Posted on 03/09/2011 11:03:37 AM PST by mandaladon
Calls for a U.S. or NATO-imposed no-fly zone over Libya to aid the fledgling rebellion against dictator Muammar Qadhafi have been met with protests by Obama administration officials that it is a logistical nightmare requiring careful planning and forethought.
While that's something to that argument, fears of Libya's air force are way overblown, some retired Air Force officers argue, according to Aviation Week's David Fulghum, in his March 8 blog post, "Libyan Air Defenses Would Fade Fast" (emphases mine):
Dominating Libyan airspace would not be a tough or geographically overwhelming task for the U.S. and its allies, say airpower advocates.
Objections to the U.S. establishing a no-fly zone over Libya are based on erroneous suppositions made by leaders in the Pentagon – such as U.S. Central Command chief, Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis – who do not have the aviation experience needed to make such a decision, say two senior, retired U.S. Air Force officers.
There also have been mutterings among aviation advocates that the no-fly zone idea is being downplayed so that budget support for Army and Marine Corps ground forces will not be minimized by some sort of aerial coup. Those opposing the hands-off approach of the U.S. Pentagon are promoting a congressional call-in campaign in support of allied domination of Libyan airspace.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
I stayed at Holiday Inn Express once
so does that make me an expert.
It is just cover for Obama. Votes present. His entire political career is and has been = present.
he does not have to make a difficult decision, waits for the UN to do the decision making. Than he steps in and strives to tell the world it was idea along.
Here is what he said regarding Darfur Sudan
“we could be providing logistical support, setting up a no fly zone at relatively little cost to us. But we can only do it if we can help mobilize the international community and lead. And that’s what I intend to when I’m president.”
Obama does not have the constitutional authority to establish and enforce a no-fly zone in Libya ....
I agree, we have no interest in taking sides here
We could take down Libya’s air force so fast that it’d make the Baghdad caper seem lengthy.
The question is: should we?
What are they doing against us? Have they attacked American forces?
Why not? We took the side of the rebels in Egypt and look how beautifully that’s working out.
Seriously, I can’t believe people are pining for another Kosovo. Short memories.
You mean lately?
Why are we even discussing the possibility? There is little, to no gain for the US in trying to implement something like this, and a whole bunch of negatives.
Militarily, we could do it in a snap; almost anywhere in the world, at any time of our choosing. Politically there is nothing for the US to gain from signing on to such a dumb assed plan. This whole thing is, a political dance by the Pretender and Chief; he hasn’t a clue on how to move forward.
Let the Libyans sort it out, because if a no-fly zone is the good humanitarian thing to do; in order to protect civilians, then why isn’t having boots on the ground? And if it is the good humanitarian thing to in Lybia, why isn’t it good for Sudan, or Eratria, or Somolia, or any other number of third world s***holes where islamists, or tribal fighters are killing each other in droves and that are of little strategic interest to the US?
BINGO
Not impossible, just illegal under all rules of war and international dipolmacy.
As bad as Kaddafi is, the other side is worse. I fail to see why we should get involved in helping them out. They will show us absolutely zero gratitude for the favor—Muslims are never grateful when infidels try to help out.
We don't have enough foreign wars on our plate already?
Not one more wasted American life. Not one plane, not one drop of jet fuel.
Because Col. Daffy hasn't been exporting enough hatred of USA and terrorism lately... he's not living up to Obozo's expectations. If we can get some real radicals in there perhaps they'll bring us one step closer to a world caliphate.
It’s damn near impossible...
When your president’s a pu$$y...
1. The tea party conservatives hold the purse strings, and if he tries to go in there we will not fund it and he will have to pull out of the Balkans to shift money into it.
2. He will lose the anti war crowd as part of his dwindling base.
3. his South American cohorts are telling him to stay the fuck out.
Politically it will cost his part a hell of a lot, and they are already on the ropes.
Obama is a joke—he can’t lead because he’s to scared he might do something wrong—he’s worse than Carter. BUT That being said, Where are the Europeans? Where is the Luftwaffe? As Germany just Bought Greece, they should be able to used bases in Crete. What about Egypt? Its to their interest to get involved with this civil war. send a few tanks in and send over some of their airplanes to bomb Tripoli’s airfields. Why is it always the USA that must step up to the plate? Worlds got to learn what its like without good old USA.
I don't see any justification for doing it, and especially none for doing it alone. We must consider first our national interest. What benefit is there to America by taking sides in this dispute?
I don't see one now, and this is not necessarily any kind of "moral imperative" which would justify us getting involved.
The people who take over after Ghaddafi are likely going to be as tyrannical as Ghaddafi. You don't maintain power in Muslim areas without being a tyrant. There is no tradition of Liberty in Muslim countries.
The author is building a straw man: “have been met with protests by Obama administration officials that it is a logistical nightmare requiring careful planning and forethought.”
O & Co have said that it’s doable BUT I doubt they want to and it’s obvious US public doesn’t; want t spend tens of borrowed billions in a third ongoing war.
Did you not learn a damned thing from previous Arab wars?
Think back to the 73 war and the Iraq/Iran war and the '91 war.
After Arab countries get the effing shit blown out of them they sell as much oil as can be produced as cheap as needed to make it sell to afford to rebuild.
This pattern has been easy to see since I was a child.
If anyone can come up with a reason for intervention that holds up to debate, cheap oil damned sure ain't gonna be it. If you believe that, you'll fall for anthropomorphic global warming too because both of them hold the same amount of water.
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.