The attacks start on Lybia

[OldSchoolGamer]

We tried that a couple times.. the first time Germany offered Mexico a chunk of our territory (The Zimmer telegram) if we started coming into the war upon resumption of unrestricted sub warfare (world war 1) and the second time we tried to stay neutral Japan attacked us and four days later Germany and Italy declared war on the US.

Not to hijack the thread...or to pick nits...but we weren't exactly "neutral" in the time leading up to WWII.  On paper, yes...in practice, we were busy disrupting fuel shipments to the Japanese Empire and helping arm Britain.

Not that I would have done anything differently had I been in charge (well, except for assigning a higher likelihood to a Japanese sneak attack in the Pacific).  Japan and Germany were clearly imperial powers with conquest on their mind, and American entry into WWII one way or another was preordained.  Just sayin'...

[Silk]

There is a bit of a joke going around at the moment where I live (Nothing to do with me though, but relevant to what people are saying) about how this is considered one of the more legal wars in a long while and America is getting cold feet, just as a statement of irony.

[Callie Del Noire]

There is a bit of a joke going around at the moment where I live (Nothing to do with me though, but relevant to what people are saying) about how this is considered one of the more legal wars in a long while and America is getting cold feet, just as a statement of irony.

Truth be told.. we dont' have the assets.

Thanks to 'right sizing' without changing our rules of battle, we've simply don't have the manpower to do '2 1/2' wars. Not the ships, planes, tanks, trucks, boats or anything else. The only reason we were able to do Iraq and Afghanistan as long as we have is their geographic closeness.  A lot of folks don't realize the training, maintenance and downtime cycles that are needed to keep our forces sharp. We've ignored a LOT of them in the last 10 years, particularly in the Marines and Army.

As usual in the downsizing, the grunts lose a LOT more than the leadership. When I first joined in 1994, the blueshirts in the Navy had been downsized for at least 4 years and the problem was the Chiefs and Officers were still over what they needed for the downsized Navy. Similar problems in the other branches.

[Zakharra]

  Can't we provide the logistics and tactical support and let the Brits, French and other allies do the boots on the ground fighting?

[Callie Del Noire]

  Can't we provide the logistics and tactical support and let the Brits, French and other allies do the boots on the ground fighting?

I think we are. I'm willing to bet the base in Sicily is the one that we co-run with the Italians. I am willing to bet that we are running Electronic Warfare and Surveillance for sure. I'm betting by now between the US, English, France, Italy and the Dutch there isn't much in the northern section over the size of a duck that is flying that isn't immediately tagged and classified.

[sesshomaruartist]

But even though Obama continues to state that it's not American's war, there seems to be a belief that if and when America pulls out that other countries would falter. Britain too has quite a contingent in Iraq and Afganistan, this war won't be doing them any favors economically. As for France I doubt any country would do this with so few allies and Italy has already shown mixed feelings for this operation. I hope I'm wrong though.

[OldSchoolGamer]

I think the hope is that the rebels will become better organized and equipped, and able to carry the load themselves within a few weeks.

[sesshomaruartist]

They need also some kind of leadership too, they seem to push one step closer to tripoli and get attacked stagger two steps behind. Perhaps some military training since majority of them are ordinary citizens. I seriously doubt they can do any damage to Gaddafi even if they reached Tripoli.

[Oniya]

They need also some kind of leadership too, they seem to push one step closer to tripoli and get attacked stagger two steps behind. Perhaps some military training since majority of them are ordinary citizens. I seriously doubt they can do any damage to Gaddafi even if they reached Tripoli.

This has been a problem with other 'police actions' that the US has gotten involved in.  Leadership training is going to be essential for the area to become stable if Qaddafi is ousted.

[Callie Del Noire]

But even though Obama continues to state that it's not American's war, there seems to be a belief that if and when America pulls out that other countries would falter. Britain too has quite a contingent in Iraq and Afganistan, this war won't be doing them any favors economically. As for France I doubt any country would do this with so few allies and Italy has already shown mixed feelings for this operation. I hope I'm wrong though.

First off, I think the French would have a greater investment in this region that most of the others. Geographically it seems to me the French and Italians (and Spanish for that matter) would want whoever comes out of this as friendly and stable as possible. We ALL definitely don't want a hostile Islamic state ala Iran in the region. Libya has quite a bit going for it, and with the right forces being supported I'd say it would be able to recover fast.

I think the countries neighbors would do well to help out. And it would definitely be a step up from the man who sponsored bombings all over Europe. He might have been quiet for the last 10 years or so but don't forget almost every country in Western Europe has him to thank for bodies and radical terrorist groups getting training.

Long view wise.. it would be a sound move to replace him with a balanced moderate government. If everyone stands aside..you can promise the country to more radical groups.

I wish the folks making the decisions in the area the best of luck convincing the Nay Sayers that it is their (and our) interests to do this rather than hide.

[sesshomaruartist]

First off, I think the French would have a greater investment in this region that most of the others. Geographically it seems to me the French and Italians (and Spanish for that matter) would want whoever comes out of this as friendly and stable as possible. We ALL definitely don't want a hostile Islamic state ala Iran in the region. Libya has quite a bit going for it, and with the right forces being supported I'd say it would be able to recover fast.

I think the countries neighbors would do well to help out. And it would definitely be a step up from the man who sponsored bombings all over Europe. He might have been quiet for the last 10 years or so but don't forget almost every country in Western Europe has him to thank for bodies and radical terrorist groups getting training.

Long view wise.. it would be a sound move to replace him with a balanced moderate government. If everyone stands aside..you can promise the country to more radical groups.

I wish the folks making the decisions in the area the best of luck convincing the Nay Sayers that it is their (and our) interests to do this rather than hide.

I did not state that no one should do anything, but even if they did, in the end Libya might become another Iraq since even now the Arab League are stating that the attacks are not what they wanted, even though they don't have the balls to do anything to help the libyan people, the truth is cause most Arab goverments are Unser regimes and so they do not want to influence their own people to uprise against them. Plus we all know how the western especially American image is among the Arabic world in general so they would be mixed reactions once ground forces are deployed whether they are Americans or not as they see them linked with Israel.   

[consortium11]

First off, I think the French would have a greater investment in this region that most of the others. Geographically it seems to me the French and Italians (and Spanish for that matter) would want whoever comes out of this as friendly and stable as possible. We ALL definitely don't want a hostile Islamic state ala Iran in the region. Libya has quite a bit going for it, and with the right forces being supported I'd say it would be able to recover fast.

I think the countries neighbors would do well to help out. And it would definitely be a step up from the man who sponsored bombings all over Europe. He might have been quiet for the last 10 years or so but don't forget almost every country in Western Europe has him to thank for bodies and radical terrorist groups getting training.

Long view wise.. it would be a sound move to replace him with a balanced moderate government. If everyone stands aside..you can promise the country to more radical groups.

I wish the folks making the decisions in the area the best of luck convincing the Nay Sayers that it is their (and our) interests to do this rather than hide.

Just on the French point it's worth noting that this is far from the first time they've been involved in Libya. One of the main reasons the Chad/Libya conflicts ended so badly for Libya was when the French finally kicked into action. They've long taken the lead on dealing with Libya in the Western World until the promises of oil and an end to terrorism/WMD development brought the détente that's lasted until this current conflict.

[Callie Del Noire]

Just on the French point it's worth noting that this is far from the first time they've been involved in Libya. One of the main reasons the Chad/Libya conflicts ended so badly for Libya was when the French finally kicked into action. They've long taken the lead on dealing with Libya in the Western World until the promises of oil and an end to terrorism/WMD development brought the détente that's lasted until this current conflict.

I'm hoping that the lesson from that event will push them to work earlier and help install moderate allies into place. They, in my opinion, have a better chance being a moderating influence than the US. They have a recent history of wishing to NOT overly interfere than the US, hence my opinion that they would do more good with less concern of long term involvement than the US.

Not to mention, like I have mentioned before, it's their 'neighborhood' and in their own interest.

That lack of recent aggressive moves will be a better platform to work from.

[Noelle]

It would do the French a world of good to make peace with the Maghreb world, in general. They have undergone/are undergoing a similar "Islamification" fear as they struggle to integrate a large Muslim population into their society, which is already highly secular to begin with.

What surprises me about Sarkozy is his recent...passion, you could say, to go in and help Libyans, especially given his own particularly questionable actions towards their population/related populations in his own country, though the point has already been brought up that it's in his best interest to have a stable North Africa to help stymie the immigration into France. I wonder, though, how Libyan immigrants stack up to those from, say, Algeria or Tunisia, especially given that French is second to Arabic in both countries. Either way, it's nice to see countries beside the US step up to the plate, especially given the constant bad-mouthing France endures for declining the Iraq war, among other things.

[MagicalPen]

UN involvement is more directed at leveling the playing field (the rebels were on the verge of success before Ghad. started using tanks, artillery, and planes indiscriminately. Very hard to find protection in the open desert from such things when you have no means of countering them. Of course, had the politicians gotten their act together, the Rebels wouldn't have been on the verge of defeat a few days ago and the dictator might well be disposed of by now.

I am glad we did finally take action, but it could have been done sooner. I don't support the use of troops on the ground in the country at all, but neutralizing the 'power weapons' that were being used to neutralize rebels and civilians alike. It will be interesting to see what the final death toll will turn out to be.

On the same hand, I worry about who will fill the power vacuum...much like the situation in Egypt.

[Callie Del Noire]

UN involvement is more directed at leveling the playing field (the rebels were on the verge of success before Ghad. started using tanks, artillery, and planes indiscriminately. Very hard to find protection in the open desert from such things when you have no means of countering them. Of course, had the politicians gotten their act together, the Rebels wouldn't have been on the verge of defeat a few days ago and the dictator might well be disposed of by now.

I am glad we did finally take action, but it could have been done sooner. I don't support the use of troops on the ground in the country at all, but neutralizing the 'power weapons' that were being used to neutralize rebels and civilians alike. It will be interesting to see what the final death toll will turn out to be.

On the same hand, I worry about who will fill the power vacuum...much like the situation in Egypt.

I'm sure a LOT of folks in that corner of the world are worried about what comes out of the change of power in those countries. Syria, Lebanon, Turkey are first in line BEHIND Israel.

Most of the successful secular governments in the Islamic world are in the Med. To have TWO fold in such a short time has to be a serous concern to anyone with two cents worth of common sense to rub together.

[consortium11]

I'm sure a LOT of folks in that corner of the world are worried about what comes out of the change of power in those countries. Syria, Lebanon, Turkey are first in line BEHIND Israel.

Most of the successful secular governments in the Islamic world are in the Med. To have TWO fold in such a short time has to be a serous concern to anyone with two cents worth of common sense to rub together.

Egypts the big one. As tragically as the others could turn out (and they could end successfully) in the short term they're essentially internal conflicts. Long term if things go as badly as they could then there's the potential for either turning into an open sore like Somalia or a friendly nation for fundamentalists but their short term impact is limited. In Egypt on the other hand the Muslim Brotherhood is the only one of the opposition groups that is effectively organised... and if they do get into power then the current situation in Isreal/Palastine (volatile right now as it is) could blow up in an instant. If the Brotherhood feel secure they'll happily rip up all treaties and restart the war with Israel, whatever their proclamations at the moment.

In truth the only countries worse for the world in general if they fell into completel anarchy or hostile fundamentalism became the rulers of the ones currently at threat are Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

[RubySlippers]

We have UN authorization for a NO FLY ZONE and I support that but what is the US doing firing on other targets than SAM systems and armed aircraft, any other sorties are outside of the UN authorization as far as I can tell.

Did we vote to include all additional measures as deemed necessary to supress one side over the other?

If its not we are going beyond the authorization we voted on and we should scale back operations to within those limits.

[Silk]

I beleive the remit for intervention is the dismantlement of all heavy armaments that are a risk to the civilian population. Such as artilery and tanks are included if used within civilian locales

[RubySlippers]

Oh then bomb away as long as its in the resolution and its only our air power used.

[MagicalPen]

Might want to read up on the news in regards to that. The French and British seem to be taking a good deal of the sorties in Libya at this point. The US is also the biggest military force, so has to take on the lion shares of the task. The reason those other targets are being hit is because those targets themselves are not targeting Rebel Military Assets, but indiscriminately firing on the Civilian population. Despite repeated calls to stop doing such things, pro-Dictator forces continue to do so - the only way to stop them is neutralize them. I have no problem with the combined forces targeting targets of opportunity like that.

[Callie Del Noire]

There have been many reports of Pro-government force snipers shooting civilians. From spots reinforced with tanks and such. Seems to me if you're going to deviate from the conditions the folks watching from the high ground ask you not to do.. you shouldn't be surprise when they drop a rock on you.

A lot of the folks he supported back during the Serbian conflicts have been signed on as mercs, as well as even less civilized mercs from the southern portion of Africa (remember he had no problem dealing with the folks in Angola). A lot of both groups had zero computations about shooting anything that didn't pay them.

[Will]

I've actually heard conflicting reports on who these mercenaries are, and whether they're mercenaries at all.  Especially the ones from southern Africa.  I've heard on NPR that many of the so-called mercenaries are actually just migrant workers?  And the native Libyan population just jumped to the conclusion of them being hired guns based on local prejudices.

So, I dunno.  I think it would probably be best to source any information about mercenaries being used against civilians, or any sort of move against civilians at all.  Lots of civilians have willingly taken up arms to fight, and at that point, I have to say they cease being civilians.  Whether this is because they wanted to go and overthrow the regime, or because they thought they were going to be attacked one way or another, I don't know, but I don't pretend to know, either.

[consortium11]

I've actually heard conflicting reports on who these mercenaries are, and whether they're mercenaries at all.  Especially the ones from southern Africa.  I've heard on NPR that many of the so-called mercenaries are actually just migrant workers?  And the native Libyan population just jumped to the conclusion of them being hired guns based on local prejudices.

So, I dunno.  I think it would probably be best to source any information about mercenaries being used against civilians, or any sort of move against civilians at all.  Lots of civilians have willingly taken up arms to fight, and at that point, I have to say they cease being civilians.  Whether this is because they wanted to go and overthrow the regime, or because they thought they were going to be attacked one way or another, I don't know, but I don't pretend to know, either.

I mentioned this earlier. There's two points to be made here...

1) It's almost certain that Gaddafi is using mercenaries... or at least non-Libyan fighters even if not technically mercenaries. He's long built and relied upon a "Pan-African Legion" and a "Pan African Islamic Legion" in conflicts in the past and he'll of course use them against civilians.

2) Despite that the sheer quantity of attacks by "Mercenaries" should be taken with a pinch of salt. When this conflict first broke out if you went by local reports it was as if an invasion had occured... no Libyans would shoot other Libyans it was always "Southern African mercenaries". There's a lot of ethnic and tribal tension in the area going back to when the Arab majority used an African minority as slaves and much of that's played through the way this conflicts been reported on the ground there. It's very easy for a privileged majority to blame all their ills on an under-privileged minority... and while some problems may come from them it's virtually never that one-sided.

What I wouldn't dismiss are the attacks on civilians as a whole. Gaddafi's regime has never shown any reluctance to attack anyone who opposes them, armed or not.

[Will]

I'm not trying to dismiss them; I'm just saying a source would be better when talking about a specific instance.  It appears that there's a lot of misinformation coming out of this situation.