Posted on 03/25/2011 3:36:24 AM PDT by tobyhill
NATO agreed to take over command of the newly established no-fly zone over Libya, but the alliance's new role doesn't allow the U.S. to make a quick exit from the costly military operation as the Obama administration had wanted.
American sea and airpower remain key parts of the effort to keep forces loyal to Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi from attacking civilians after allies balked at assuming complete command of the campaign that began six days ago. The U.S., along with France and Great Britain, maintains primary responsibility for attacks on Gadhafi's ground forces and air defense systems, which are the toughest and most controversial parts of the operation.
The Obama administration had sought a clear signal from NATO on the hand over. Instead, it got a mixed message.
NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen initially announced the agreement in Brussels, saying the alliance could eventually take more responsibility, "but that decision has not been reached yet." Several NATO members — including Turkey, the alliance's only Muslim member — had resisted any involvement in ground attacks.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
When al queada takes over uhbummer will declare mission accomplished..
Obama probably said, "I'm sure the Navy can do something without the President of the United States intervening."
Funny how that works. You hand off command to someone else and you don’t get to call the shots anymore.
So, is anyone in charge at this point?
They’re taking applications.
The new military is non-judgmental.
nobama foreign policy: HUH? WTF?
Great “leadership”!
When his campaign exploratory committee asked him if he could handle a leadership role he thought they said leisureship.
we need to get the hell out of this ASAP anyways. let the Europeans deal with this. It’s their oil after all.
LLS
How did we convince the Turks to go along with this?
Before he can announce ‘mission accomplished’ he has to announce ‘mission started.’
A typical Obama scam. All his toads on MSNBC were cheering that after only a week Obama has ended the US involvement. He wants to get the media and congress (both parties) to STOP asking him what the mission and end-goal is.
Now by symbolically putting the NATO in charge (???) he can continue to drop our money in Libya while claiming successfully to have met the Kerry doctrine, get the UN (NATO in this case) to take over from the US. How did NATO do in Afganistan while we were busy in Iraq ?
Good analysis.
Libya is an example of a trap that a POTUS from either party could step on.
1) He states exactly what the mission is (e. g. no US ground troops, by which he means no big numbers of troops, and we will deny that the small groups there are ours if they get caught) and critics say he should not limit his options yet.
2) He keeps all options open, and in so doing does not define the limits of the mission. Critics don't like that either.
“Mission Abstained”
Yep, I do not believe we have a republic anymore, It is increasingly looking like an unresponsive bait and switch shell game.. What is so friggin hard about standing up and impeaching this POS POTUS, What is so hard about slashing the hell out of thee federal budget, it seems there is some mafia force that threatens folks when they arrive..
We know we are sinking economically, in defense and military, thousands of illegal immigrants a month many of whom are al queada etc.. and we cannot get a response from the Federal “G” gangsta government...
I wonder deeply if the next vote will not be completely rigged..game over..grieved over our country, but optimistic about Heaven, just wish there could be some good news in between...we have fallen and won’t get up..
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.