Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
Moderator
Hmmm... now, 24 hours later, "everybody" is looking for US troops on the ground... and so far are not finding them. (it is now generally acknowledged that both the UK and France have SF on the ground, though this not proven by MSM reports)Originally Posted by Speakeasy
Because:
1. Gadhafi is too dangerous to leave in place... especially dangerous to Europe. France and Great Britain have been particularly strident in this view.
2. The whole world, including apparently Obama, thought that this would be all over in a matter of days if not hours.
3. It is generally understood now that the rebels cannot 'win' ie: 'take out' Gadhafi without help. (Because he won't go on his own...)
4. We are clearly providing close support tactical air attacks and as I detailed in an earlier post, this is best when guided from the ground. Also as someone else mentioned: yes I'm sure we have UAVs, satellites, and all that fun stuff to use for target acquisition... but we're not about to hand the ground receivers over to the rebels. The US has spent 20 years to develop and the last 10 perfecting the 'integrated battlespace' This is not something that you can just hand over to the first guy with a RPG that comes along.
5. We have moved (somebody has moved) a Marine MEU (the 26th keeps popping up... but still) into the western Med. These troops could well be tasked with command and control with rebel units, and/or establishing a sea supported logistical base. In the end this war like so many others may ultimately be decided by logistics.
6. Either that, or we have the wrong units / equipment there. And there is a strong case to be made for that since Obama doesn't seem to want much to do with all this.
This 'thing' needs to end with one bullet going into one guy's head, and everyone else can then go on home. The questions remain: who can fire that bullet, who has the will to fire it?
Citizen
Its seems pretty reasonable that we would have some american military physically on the ground, doing rescues or intelligence. I dont think thats what Obama meant, and its overreacting to claim such troops would be a ground invasion. Ill give him the benefit of nuance here. Heck, we already had two pilots on the ground.
Moderator
Based on the errors of the original report in the OP, and given the events up to today... I agree. However, that leaves all those other issues I raised in my post above hanging. And that exposes Obama to a possible 'failure' in Libya.
As I said over last weekend... there are 99 ways this could blow up in Obama's face for every one way he'll come out of this looking good.
He said there would be no ground troops.
You're so fucking liberal you won't even be able to admit that he lied if he sends troops in.
And, I'll tell you this: If we do send troops in, that decision's already been made. He just hasn't told you yet...
No, because your conjectures are stupid. Mine is quite possible...
If you're truly an honest person, please turn in your Lib membership Card. Libs have no use for you and your honesty...But hey, I voted for him. If he sends ground troops, I will go on record and say he lied about it. Not that it would mean much to ya. I may be a Liberal, but I am an honest Liberal. I am still looking for an honest Con. Allen Cranston is the last one I ever listened to. But he is out of office.
I absolutely believe we will see Americans on the ground...For the record, I think Obama will keep his word on the ground troops, but it ain't over so...
U.S. House Representative
How are there not going to be troops in Libya? Is it just going to be bombing targets, and how on earth would that work? What exactly is the point of not sending people in if you're - allegedly - trying to prevent a massacre? Is there any point to being in Libya at all? As opposed to the other Arab hotspots? (And yes, I opposed Iraq and Afghanistan, as well.) Does anyone actually know the specifics?
The most shortlived alliance in human history | Brendan O’Neill | spiked
They have kickstarted a war without a war aim, a military mission with no clear mission, an international game where no one knows what the endgame will be. Is this a war to kill Gaddafi? British ministers think it might be, but British military officials say it shouldn’t be. What does France want? The ousting of Gaddafi, says Sarkozy - or perhaps just a boost to the confidence of the anti-Gaddafi rebels, say Sarkozy’s political colleagues. With no sense of alarm or surrealism, a Guardian editorial says: ‘The longer the bombing campaign goes on, the sooner the real issue will have to be confronted: where is it leading?’
The kind of thing normally worked out prior to the hurling of bombs into the territory of a sovereign state - the question of where it should lead, what the bombing is designed to achieve, what Plan A is - is being worked out after the fact in relation to Libya, through newspaper editorials and public spats between Western nations and between government and military officials within nations.
It is the height of recklessness, a kind of blasé barbarism, to start a war without knowing what the war is for.
Moderator
And the polling...
Americans Approve of Military Action Against Libya, 47% to 37%The 47% of Americans approving of the action against Libya is lower than what Gallup has found when asking about approval of other U.S. military campaigns in the past four decades.
Citizen
No one said it made sense.
Secretary of Defense
And the ones making sense on this thread is the liberals and most certainly not the righties, as they keep flip-flopping and trying to cover their ass. Just like one of the righties supreme commanders Grinrich.
AP News: SPIN METER: Gingrich reverses stand on Libya
WASHINGTON (AP) - Likely Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has met his first debate opponent of the 2012 campaign season: himself.
The former House speaker was quick to criticize President Barack Obama two weeks ago for not being more forceful in leading an international campaign to destroy Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's air defenses and save rebels from impending defeat. Gingrich said the United States should tell Gadhafi "that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we're intervening."
On Wednesday, he did an about-face.
fiscal conservative, Constitutional Neo-liberal democrat
"I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat," Noted humorist Will Rogers
http://politicalcorner.org/index.php
http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm
U.S. House Representative
Show your sources, or at least go into some detail about what you mean. Come on, let's see it.
See above. How am I, for instance, flip flopping? I was agin' Iraq, agin' Afghanistan. I'm agin' Libya and see no point to it.and most certainly not the righties, as they keep flip-flopping and trying to cover their ass.
You do realise the "man" is tolerated by righties at best. He's certainly not one of our "Supreme Commanders". Even people praising him have to point out that he's undisciplined and has the morals of a brain damaged dog. I think he's scum, myself.Just like one of the righties supreme commanders Grinrich.
Administrator
Gingrich definitely damaged himself on this one with rank smelling flip-flopping of convenience, e.g.,
YouTube - Newt Gingrich Libya Flip Flop
He gets very low marks on credibility even with many Republicans who see him as a shallow opportunist and liability, and this very well may do the GOP a favour insofar as helping him lose the GOP primary if he runs given he likely has no shot to win a general election.
For 5 little cents per day, you can view the forums w/o advertising, search the forums endlessly, feel good about keeping this place up and running, among the other benefits that are offered to contributing members.
U.S. House Representative
Did Gingrich ever have a chance of winning it? From what I've seen, the (1) opportunism and flip flops, (2) the adultery, (3) the sheer embarassment of him being on that side and (4) the assumption that Catholics and Evangelicals are stupid enough to just believe that "god has forgiven me" and therefore no one can criticise him...
The "I only cheated because I love my country so much" talk (no, really, he said that) didn't exactly help him either:
http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.co...-to-fault.html
I've seen the more conservative/Republican Americans I know shit razorblades at the mention of his name.
Administrator
IMO, he'd have trouble winning if Obama ate his dog on the White House lawn. Would the GOP base rally around him with nose grabbing if he was nominated? The confirmed party loyalists/straight ticket voters would, but beyond that, the stage would be set for a landslide IMO given general race dynamics and as applied to how he's viewed in it given his track record. To avoid that, it seems clear by all polling of Republicans that Gingrich has a very small portion of support within the GOP if he's a primary contestant and it would be in the primary where the bulk would do their best to see him out the exit door.
For 5 little cents per day, you can view the forums w/o advertising, search the forums endlessly, feel good about keeping this place up and running, among the other benefits that are offered to contributing members.
Moderator
That has to be one of the worse efforts at deflection I've ever seen... here or anywhere.
Hand it to Obama though after 2 1/2 years he has brought this nation together and now for the first time, men and women, young and old, left, right and center, stand together with common purpose and with one voice say:
What the fuck is Obama trying to do in Libya!?!
Want to answer that ConLib? Or are you going to spend all your time trying to get us to forget about it? Won't work BTW...
Administrator
The rebels don't want ground troops. They have said that in the past and are repeating that even now. They just wanted the air cover to prevent their collapse followed by a butchering. They also want weapons to do the job themselves on the ground given it's their fight and wish it to be their victory on the ground. That certainly works for me given they should be the ones who earn their freedom on the ground as they will be its primary beneficiaries, and it's certainly seeming like a point of agreement with the UN mission participants given they don't wish to be bogged down in a ground war at cost of lives and resources, etc.
Libyan rebels plead -- send us guns | Agricultural Commodities | ReutersLibyan rebels plead -- send us guns
Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:30pm
By Angus MacSwan
BENGHAZI, Libya, March 24 (Reuters) - Libyan rebels desperately need arms and ammunition from foreign countries -- especially weapons to knock out tanks -- to bolster their struggle against Muammar Gaddafi, a rebel military spokesman said on Thursday.
But they do not want foreign advisers or troops to intervene on their behalf, said Colonel Ahmed Bani, an air force officer who has joined the rebels based in the eastern city of Benghazi.
"We need arms and ammunition. This is our only problem," he said in a briefing. "Our friends are trying to support us. I hope soon we will have success and we will have all the weapons we need to liberate Libya."
Top of the list was anti-tank weapons to halt the heavy armour that has spearheaded the government attacks against rebel forces in eastern Libya and towns in the west. Communications equipment was also badly needed, he said.
A number of countries had promised material aid, he said, but he declined to name any of them.
"Everyone who loves freedom would love to help us. It is an endless chain of names," he said.
The rebel army, made up largely of young, untrained volunteers, was pushed back to Benghazi by Gaddafi's forces at the weekend but the city was rescued when foreign warplanes struck them for the first time.
Allied planes have since pounded targets across Libya, severely damaging Gaddafi's defences, but the rebels are stuck on a frontline at Ajdabiyah in the east while in the west the government is besieging Misrata and other towns.
Foreign governments are debating what kind of further support, if any, they should offer. But Bani, echoing other rebel officials, ruled out accepting any advisers or trainers to whip the disorganised fighters into shape.
"Our culture does not accept foreign troops on our soil. The only foreign expert we have is Google Earth," he said.
. . .
For 5 little cents per day, you can view the forums w/o advertising, search the forums endlessly, feel good about keeping this place up and running, among the other benefits that are offered to contributing members.
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks