Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NATO Discusses Ground Operation, Libya Promises Hell
RussiaToday ^ | May 4, 2011

Posted on 05/07/2011 9:29:44 AM PDT by Fennie

The aerial bombardment of Libya has reached a dead end, which has intensified talk among NATO members about a possible land operation, a move that threatens to escalate massively the violence that already exists there.

The alliance's spokesman has admitted there is still little sign of progress for either side in the conflict, so there is a need for a new UN resolution to approve sending foreign troops in. In the meantime, civilian casualties from allied bombing continue to mount as fresh NATO air strikes have been heard in the Libyan capital overnight.

At a video conference with Russian students, a NATO spokesman revealed his organization's proposed solution: send in ground troops.

"The UN Security Council should adopt a new resolution on Libya. Resolution 1973 does not envisage land operations. We need a new resolution," professed James Appathurai.

(Excerpt) Read more at rt.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gaddafi; illegalwar; libya; nato; obama; oup; protectcivilians; protectingcivilians; quagmire; warcrime; wrongcic; wrongwar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last

1 posted on 05/07/2011 9:29:47 AM PDT by Fennie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Fennie

When we went to war for real against Iraq, we took 6 months and amassed over 200,000 troops and support.

If NATO tries to simply send a few bridages in to help the rebels they will be destroyed by Libya. Libya has actually been going easy on the rebels because the rebels are using civilians as human shields. If NATO tries to join the rebels, and does so within their cities, that would be a war crime, and if they take up locations outside the cities, they will be destroyed.

Unless NATO starts with a massive carpet-bombing effort, which will kill thousands of civilians.


2 posted on 05/07/2011 9:33:17 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; Delacon; ...

Thanks Fennie.
The aerial bombardment of Libya has reached a dead end
That has a tendency to happen when one bombs the wrong side too many times.


3 posted on 05/07/2011 9:39:33 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Thanks Cincinna for this link -- http://www.friendsofitamar.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Fennie

The Europeans have really dug themselves a deep hole.


4 posted on 05/07/2011 9:40:15 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fennie

Uh.....

The mission here is what exactly?

And how is this any different than what is happening in Syria, Yemen, and Zimbabwe?


5 posted on 05/07/2011 9:41:32 AM PDT by VanDeKoik (1 million in stimulus dollars paid for this tagline!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fennie
NATO's reason for existence is to help any member state that is attacked. The idea is that an attack on a member state would be met by the combined military might of all the states.

Which NATO signatory was attacked by Serbia in the Balkans war?

Answer: None, but NATO attacked Serbia anyway.

Which NATO signatory was attacked on 9/11 and what was NATO's response?

Answer: The US was undeniably attacked on 9/11 by Afghanistan. There was some immediate military aid from the UK, Germany, and Canada. After the taliban government was unseated, American, Canadian and UK ground troops and special forces took up the fight in Afghanistan. Some other NATO nations sent token forces to the theater.

Which NATO signatory was recently attacked by Libya and what was NATO's response?

Answer: No NATO signatory was attacked, although an argument could be made that the US and Libya have been conducting a low level conflict since the 1980's. The largest "battle" was the destruction of a US flagged aircraft over Lockerbie. This was certainly an act of war. NATO finally responded years later with the US sending token forces.

Could someone explain to me what kind of alliance this is?

6 posted on 05/07/2011 9:43:28 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (Slugs and Bitter Clingers Unite.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fennie

NATO would be well served to keep ground troops out of Libya.

They need to do a better job of identifying the enemy before their airstrikes.


7 posted on 05/07/2011 9:50:07 AM PDT by G Larry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fennie

Let me be the first on this thread ...

“It’s a quagmire! Get our troops out of the area immediately!!!!!”


8 posted on 05/07/2011 9:50:57 AM PDT by CapnJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

You are correct, the tribes would then go to war, but the real question is what in the hell are we doing there illegally. The country mass killing its people is a good ways east. But then there is no oil there.


9 posted on 05/07/2011 9:51:12 AM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Former Proud Canadian
Since president bush signed an agreement with daffy and daffy paid restution and actually aided in the hunt for AQ and had al diplomatic relations restored, do not think the Lockerbie argument would fly.

War with NATO over Libya is illegal.

10 posted on 05/07/2011 9:56:40 AM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Fennie

“NATO discusses ground operation”

Let me translate that. NATO discusses sending in the American ground forces.


11 posted on 05/07/2011 9:56:50 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fennie

WHY LIBYA


12 posted on 05/07/2011 9:59:01 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Thats right, Daffy played ball with USA and Obama bombed him anyway. Just like the rest of our Allies.

Also, Nato was a cold war defensive organization it has no business invading North Africa.


13 posted on 05/07/2011 10:01:03 AM PDT by omega4179 (Thank you G W Bush for Guantanamo intel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Fennie

Nothing here that some cheap oil and a couple of suitcases full of $100 bills delivered to the democrat headquarters couldn’t solve.


14 posted on 05/07/2011 10:03:06 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

And Obama’s encouraging them.


15 posted on 05/07/2011 10:24:40 AM PDT by yup2394871293
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: yup2394871293

Libya is art of the plan for the NWO Arab Zone. They will do whatever they have to for the Muslim Brotherhood to run it.


16 posted on 05/07/2011 10:26:22 AM PDT by screaminsunshine (Shut up and eat your Beans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Fennie

NATO Discusses Ground Operation, Libya Promises Hell

Sadam H. said the same thing.


17 posted on 05/07/2011 10:27:07 AM PDT by chainsaw ("The government cannot give to anyone anything that it does not first take from someone else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Former Proud Canadian

“...The US was undeniably attacked on 9/11 by Afghanistan...”
-
I disagree with your undeniable fact.
Afghanistan did not attack the U.S.


18 posted on 05/07/2011 10:33:49 AM PDT by Repeal The 17th (Tagline closed for repairs. Please use the next available tagline. We appreciate your patience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Fennie

IMO, Syria is more important than Libya, yet nary a peep about Syria.


19 posted on 05/07/2011 10:35:24 AM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fennie

This is Libya for goodness sakes. How long does something like this take? If we were even going to get involved in something like this, it should have been done and dealt with by now.


20 posted on 05/07/2011 10:41:27 AM PDT by HollyB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson