Libyan rebels seize British SAS troops-Sunday Times

Reuters ^ | Mar 6, 2011 | Stefano Ambrogi

[gleeaikin]

If any significant military steps are taken in should be the Europeans as they are most dependent on the oil. And, for example, why are we paying to keep 35,000 US troops in Germany. Aside from Ramstein and medical evacuations, what else are our troops doing there that is necessary.

[Marine_Uncle]

The troop levels where supposed to start coming down along with base closings in Germany, during the GWB Administration. I have the same question.
It could simply be because of things heating up in Georgia, after the Russians started to play games, and we sent in support the Georgians.
Then again, perhaps not.
And as for European military putting feet on the ground in Libya. Same sentiment.

[Vanders9]

The Arab states seem very keen on a no-fly zone. Maybe they should do it.

[Marine_Uncle]

Maybe the Arab states want to further drain US resources. Where the ones that will provide the carrier, Naval and Marine aviators. I say screw em. But then again I'm not calling the shots. It is looking more like the rebellion is going to come to an end.
I'm stepping out to go shopping. So will not be available for a while for any form of follow up.

[Vanders9]

None of the European nations will move on Libya militarily, even with something like a no-fly zone, without at least the tacit approval of the USA. And Hillary and your State department don’t want it, do they?

[Marine_Uncle]

And neither do some in the Pentagon and CENTCOM, as well as the Whitehouse.
This is totally different then say the no fly zone the US performed over northern Iraq many years back to keep the Butcher's planes from bombing the Kurds, and dropping canisters of nerve gas on them.
It will be a very involved operation. I assume you understand how air strikes are called in etc.. Lots of people on the ground. This is nothing like the US and Brits performed in Iraq. You and we had everything in place on the ground.
And perhaps the US is becoming tired of providing it's battle carrier groups to every little piss pot area of the oceans to perform some given task. It is an extremely expensive proposition.
Is Britain and France willing to put their carrier(s) into action on a Libyan around the clock no fly zone.
I assume again you followed the nfz carried out in northern Iraq during the GHB years. Average total flight time per day. Well it was around 6 hours per day.
With no on the ground targeting personnel.
This one is a totally different type of dog.

[Vanders9]

British PM Cameron has been doing the rounds of the European powers trying to build concensus for a "no-fly zone" policy. In other words, this is a European plan. My take is they are perfectly willing to do this without the US. But to reiterate, none of them will move without (at least) a nod from the US authorities. The last time Britain and France unilaterally intervened in the Middle East it didnt work well. Neither of them will risk a repeat of the Suez fiasco.

It's much harder for the Euros to implement such a thing of course, as none of them have anything like US carrier battlegroups and airbases are short in the area. I would presume neither Tunisia or Egypt will allow use of their airbases, or even airspaces. We could use the British bases on Malta but that would involve a lot of in flight refueling if anything like round the clock coverage can be achieved. And as you say, it would be an expensive business. Especially as the Libyans will shoot back.

[Marine_Uncle]

You do have a good handle on what is at stake. Perhaps a no fly zone operation will be established. No one would expect Prime Minister Cameron or President Sarkozy to jump into such an endeavor in a half ass fashion. Nor should the US be expected to.
As your aware, within NATO things are being worked out as to the worth of such an endeavor. Britain, France, and the US obviously would be prime players.
I four one don't want to be reading about any pilot/aviator being shot down. We still have little information on just what tribal unities really have been established, how strong they might eventually become. Just because a few tanks and light armor vehicles where either stolen or taken over or given up by the government forces, does not mean the so called rebels/freedom fighters/whatever are going to get anywhere any time soon.
The powers that be are trying to established just who might be capable of creating some form of government in the aftermath. It would be foolish IMHO to just go in and hammer the hell out of every potential surface to air site, and strafe or bomb every aircraft found sitting on the ground plus all the hanger facilities etc., where they can be expected to be hidden in.
Then for a unknown period of time fly air cover for groups that we are not even familiar with, so that they can rag tag fight pitch battles with the government forces.
I can see why the US is holding off. And surely you can see where the British and French would have the same misgivings and concerns, along with every other NATO nation that would have to contribute. Without boots on the ground performing well thought out ground actions that lead to the total destruction of all Libyan forces, and ouster of the current regime, and then a long drawn out process of establishing a valid government (Heaven only knows what that might entail).....shades of Iraq and Afghanistan come to mind, brings some of us to the conclusion, they all had tread carefully as to what they end up doing.
I'll let it go at that.

[Marine_Uncle]

I should have included you in my post #88.

[txhurl]

BUMP

Whatever became of this...

[Marine_Uncle]

It sure did go quiet rather quickly. We can only hope this SAS squad, other, where released with no harm coming to them.

[archy]

BUMP

Whatever became of this...

CSM story here. No, NOT something my old Command SarMajor told me.