about oil, this is it. It's not for us though. CHANGE MY A$$