Obama pushes no-fly zone; Gaddafi looking for the exit?
The UK’s Guardian reports that the Obama Administration and the Downing Street folks are pushing the international community (the UN’s Security Council, mostly) for a no-fly zone over Libya. I guess it’s the best way to look tough with war machines without actually accomplishing anything. No fly zones worked so well over Iraq. They brought Hussein to his knees.
What? They didn’t? Well, that’s because Clinton and Bush rushed to war over a ten year period;
Kerry, chairman of the foreign relations committee, argued at the weekend that a no-fly zone would not amount to military intervention, adding: “One could crater the airports and the runways and leave them incapable of using them for a period of time.” The Republican McCain is also pushing for a more proactive policy to support the rebels.
Obama is believed to oppose US military intervention in Libya, partly because it could boost Gaddafi’s standing. But if civilian deaths mount and the humanitarian crisis worsens, his hand may be forced. The US is also concerned that a golden chance to topple Gaddafi may be lost if the crisis is allowed to deteriorate into a low-intensity stalemate, with neither side able to best the other.
Yeah, I’ve got news for you; when you fly your military aircraft over someone else’s airspace, that is a military intervention. You have to respond if someone gets froggy and fires missiles at your aircraft. Just flying around in circles doesn’t do anything unless you’re prepared to use force to bolster your presence in the air. That’s an act of war.
But then, we may not have to do anything. Some Arab news services are saying that Gaddafi is looking for a way out according to Reuters;
Gaddafi made the proposal to the interim council, which speaks for mostly eastern areas controlled by his opponents. It quoted sources in the council as saying Gaddafi wanted guarantees of personal safety for him and his family and a pledge that they not be put on trial.
Al Jazeera said sources from the council told its correspondent in Benghazi that the offer was rejected because it would have amounted to an “honourable” exit for Gaddafi and would offend his victims.
Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, General Petreaus and Secretary of Defense Gates were caught on video by ABC cracking wise about a US invasion of Libya. I’m sure some morons will try to use it against Petraeus (Gates is on his way out anyway);
Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Terror War
I am still trying to figure out a few things about this proposal. How does supporting Libyan rebels support our National Defense Strategy and National Military Strategy? Does anyone know what the rebel’s strategic endstate is and how that meshes with our national interests? What are the potential second and third order affects of rebel support to the rest of the region and to our military as a whole? Historically, rebellions in Muslim countries only change the oppressor’s name. The only exception that I can think of is Turkey’s establishment after the delusion of the Ottoman Empire, and I haven’t heard of a modern day Ataturk in this band yet. In most instances, the enemy of your enemy isn’t going to turn out to be your friend.
This is just more of the song and dance that is Obumbler and his administration. He, and the Euros can push a No fly Zone all they want, in the full knowledge that his best buds, the Russians and the Chinese, will veto the thing, if it makes it past being talked to death at the Security Council.
But, he’ll be able to stand in front of Joey and the rest of his adoring throngs and tell them he actually thought about doing something, somewhere, in the world, once upon a time. Other than organizing a community.
I am truly surprised to see the British doing anything at all in cooperation with the Leftist in Chief after he fucked them in the ass to the Russians with that nuclear treaty and the highly classified information he HANDED to them on Britain’s nuclear capabilities.
But then, they can often be much more grown up, efficient and professional than we can at times, particularly our political leadership.