U.S. and Allies Strike Libya

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Hooray multilateralism!

That's simply because the US has more ships with that capability in the area. The 6th fleet is based in Italy. There are three UK ships with Tomahawk's en route. The two ships the UK had close are type 22 and 23 frigates which don't carry Tomahawks, they're anti submarine and anti ship specialists. You fire Tomahawks at air defense and C&C sites to gain air superiority.

The UK and French are supplying more aircraft, and Obama implied that the US will be stepping back their committed air resources once the Danish and Canadian forces are fully operational.

This is currently US led, but that's simply a matter of the US having the resources close at hand when it all kicked off.
 
That's a plausible analysis, but we need to keep in mind for the future it's in the Administration's interest for PR to minimize the role of the US in this action and declare that European countries are "leading" it. Both claims should be supported by evidence before accepting it.
 
Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) has panned President Obama's decision to participate in Saturday's missile attack on Libya, going so far as to question whether the strikes should be considered an "impeachable offense."

In a lengthy statement dated March 18 and re-printed in full on his website, Kucinich notes:

" While the action is billed as protecting the civilians of Libya, a no-fly-zone begins with an attack on the air defenses of Libya and Qaddafi forces. It is an act of war. The president made statements which attempt to minimize U.S. action, but U.S. planes may drop U.S. bombs and U.S. missiles may be involved in striking another sovereign nation. War from the air is still war."

As Politico is reporting, Kucinich raised the prospect of impeachment during a Saturday conference call, and is just one member of a group of liberal House Democrats questioning the constitutionality of U.S. missile strikes against Libya. The congressman mainly objected to the fact that Congress was not consulted before the air strikes, Raw Story reports. In an interview, he told the site, "And I'm raising the question as to whether or not it's an impeachable offense. It would appear on its face to be an impeachable offense."

In his online statement, he added:

"It is hard to imagine that Congress, during the current contentious debate over deficits and budget cutting, would agree to plunge America into still another war, especially since America will spend trillions in total for the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and incursions into Pakistan. The last thing we need is to be embroiled in yet another intervention in another Muslim country. The American people have had enough. First it was Afghanistan, then Iraq. Then bombs began to fall in Pakistan, then Yemen, and soon it seems bombs could be falling in Libya. Our nation simply cannot afford another war, economically, diplomatically or spiritually."

As Kucinich reiterated Monday to MSNBC, "A decision was made to make American forces into a war [and] he didn't consult with Congress. What the consequences are politically, we'll see...but the fact is we're going to spend half a billion dollars in the first week on this war, we don't have the resources."
 
yeah i think both views are right. let's face it, war is a business. we won't go unless we have something to gain. knowing women will be safe isn't "good enough".

edit: oops, didn't notice there was another page. this was in response to the congo posts as well the oil ones.
 
This really reminds me of the beginning of the Gulf War in January 1991. We know it's mostly a just action, but where the hell will it stop?

I am confused....the Gulf War in January 1991 had nothing to do with interfering with an internal Civil War within a nations borders.

Iraq invaded Kuwaitt, a soverign nation and was looking at Saudi Arabia.

Not sure how the two situations equate.
 
And the no blood for oil anti war marches will start soon, right? Wait, what? They're not? Oh.

The Bush Administration spent the better part of a year telling the world how friggin' amped they were to curbstomp Hussein before going in, we've spent less than a week knowing that Obama even wanted to do anything in Libya.
 
A) The Western audience are total suckers for bland platitudes about Jeffersonian democracy and self-determination.

B)
Link
According to a cache of al Qaeda documents captured in 2007 by U.S. special operations commandos in Sinjar, Iraq, hundreds of foreign fighters, many of them untrained young Islamic volunteers, poured into Iraq in 2006 and 2007. The documents, called the Sinjar documents, were collected, translated and analyzed at the West Point Counter Terrorism Center. Almost one in five foreign fighters arriving in Iraq came from eastern Libya, many from the city of Darnah. Others came from Surt and Misurata to the west.

On a per capita basis, that’s more than twice as many than came from any other Arabic-speaking country, amounting to what the counter terrorism center called a Libyan “surge" of young men eager to kill Americans.

It's totally keeping Qaddafi that offers the risk of instability, right?

C) If they turn around and start butchering Qaddafi loyalists, are we going to bomb them, too?

In the neighborhoods of the capital that have staged major peaceful protests against Colonel Qaddafi, many have volunteered — speaking on the condition of anonymity — that their demonstrations were nonviolent mainly because they could not obtain weapons fast enough.
 
Ivory Coast Civilians Ask: Where's our No-Fly Zone? - Political Punch
ABC's Dana Hughes reports:

A leader holding onto power unleashes brutality against his own people; attacking women and children, using military might against unarmed civilians participating in everyday activities. At least 500 people are confirmed dead and nearly half a million are fleeing their homes, fearful for their lives. The UN warns of civil war, possible genocide and a humanitarian catastrophe if more isn't done. But this isn't Libya and the leader isn't Gadhafi. It's Cote d'Ivoire, more commonly known as Ivory Coast.

For nearly four months the international community, including the Obama Administration, have been calling for incumbent President Laurent Gbagbo to accept his loss of the presidential election and step down. Those calls have been met with brutal violence against anyone seen as a supporter of his rival Alessane Outtara. There has been video of tanks firing on unarmed women protesters, pictures of some of the more than 30 people killed when Pro-Gbagbo forces shelled directly into a crowded market, nightly messages on state TV by Gbagbo officials encouraging the youth to arm themselves and attack "the terrorists."

Reports of mercenaries from Liberia crossing back and forth between the two countries show the deteriorating situation in Ivory Coast is threatening to destabilize the whole region, leaving many Ivorians to ask: Where is our no-fly zone?

The Obama administration has put out many statements condemning the violence in Ivory Coast. Just today Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said "Gbagbo’s indiscriminate violence can't be tolerated. All individuals responsible for ordering or carrying out these heinous acts will have to answer for their actions.” She also said the administration has pledged over $12 million dollars to the World Food Program to help feed the hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing the fighting.

But aside from sanctions and a temporary boycott of cocoa exported from the country, the world's largest producer of the crop, little other action has been taken by the United States and the international community. On friday the New York Times published an editorial saying the world needed to do more to intervene before it's too late. Even a seemingly non-military intervention action like the United Nation's jamming the television and radio signals to stop broadcasts inciting violence would do some good in diffusing the situation, the Times argued. With the crisis escalating more every day, "the international community must move quickly to halt this terror," the Times said.

For Ivorians watching the crisis unfold, next to the attention Libya is getting, there is a feeling that the administration, and the West is willing to stand-by while the country descends into chaos and thousands are potentially killed. Twitter messages in English and French detail what's happening in the country and cry for help. One uses hashtags to Obama, Sarkozy, and various media outlets "S.O.S," @boomshake1 tweets "WE NEED HELP in COTE D IVOIRE GBAGBO KILLED US."

- Dana Hughes

Sounds like the democratic rebels need a convenient media narrative.
 
As The Daily Show just put it tonight:

Libya attacks its own citizens, it gets a no-fly zone and missles.

Bahrain attacks its own citizens, it gets a "hey, let's tone it down" comment.

I'm about ready to just bury my damned head in the sand because the state of pretty much everything is so appalling/depressing/outrageous/corrupt/downright fucked, I can't even think straight about any of it right now, and I'm close to shutting my brain off and dissolving into the kind of helpless paralysis that is just what gets us into trouble.
 
I am confused....the Gulf War in January 1991 had nothing to do with interfering with an internal Civil War within a nations borders.

Iraq invaded Kuwaitt, a soverign nation and was looking at Saudi Arabia.

Not sure how the two situations equate.

The two situations equate in how I said it reminds me that there doesn't seem to be a clear endpoint. I'm not going to get nitpicky about justifications, especially between the two.
Most people thought we should intervene in Kuwait, and most people think we should provide a No-Fly zone for Libya. But, my feeling is that in both cases where does our intervention end?

Do we drive the Iraqis out of Kuwait?/Do we provide cover for the Libyan rebels while they fight?

Do we destroy Saddam's/Gadhafi's military so they can't do this sort of thing again?

Do we kill/overthrow Saddam/Gadhafi and let the people sort out their country?

I think it's a fair comparison.
 
As The Daily Show just put it tonight:

Libya attacks its own citizens, it gets a no-fly zone and missles.

Bahrain attacks its own citizens, it gets a "hey, let's tone it down" comment.

I'm about ready to just bury my damned head in the sand because the state of pretty much everything is so appalling/depressing/outrageous/corrupt/downright fucked, I can't even think straight about any of it right now, and I'm close to shutting my brain off and dissolving into the kind of helpless paralysis that is just what gets us into trouble.

bahrain doesn't give france 30% of it's oil.

all we've proven is that once again, when you go to the polls and pick between a republican and a democrat, you might as well be picking between a douche and a turd sandwich.
 
bahrain doesn't give france 30% of it's oil.

all we've proven is that once again, when you go to the polls and pick between a republican and a democrat, you might as well be picking between a douche and a turd sandwich.



same thing with Western Democracies and their foreign policy towards the middle east/north africa. keep that oil safe!

say what you will, at least STING has always been unafraid to admit that all these various wars/adventures have been about oil.
 
I think it took me a full minute to realize who you were talking about if not the musician :doh:
 
Yeah, no, I get that now, that was what triggered it. Cause I was like, "Why does he keep writing it in all caps??" and then it hit me.
 
An american F16 crashed last night due to mechanical failure. Pilots ejected safely, one is safe with rebel forces, the other got picked up by the Marines.


Snipers, shells, tanks terrorize key Libyan city

TRIPOLI, Libya – Moammar Gadhafi's snipers and tanks are terrorizing civilians in the coastal city of Misrata, a resident said, and the U.S. military warned Tuesday it was "considering all options" in response to dire conditions there that have left people cowering in darkened homes and scrounging for food and rainwater.

The U.S. is days away from turning over control of the air assault on Libya to other countries, President Barack Obama said. Just how that will be accomplished remains in dispute: Obama spoke Tuesday with British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicolas Sarkozy in hopes of quickly resolving the squabble over the transition.

"When this transition takes place, it is not going to be our planes that are maintaining the no-fly zone. It is not going to be our ships that are necessarily enforcing the arms embargo. That's precisely what the other nations are going to do," the president said at a news conference in El Salvador as he neared the end of a Latin American trip overshadowed by events in Libya.

Gadhafi, meanwhile, made his first public appearance in a week, promising enthusiastic supporters at his residential compound in Tripoli, "In the short term, we'll beat them, in the long term, we'll beat them."

Libyan state TV broadcast what it said was live coverage of Gadhafi's less-than-five-minute statement. Standing on a balcony, he denounced the coalition bombing attacks on his forces.

"O great Libyan people, you have to live now, this time of glory, this is a time of glory that we are living," he said.

State TV said Gadhafi was speaking from his Bab Al-Aziziya residential compound, the same one hit by a cruise missile Sunday night. Reporters were not allowed to enter the compound as he spoke.

Heavy anti-aircraft fire and loud explosions sounded in Tripoli after nightfall, possibly a new attack in the international air campaign that so far has focused on military targets.

One of Gadhafi's sons may have been killed, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told ABC News on Tuesday. She cited unconfirmed reports and did not say which son she meant. She said the "evidence is not sufficient" to confirm this.

Clinton also told ABC that people close to Gadhafi are making contact with people abroad to explore options for the future, but she did not say that one of the options might be exile. She said they were asking, "What do we do? How do we get out of this? What happens next?"

Despite the allies' efforts to keep Gadhafi from overwhelming rebel forces trying to end his four-decade rule, conditions have deteriorated sharply the last major city the rebels hold in western Libya.

Residents of Misrata, 125 miles (200 kilometers) southeast of Tripoli, say shelling and sniper attacks are unrelenting. A doctor said tanks opened fire on a peaceful protest Monday.

"The number of dead are too many for our hospital to handle," said the doctor, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals if the city falls to Gadhafi's troops. As for food, he said, "We share what we find and if we don't find anything, which happens, we don't know what to do."

Neither the rebels nor Gadhafi's forces are strong enough to hold Misrata or Ajdabiya, a key city in the east that is also a daily battleground. But the airstrikes and missiles that are the weapons of choice for international forces may be of limited use.

"When there's fighting in urban areas and combatants are mixing and mingling with civilians, the options are vastly reduced," said Fred Abrahams, a special adviser at Human Rights Watch. "I can imagine the pressures and desires to protect civilians in Misrata and Ajdabiya are bumping up against the concerns about causing harms to the civilians you seek to protect."

It is all but impossible to verify accounts within the two cities, which have limited communications and are now blocked to rights monitors such as the International Committee for the Red Cross.

Most of eastern Libya is in rebel hands but the force — with more enthusiasm than discipline — has struggled to take advantage of the gains from the international air campaign, which appears to have hobbled Gadhafi's air defenses and artillery and rescued the rebels from impending defeat.

The coalition includes the U.S., Canada, several European countries and Qatar. Qatar was expected to start flying air patrols over Libya by this weekend, becoming the first member of the Arab League to participate directly in the military mission.

The Obama administration is eager to relinquish leadership of the hurriedly assembled coalition. A NATO-led operation would require the unanimous support of member nations but two of them, France and Turkey, do not want the alliance to take over.

A compromise was emerging that would see NATO take a key role, but the operation would be guided by a political committee of foreign ministers from the West and the Arab world.

Obama defended U.S. involvement against criticism from several members of Congress, including some fellow Democrats.

"It is in America's national interests to participate ... because no one has a bigger stake in making sure that there are basic rules of the road that are observed, that there is some semblance of order and justice, particularly in a volatile region that's going through great changes," Obama said.

Ajdabiya, a city of 140,000 that is the gateway to the east, has been fought over for a week. Outside the city, a ragtag band of hundreds of fighters milled about on Tuesday, clutching mortars, grenades and assault rifles. Some wore khaki fatigues. One man sported a bright white studded belt.

Some men clambered up power lines in the rolling sand dunes of the desert, squinting as they tried to see Gadhafi's forces inside the city. The group periodically came under artillery attacks, some men scattering and others holding their ground.

"Gadhafi is killing civilians inside Ajdabiya," said Khaled Hamid, who said he had been in Gadhafi's forces but defected to the rebels.

Ahmed Buseifi, 32, said he was in Libya's special forces for nine years before joining the opposition. He said other rebellious special forces had entered Ajdabiya and Brega, another contested city, hoping to disrupt government supply lines. The airstrikes, he said, leveled the playing field.

"If not for the West, we would not have been able to push forward," he said.

A U.S. fighter jet on a strike mission against a government missile site crashed Monday night in eastern Libya, about 25 miles (40 kilometers) outside the rebel capital of Benghazi. Both crewmen ejected safely as the aircraft spun from the sky during the third night of the U.S. and European air campaign.

The crash, which the U.S. attributed to mechanical failure, was the first major loss for the U.S. and European military air campaign.

By Tuesday afternoon, the plane's body was mostly burned to ash, with only the wings and tail fins intact. U.S. officials said both crew members were safe in American hands.

One of the pilots parachuted into a rocky field and hid in a sheep pen on Hamid Moussa el-Amruni's family farm.

"We didn't think it was an American plane. We thought it was a Gadhafi plane. We started calling out to the pilot, but we only speak Arabic. We looked for him and found the parachute. A villager came who spoke English and he called out, 'We are here, we are with the rebels,' and then the man came out," el-Amruni said.

A second plane strafed the field where the pilot went down. el-Amruni himself was shot, suffered shrapnel wounds in his leg and back. He propped himself up with an old broomstick and said he bore no grudge, believing it was an accident.

The pilot left in a car with the Benghazi national council, taking with him the water and juice the family provided. They kept his helmet and parachute.

Since the uprising began on Feb. 15, the opposition has been made up of disparate groups even as it took control of the entire east of the country. Only a few of the army units that defected have actually joined in the fighting, as officers try to coordinate a force with often antiquated, limited equipment.

In Misrata, the doctor said rebel fighters were vastly outgunned.

"The fighters are using primitive tools like swords, sticks and anything they get from the Gadhafi mercenaries," he said.

Mokhtar Ali, a Libyan dissident in exile who is still in touch which his family in Misrata, said rooftop snipers target anyone on the street, and residents trapped inside have no idea who has been killed.

"People live in total darkness in terms of communications and electricity," Ali said. "Residents live on canned food and rainwater tanks."

U.S. Navy Adm. Samuel J. Locklear said intelligence confirmed that Gadhafi's forces were attacking civilians in Misrata, Libya's third-largest city, and said the international coalition was "considering all options" there. He did not elaborate, but Misrata is one of the cities that Obama has demanded that Gadhafi forces evacuate.

Airstrikes overnight into Tuesday hit a military port in Tripoli, destroying equipment warehouses and trucks loaded with rocket launchers. Col. Abdel-Baset Ali, operations officer in the port, said the strikes caused millions of dollars in losses, but no human casualties.

But while the airstrikes can stop Gadhafi's troops from attacking rebel cities — in line with the U.N. mandate to protect civilians — the United States has so far been reluctant to go beyond that. The Libyan leader was a target of American air attacks in 1986.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and others said the U.S. military's role will lessen in coming days as other countries take on more missions and the need declines for large-scale offensive action.

Two dozen more Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched from U.S. and British submarines, a defense official said earlier in the day. Locklear, the on-scene commander, didn't give details but confirmed that brought to 161 the number of Tomahawk strikes aimed at disabling Libyan command and control facilities, air defenses and other targets since the operation started Saturday.

Locklear said the additional strikes had expanded the area covered by the no-fly zone.

Asked if international forces were stepping up strikes on Gadhafi ground troops, Locklear said that as the "capability of the coalition" grows, it will be able to do more missions aimed at ground troops who are not complying with the U.N. resolution to protect those seeking Gadhafi's ouster.

___

Lucas reported from Zwitina, Libya. Associated Press writers Maggie Michael in Cairo; Robert Burns and Pauline Jelinek in Washington and David Rising in Berlin contributed to this report.

Snipers, shells, tanks terrorize key Libyan city - Yahoo! News
 
Link

The U.N. peacekeeping mission in Ivory Coast says it is concerned that heavy weapons could be used against civilians as rival presidents struggle for power.

In a statement Tuesday, the mission said forces loyal to incumbent president Laurent Gbagbo are repairing an attack helicopter and preparing multiple rocket launchers for use.

The mission called the weapons "a grave threat to the civilian population"
and warned Gbagbo forces that the U.N. would act if such weapons are used.

Earlier, Ivory Coast's internationally recognized president, Alassane Ouattara, called on the United Nations to authorize "legitimate force" to protect civilians.

Causing regional instability?

Aid groups say about 90,000 people have fled to neighboring Liberia and some 300,000 have been displaced in the main commercial city of Abidjan.

Check.
 
What is wrong with the world. :sigh:


Causing regional instability?

That seems to be the big factor in supporting military intervention.

It seems pretty cold, but some random tribal leader in the Congo doesn't really threaten the region's stabilty, or lack thereof.
 
On the face of it, Cote d'Ivoire sounds like a much clearer/easier case for intervention- we'd be supporting the world-wide consensus democratically elected Presidential candidate take power and removing the incumbent President who won't leave and is threatening the civilian population. The candidate, Alassane Ouattara, is a relatively known quantity who (I believe) doesn't have any ugly genocides on his record. The country isn't really a stitched-together conglomeration of mortal enemies.

And, the surge of refugees into neighboring regions is destabilizing.

There's a lot of things going on in that last paragraph that you can't say for Libya.

So I don't respect the humanitarian pretext. One might say "well, we can't do everything but we can at least do something, hence: Libya". Why is Libya a better plan than the Ivory Coast?
 
It seems pretty cold, but some random tribal leader in the Congo doesn't really threaten the region's stabilty, or lack thereof.
Sure it does; the present "lack thereof" in Rwanda, Burundi and bordering regions of Uganda is primarily due to the destabilizing effects of ongoing war in eastern DR Congo. Not to mention, the near-total breakdown of society across much of the region incubates mercenaries; it's long been one of Qaddafi's prime sources of killers for hire, for example.
 
"It is in America's national interests to participate ... because no one has a bigger stake in making sure that there are basic rules of the road that are observed, that there is some semblance of order and justice, particularly in a volatile region that's going through great changes," Obama said.

Which can be said about one of ANY various parts of the world. Seriously, just throw a dart at a random spot and there's something that would fall in that category.

Cori alluded to this...
As The Daily Show just put it tonight:

Libya attacks its own citizens, it gets a no-fly zone and missles.

Bahrain attacks its own citizens, it gets a "hey, let's tone it down" comment.

I REALLY loved the show Monday night. It pretty much summed up so perfectly every feeling stated by many in here, every feeling I've had about our "involvement" over the years. Even if other nations do want us to get involved, they get tired of us quickly because we're so fucking INCONSISTENT and never seem to have a decent strategy in place other than blowing things up every so often. How many more times do we have to go down this road?

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) has panned President Obama's decision to participate in Saturday's missile attack on Libya, going so far as to question whether the strikes should be considered an "impeachable offense."

In a lengthy statement dated March 18 and re-printed in full on his website, Kucinich notes:

" While the action is billed as protecting the civilians of Libya, a no-fly-zone begins with an attack on the air defenses of Libya and Qaddafi forces. It is an act of war. The president made statements which attempt to minimize U.S. action, but U.S. planes may drop U.S. bombs and U.S. missiles may be involved in striking another sovereign nation. War from the air is still war."

As Politico is reporting, Kucinich raised the prospect of impeachment during a Saturday conference call, and is just one member of a group of liberal House Democrats questioning the constitutionality of U.S. missile strikes against Libya. The congressman mainly objected to the fact that Congress was not consulted before the air strikes, Raw Story reports. In an interview, he told the site, "And I'm raising the question as to whether or not it's an impeachable offense. It would appear on its face to be an impeachable offense."

In his online statement, he added:

"It is hard to imagine that Congress, during the current contentious debate over deficits and budget cutting, would agree to plunge America into still another war, especially since America will spend trillions in total for the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and incursions into Pakistan. The last thing we need is to be embroiled in yet another intervention in another Muslim country. The American people have had enough. First it was Afghanistan, then Iraq. Then bombs began to fall in Pakistan, then Yemen, and soon it seems bombs could be falling in Libya. Our nation simply cannot afford another war, economically, diplomatically or spiritually."

As Kucinich reiterated Monday to MSNBC, "A decision was made to make American forces into a war [and] he didn't consult with Congress. What the consequences are politically, we'll see...but the fact is we're going to spend half a billion dollars in the first week on this war, we don't have the resources."

Once again, Kucinich nails it :up:. Tell me again why he didn't go further last time he ran for president?

Also, to Earnie-killer post, as per usual from you.

Angela
 
Back
Top Bottom