How limited is the U.S. mission in Libya?

Stars and Stripes ^ | July 01, 2011 | By JOHN VANDIVER

[Jet Jaguar]

STUTTGART, Germany — Following President Barack Obama’s comments during a Wednesday news conference, in which he said the U.S. is no longer carrying the bulk of NATO’s military load in Libya, there has been much back and forth about what exactly the U.S. role is in Operation Unified Protector.

Set against a debate about the constitutionality of the mission, the White House has defended American engagement in the campaign. The Obama administration says the scope of the U.S. engagement is limited in nature with a special focus on providing logistical support to allies, as well has suppressing Libyan air defenses and carrying out precision strikes.

“As a consequence, we have not seen a single U.S. casualty,” Obama told reporters during a nationally broadcast news conference. “There’s no risks of additional escalation.

“This operation is limited in time and in scope,” the president said.

But how does one define “limited?” How large a share of the burden is the U.S. carrying since handing over command of the mission to NATO? Opinions vary, but here are the numbers:

Since March 31, when NATO took over command, through June 30, the U.S. has flown 3,545 sorties and 816 strike sorties, of which 135 resulted in dropping ordnance, according to data provided by AFRICOM. During that period, NATO has flown 13,324 sorties, 5,005 of which were strike sorties, according to NATO data. NATO did not give a breakdown for the number of strike sorties that resulted in munitions drops, but it listed 10 “key hits” for June 30 alone.

Compared to the initial U.S.-led phase of the mission, dubbed Operation Odyssey Dawn, the U.S. day-to-day engagement also has dropped off significantly. At its height, 153 U.S. aircraft deployed in support of Odyssey Dawn, more than double the number currently engaged, according to AFRICOM. The U.S. also had 12 U.S. ships and submarines that supported OOD compared to just two ships today. From March 19 to the morning of March 31, the U.S. flew 1,319 sorties, 473 of which were strike sorties. And 228 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles launched during the two week campaign, AFRICOM reported.

According to NATO Spokesman Tony White, there are roughly 200 planes involved in the mission today. Of that number, about 70 belong to the U.S., according to AFRICOM. While NATO data show that U.S. allies are conducting most of the sorties and strike missions, the U.S. role is indispensible, White said, particularly when it comes to providing support in the form of surveillance and aerial refueling aircraft.

“If they took that away, we wouldn’t have an operation. Or at least we couldn’t maintain the rate we’re going at,” White said. “It’s not fair to say the Americans have pulled out. They’re still flying a lot of hours.”

[Jet Jaguar]

F-16 Ping

[Jet Jaguar]

Ping.

And hi Ma’s!

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Jet Jaguar.

...Operation Unified Protector... "we have not seen a single U.S. casualty" ... "There's [sic] no risks of additional escalation" ... "This operation is limited in time and in scope" ... the U.S. has flown 3,545 sorties and 816 strike sorties, of which 135 resulted in dropping ordnance... NATO has flown 13,324 sorties, 5,005 of which were strike sorties... U.S. day-to-day engagement also has dropped off significantly. At its height, 153 U.S. aircraft deployed... more than double the number currently... also had 12 U.S. ships and submarines... just two ships today. From March 19 to the morning of March 31, the U.S. flew 1,319 sorties, 473 of which were strike sorties. And 228 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles... roughly 200 planes... today. Of that number, about 70 belong to the U.S.

See, not a war, a kinetic military action. And the points isn't "are we or are we not", the point are that involvement is limited. See? All better now.

[dblshot]

These stats overlook the fact that an American carrier group and marine expeditionary force sit just off Libya and massive US assets in Europe and elsewhere are available to cover, reinforce, augment or whatever the assets described in this piece. Without this massive backup, it would be risky to strike even a weak force as Gaddafi’s. Now, while I would certainly want superior firepower and air supperiorty behind me, I don't think you can say that (at least from Gaddafi’s point of view) that only a limited force is arrayed against him.

[Nachum]

Thanks for the heads up Jet Jaguar

The list, ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/

[GailA]

I have some ocean front property in AZ to sell??????

FOR ALL RETIRED MILITARY!

http://militaryadvantage.military.com/2011/06/moaa-warns-retirement-under-attack/

READ AND PASS ON!