Posted on 03/01/2011 10:43:56 AM PST by gandalftb
David Cameron threatened Colonel Gaddafi with military action last night, promising a no-fly zone and arms shipments to his enemies.
In a dramatic move that could define his premiership, the Prime Minister even suggested he could send British troops into Libya as a peacekeeping force to stop Gaddafi’s henchmen massacring democracy campaigners.
At a National Security Council meeting yesterday morning, he ordered military chiefs to draw up plans for the no-fly zone. If Gaddafi turned his air force on the rebels, RAF warplanes would be able to intervene.
In another hard-hitting move, the Pentagon started moving warships in preparation to police a no-fly zone and world leaders imposed a raft of diplomatic and financial sanctions.
‘We must not tolerate this regime using military force against its own people,’ he told MPs. ‘In that context I have asked the Ministry of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Staff to work with our allies on plans for a military no-fly zone. My message to Colonel Gaddafi is simple: go now. We do not in any way rule out the use of military assets.' Asked whether Britain could supply arms to the Libyan opposition, Mr Cameron told MPs: ‘It is certainly something we should be considering.
Britain signed an arms embargo at the weekend preventing further sales of weapons to Libya. But Mr Cameron could justify sending weapons to the rebels using a loophole in the embargo allowing ‘humanitarian’ weapons drops.
France said it would fly aid to the opposition-controlled eastern half of the country.
Britain could deploy up to 59 Eurofighter Typhoons from RAF Coningsby and RAF Leuchars in Scotland. They are expected to fly from RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, where British ‘eye in the sky’ AWACS aircraft are already stationed.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Why not free Iran?
The positioning of those SAM facilities seems to underscore who Libya is really afraid of: Israel.
I am all for us and the Brits going after Qaddafi. However, I suspect that the only reason why they are so focused on this is because of the contracts BP signed with the Libyan Government on oil before they released Megrahi for “humanitarian” reasons from a Scottish Prison.
They will get their oil regardless of whether Qaddafi or the Islamists have it.
Notice that it took weeks before Zero said a word about Libya, and even then he was circumspect about criticizing Qaddafi personally. Anything Zero would do probably would need to be cleared with Qaddafi's buds Calypso Louie Farrakhan and Rev. 'GD AmeriKKKa' Wright anyway ... if anything, he'd probably intervene on Qaddafi's side.
This a case where the cure may be worse than the disease.
Ok, at best US Special Forces or maybe Marines should be used alongside SAS forces to capture/disable/destroy SAM sites in coordination with rebels. That should be the extent of US Involvement. Disable those SAM sites, turn over operable one to rebels, extract US forces and the Brits may be able to enforce a no-fly zone. Even though I would like no US involvement, if we have to that should be the extent.
Yeah, but we have an arrest warrant out for Gudaffi over the Lockerbie bombing.
He coulda’ been a contenda’, but he took a one way ticket to Polookaville.
"Forward, the Light Brigade!"
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'd:
National self-interest is at least a rational reason for taking up arms. None of us had any reason to be in Serbia, for instance.
As well as protecting the Oil, don’t forget that the UK will likely get to keep Gadaffi’s money as well. Thats about ... 4000 dollars per taxpayer. That’s a useful proportion of our national debt.
Libya is not particularly likely to become a shining city on a hill whatever happens, but the chances improve if the UK sticks its oar in.
In summary: aerial sorties in defence of sweet, black oil is full of win for the UK.
We don't want the new Libya to reorganize in a vacuum and all of us wondering what happened instead of helping things happen and getting the loyalty of the new leadership.
We won't put troops on the ground and for minimal cost get rid of a 42 year trouble-making dictator.
Big brave talk from the country that threw Blair in the crapper for helping George Bush topple a murderous tyrant who was killing his own people and who already had defied 17 UN resolutions and sanctions
and from a govt that cut a deal with Qadaffi that released the Lockerbie bomber in exchange for oil
If brits want to “free Libya” (to what? the muslim brothers? al Qaeda?) let them go right on ahead. Oh and by the way, they just annnounced a major RIF in their own military
“For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Chuck him out, the brute!”
But it’s “Saviour of ‘is country” when the guns begin to shoot”
We can safely take the SAM sites out with cruise missiles. Just need their platforms to get into place.
Let the Muslims slaughter each other to their heart’s content. The lesser of them there are, the better for the world.
There’s 6.3 million people there. If 1/6th of the population rose up Qaddafi would be gone or dead in a few hours. The West needs to stay out of it.
That’s only for Republicans.
I don’t know, perhaps you’re right. Question...after this crap is over would the US be on the hook to pay for these SAM defenses? If not, Tomahawks away.....
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.