PDA

View Full Version : UN OKs Libya airstrikes, no-fly zone



Roger Perry
03-17-2011, 06:22 PM
Military action could follow within hours;

"The U.N. Security Council authorized a no-fly zone over Libya and called for Arab states and others to use "all necessary measures" to protect civilians from attacks by Moammar Gadhafi's forces.
The resolution passed 10-0 with five abstentions, including Russia and China.
The resolution establishes “a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya" while excluding an occupation force. It also calls for freezing the assets of the Libyan National Oil Corp. and the central bank because of links to Gadhafi."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42124388/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

Looks like President Obama couldn't have been too busy on the golf course.;)

M&K's Retrievers
03-17-2011, 07:20 PM
Military action could follow within hours;

"The U.N. Security Council authorized a no-fly zone over Libya and called for Arab states and others to use "all necessary measures" to protect civilians from attacks by Moammar Gadhafi's forces.
The resolution passed 10-0 with five abstentions, including Russia and China.
The resolution establishes “a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya" while excluding an occupation force. It also calls for freezing the assets of the Libyan National Oil Corp. and the central bank because of links to Gadhafi."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42124388/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

Looks like President Obama couldn't have been too busy on the golf course.;)

WTF did Obama have to do with this?

Goose
03-17-2011, 07:24 PM
Hey! Hey! Barack Hussein! How many kids will you kill today!

Hey! Hey! Barack Hussein! How many kids will you kill today!

Hey! Hey! Barack Hussein! How many kids will you kill today!

We live in Cuba now.

Roger Perry
03-17-2011, 07:28 PM
WTF did Obama have to do with this?

"The United States would likely use bombers and fighter planes, possibly including F-16s, F-15s and F-22s, to strike ground targets, U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz has said.
Congressional officials Thursday said the Obama administration is readying plans to participate in a no-fly zone with the help of Arab countries including Jordan, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates."

the U.S. had a vote in the UN resilutions to approve the no fly zone. The person representing the U.S. would not have voted for it without the approval of the President of the United States. I would imagine if President Obama is Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces he would have to approve using the Military to carry out the No Fly Zone in Libya wouldn't he???????

Roger Perry
03-17-2011, 07:28 PM
Hey! Hey! Barack Hussein! How many kids will you kill today!

Hey! Hey! Barack Hussein! How many kids will you kill today!

Hey! Hey! Barack Hussein! How many kids will you kill today!

We live in Cuba now.

Not nearly as many as GW Bush sent to their death;-)

M&K's Retrievers
03-17-2011, 07:56 PM
"The United States would likely use bombers and fighter planes, possibly including F-16s, F-15s and F-22s, to strike ground targets, U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz has said.
Congressional officials Thursday said the Obama administration is readying plans to participate in a no-fly zone with the help of Arab countries including Jordan, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates."

the U.S. had a vote in the UN resilutions to approve the no fly zone. The person representing the U.S. would not have voted for it without the approval of the President of the United States. I would imagine if President Obama is Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces he would have to approve using the Military to carry out the No Fly Zone in Libya wouldn't he???????

Roger, Obama, like you don't have a clue to what is going on. Obama does what he is told.

Eric Johnson
03-17-2011, 08:32 PM
I have my doubt that anyone in the senior leadership, other that SecDef Gates, knows the difference between air superiority and air supremacy. Fortunately, we will only be in a combat support role....AWACS/Rivet Joint and tankers....in the early days.

Eric

Franco
03-17-2011, 08:41 PM
All I have to say about a U N intervention against Kadafi is;

the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know.

Roger Perry
03-17-2011, 08:42 PM
Roger, Obama, like you don't have a clue to what is going on. Obama does what he is told.

No, that was the puppet Bush with Dick Cheney pulling the strings.:-P

dnf777
03-17-2011, 09:02 PM
Anyone know what the literacy rate in Libya is? What percentage of folks have computers....access to the WWW? Can the Libyan uprising be attributed to social-networking sites spreading mal-content as it was in Egypt? Does anyone think US psyops is behind any of this? (when they're not busy influencing our congressmen) ;)

I find it interesting that all these uprisings are occurring now, all of the sudden, with the only explanation being Facebook and twitter enabled all this organization.

M&K's Retrievers
03-17-2011, 09:27 PM
No, that was the puppet Bush with Dick Cheney pulling the strings.:-P

Maybe you should go back and read some of your posts.

Trying to connect the dots regards,

BonMallari
03-17-2011, 11:59 PM
Too little Too late....the outcome in Libya has pretty much been decided Khadafy has pretty much beat back the rebels and is now just looking to punish them and show them he is in control...the US waited way too long to get into the game...again

road kill
03-18-2011, 05:48 AM
Too little Too late....the outcome in Libya has pretty much been decided Khadafy has pretty much beat back the rebels and is now just looking to punish them and show them he is in control...the US waited way too long to get into the game...again

PRESENT!!!:shock:

RK

Hew
03-18-2011, 06:02 AM
Too little Too late....the outcome in Libya has pretty much been decided Khadafy has pretty much beat back the rebels and is now just looking to punish them and show them he is in control...the US waited way too long to get into the game...again
Exactly.....

Hew
03-18-2011, 06:05 AM
PRESENT!!!:shock:

RK
Exactly x 2.

You know we're rudderless when the Clintons have to serve as the Jiminy Cricket-like conscience on Obama's shoulder prodding him.

Franco
03-18-2011, 06:42 AM
The only thing the Libyian people hate more than Kadafi is the USA.

Helping to take Kadafi out will not make them like us.

Hew
03-18-2011, 07:05 AM
The only thing the Libyian people hate more than Kadafi is the USA.

Helping to take Kadafi out will not make them like us.
Yeah, you could be right. I read something this morning that said the US military found that Libya was the source of high numbers of foreign fighters in Iraq...and most of them came from the villages/cities that are at the center of resistance to Khadafi. As you said earlier...perhaps it's better to have the enemy you know?

Franco
03-18-2011, 08:39 AM
Yeah, you could be right. I read something this morning that said the US military found that Libya was the source of high numbers of foreign fighters in Iraq...and most of them came from the villages/cities that are at the center of resistance to Khadafi. As you said earlier...perhaps it's better to have the enemy you know?

Always better to deal with the devil you know than the one you don't.

After Pres. Reagan reprimanded Gadafi after he bombed the Disco in Germany killing some Americans, Gadafi stopped openly supporting terror against the USA. More recently, he ended his nuke ambitions.

We help overthrow Gadafi and no telling how much of a terrorist nation they will become. Then what, will we have to act alone or with the Brits?

Roger Perry
03-18-2011, 10:14 AM
And not a shot was fired or a dime spent by the United States military. ;-)

Libya declared a cease-fire Friday and promised to stop all military operations in a bid to fend off international military intervention after the United Nations authorized a no-fly zone and "all necessary measures" to prevent the regime from striking its own people.
Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa said the decision would "take the country back to safety" and ensure security for all Libyans.
"We decided on an immediate cease-fire and on an immediate stop to all military operations," he told reporters.
"(Libya) takes great interest in protecting civilians," he said, adding that the country would also protect all foreigners and foreign assets in Libya.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/cleanprint/CleanPrintProxy.aspx?1300461122391

BonMallari
03-19-2011, 05:07 AM
And not a shot was fired or a dime spent by the United States military. ;-)

Libya declared a cease-fire Friday and promised to stop all military operations in a bid to fend off international military intervention after the United Nations authorized a no-fly zone and "all necessary measures" to prevent the regime from striking its own people.
Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa said the decision would "take the country back to safety" and ensure security for all Libyans.
"We decided on an immediate cease-fire and on an immediate stop to all military operations," he told reporters.
"(Libya) takes great interest in protecting civilians," he said, adding that the country would also protect all foreigners and foreign assets in Libya.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/cleanprint/CleanPrintProxy.aspx?1300461122391

Well that cease fire lasted all of ONE day...Kadafy is pounding Benghazi...did anyone actually believe this nut case..I meant Kadafy, not RP

Roger Perry
03-19-2011, 10:05 AM
It is good to see Countries other than the United States are taking the lead.;-)

U.K., France likely to lead U.N.-backed airstrikes (javascript:vPlayer('42158911','4651004e-6482-4c7f-999d-255fd4d54242')) |

Hoosier
03-19-2011, 10:11 AM
It is good to see Countries other than the United States are taking the lead.;-)

U.K., France likely to lead U.N.-backed airstrikes (javascript:vPlayer('42158911','4651004e-6482-4c7f-999d-255fd4d54242')) |

I assume you mean globally. Your boy seems to be making sure of that

Eric Johnson
03-19-2011, 04:05 PM
According to news sources:

The US will provide command and control (AWACS probably) and elint (Rivet Joint probably) in the beginning and then these functions will transfer to the "coalition". NATO maintains a wing of AWACS aircraft at Geilenkirchen AB, Germany.

dnf777
03-19-2011, 04:18 PM
It is good to see Countries other than the United States are taking the lead.;-)

U.K., France likely to lead U.N.-backed airstrikes (javascript:vPlayer('42158911','4651004e-6482-4c7f-999d-255fd4d54242')) |


And putting some money in the kitty! Nice not to pick up the whole tab on our dime!

subroc
03-19-2011, 04:35 PM
lefties, is this action acceptable in your view? where are the WMDs? why are we there? why help at all? BTW, did obama even know the United States participated in this action or was he told after the fact?

dnf777
03-19-2011, 05:33 PM
lefties, is this action acceptable in your view? where are the WMDs? why are we there? why help at all? BTW, did obama even know the United States participated in this action or was he told after the fact?

Did Hilary go before the UN and tell us there were WMDs? Did Gates say, "trust us, you'll see"?

I'm not sure what role we should play in this. Can see both sides easily. That's why I was glad to hear Obama say we will NOT be deploying ground forces, nor staying beyond a well-defined goal achievement. Those basic principles are something that were sorely neglected in the last administration, and why we're still mired in two endless boondoggles. Hopefully, this will be a lesson on how to assemble a coalition, establish goals, and execute in a shared manpower and financial manner. Sort of like Bush I did in Kuwait.

Apples and oranges regards

subroc
03-19-2011, 05:43 PM
MARCH 19, 2011
OBAMA: 'Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world'...

MARCH 19, 2003
BUSH: 'American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger...

dixidawg
03-19-2011, 06:10 PM
According to news sources:

The US will provide command and control (AWACS probably) and elint (Rivet Joint probably) in the beginning and then these functions will transfer to the "coalition". NATO maintains a wing of AWACS aircraft at Geilenkirchen AB, Germany.


Does "Command and Control" include launching missiles?



"...The Pentagon says 112 Tomahawk cruise missiles have been launched from U.S. and British ships in the Mediterranean, hitting more than 20 Libyan targets along the Mediterranean coastline.
Navy Vice Adm. William E. Gortney, director of the Pentagon's Joint Staff, told reporters the Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired from one British submarine and a number of American destroyers and subs. He said the success of the mission was not immediately clear, adding that additional attacks would commence later...."

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/19/france-fires-libyan-military-vehicle/#

Franco
03-19-2011, 07:22 PM
I'll have to revive this thread when the Iranian backed Muslim Brotherhood seizes power.;-)

.............................

WASHINGTON -- In 2007, when American combat casualties were spiking in the bloodbath of the Iraq War, an 18-year-old laborer traveled from his home in eastern Libya through Egypt and Syria to join an al Qaeda terrorist cell in Iraq. He gave his name to al Qaeda operatives as Ashraf Ahmad Abu-Bakr al-Hasri. Occupation, he wrote: “Martyr.’’
Abu-Bakr was one of hundreds of foreign fighters who flocked into the killing zones of Iraq to wage war against the “infidels." They came from Saudi Arabia, Syria, Oman, Algeria and other Islamic states. But on a per capita basis, no country sent more young fighters into Iraq to kill Americans than Libya -- and almost all of them came from eastern Libya, the center of the anti-Gaddafi rebellion that the United States and others now have vowed to protect, according to internal al Qaeda documents uncovered by U.S. intelligence.

dnf777
03-19-2011, 07:40 PM
I'll have to revive this thread when the Iranian backed Muslim Brotherhood seizes power.;-)

.............................

WASHINGTON -- In 2007, when American combat casualties were spiking in the bloodbath of the Iraq War, an 18-year-old laborer traveled from his home in eastern Libya through Egypt and Syria to join an al Qaeda terrorist cell in Iraq. He gave his name to al Qaeda operatives as Ashraf Ahmad Abu-Bakr al-Hasri. Occupation, he wrote: “Martyr.’’
Abu-Bakr was one of hundreds of foreign fighters who flocked into the killing zones of Iraq to wage war against the “infidels." They came from Saudi Arabia, Syria, Oman, Algeria and other Islamic states. But on a per capita basis, no country sent more young fighters into Iraq to kill Americans than Libya -- and almost all of them came from eastern Libya, the center of the anti-Gaddafi rebellion that the United States and others now have vowed to protect, according to internal al Qaeda documents uncovered by U.S. intelligence.

Of course they will.

Are you suggesting we send several hundred thousand ground troops to "nation build"??

We can't control the world, and make everyone think the way we want to. Not sure this is the right thing, but hopefully we will have a clearly defined, finite role. The rebels we're "supporting" aren't necessarily our friends.

road kill
03-19-2011, 07:49 PM
I'll have to revive this thread when the Iranian backed Muslim Brotherhood seizes power.;-)
.............................

WASHINGTON -- In 2007, when American combat casualties were spiking in the bloodbath of the Iraq War, an 18-year-old laborer traveled from his home in eastern Libya through Egypt and Syria to join an al Qaeda terrorist cell in Iraq. He gave his name to al Qaeda operatives as Ashraf Ahmad Abu-Bakr al-Hasri. Occupation, he wrote: “Martyr.’’
Abu-Bakr was one of hundreds of foreign fighters who flocked into the killing zones of Iraq to wage war against the “infidels." They came from Saudi Arabia, Syria, Oman, Algeria and other Islamic states. But on a per capita basis, no country sent more young fighters into Iraq to kill Americans than Libya -- and almost all of them came from eastern Libya, the center of the anti-Gaddafi rebellion that the United States and others now have vowed to protect, according to internal al Qaeda documents uncovered by U.S. intelligence.

In the USA???

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/franklin-graham-christians-muslims/2011/03/18/id/389992?s=al&promo_code=BE61-1


RK

Franco
03-19-2011, 07:58 PM
My motto is, "America First".

So, why do we have to be the world police?

It is time for America to become semi-isolationist. We need to take care of our own problems at home not support a new wave of Islamic radicals/terrorist.

No doubt Obama's approval ratings will go up. Too many Americans are eager to rattle a sword and demonstrate our might. We would be better served in seeing the Islamic scum kill one another and staying out of this one. I can't tell you how disappointed I am in the Republicans for supporting this fiasco.

We've already upset the balance of power in the middle-east by castrating Iraq and by so doing have made Iran the biggest player power broker in the area.

You can bet that with no troops on the ground the Islamic backed Brotherhood will seize power. They've got to be laughing at our stupidity.

Franco
03-19-2011, 07:59 PM
In the USA???

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/franklin-graham-christians-muslims/2011/03/18/id/389992?s=al&promo_code=BE61-1


RK

Newsmax has no problem with making shit up.

There are Islamic terrorist in the USA. But, Newsmax makes a living out of being sensational.

dnf777
03-19-2011, 08:33 PM
My motto is, "America First".

So, why do we have to be the world police?

It is time for America to become semi-isolationist. We need to take care of our own problems at home not support a new wave of Islamic radicals/terrorist.

No doubt Obama's approval ratings will go up. Too many Americans are eager to rattle a sword and demonstrate our might. We would be better served in seeing the Islamic scum kill one another and staying out of this one. I can't tell you how disappointed I am in the Republicans for supporting this fiasco.

We've already upset the balance of power in the middle-east by castrating Iraq and by so doing have made Iran the biggest player power broker in the area.

You can bet that with no troops on the ground the Islamic backed Brotherhood will seize power. They've got to be laughing at our stupidity.

That is certainly one side of the issue. I think I'm leaning towards that camp as well.

Then there is the argument that by doing nothing, and watching the rebels get crushed as they strive for freedom, we damage our credibility as supporters of freedom and democracy.

The problem with that argument, is that I haven't seen that anyone in that area is fighting for freedom or democracy....rather just the next dictator who comes along, and will turn the very weapons we supplied them with against us eventually.

I suppose if we launch some cruise missiles, and fly some E3s, and call it a day, that's ok. But when does it ever go as planned?

Franco
03-19-2011, 08:58 PM
That is certainly one side of the issue. I think I'm leaning towards that camp as well.

Then there is the argument that by doing nothing, and watching the rebels get crushed as they strive for freedom, we damage our credibility as supporters of freedom and democracy.

The problem with that argument, is that I haven't seen that anyone in that area is fighting for freedom or democracy....rather just the next dictator who comes along, and will turn the very weapons we supplied them with against us eventually.

I suppose if we launch some cruise missiles, and fly some E3s, and call it a day, that's ok. But when does it ever go as planned?

Then, as the World Police, we would have to free most of the world population or have our credibility damaged.

Do we start firing missels at Venezuela or China next?;-)

In my book, it is a new day.

America is going to have to take care of Americans first. Followed by our close allies, which we could name on one hand minus the thumb. Let the rest if the world take care of their own damn selves!

dnf777
03-19-2011, 09:09 PM
Then, as the World Police, we would have to free most of the world population or have our credibility damaged.

Do we start firing missels at Venezuela or China next?;-)

In my book, it is a new day.

America is going to have to take care of Americans first. Followed by our close allies, which we could name on one hand minus the thumb. Let the rest if the world take care of their own damn selves!

I hear ya.

On a separate note, I think we should begin claiming our oil from Iraq. Open up some drilling there to keep supply/prices in check.

BrianW
03-19-2011, 09:22 PM
Then there is the argument that by doing nothing, and watching the rebels get crushed as they strive for freedom, we damage our credibility as supporters of freedom and democracy.

The problem with that argument, is that I haven't seen that anyone in that area is fighting for freedom or democracy....rather just the next dictator who comes along, and will turn the very weapons we supplied them with against us eventually.

But who are we "freeing"?
If we're "the world's policeman" isn't this like supporting the Crips vs Bloods or vice versa?
No matter who wins, they'll both still hate us.

Roger Perry
03-20-2011, 08:04 AM
My motto is, "America First".

So, why do we have to be the world police?

It is time for America to become semi-isolationist. We need to take care of our own problems at home not support a new wave of Islamic radicals/terrorist.

No doubt Obama's approval ratings will go up. Too many Americans are eager to rattle a sword and demonstrate our might. We would be better served in seeing the Islamic scum kill one another and staying out of this one. I can't tell you how disappointed I am in the Republicans for supporting this fiasco.

We've already upset the balance of power in the middle-east by castrating Iraq and by so doing have made Iran the biggest player power broker in the area.

You can bet that with no troops on the ground the Islamic backed Brotherhood will seize power. They've got to be laughing at our stupidity.

I think this is your biggest fear. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Roger Perry
03-20-2011, 08:14 AM
;-)
But who are we "freeing"?
If we're "the world's policeman" isn't this like supporting the Crips vs Bloods or vice versa?
No matter who wins, they'll both still hate us.
http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/032011_egyptvotes-1226a.grid-6x2.jpg
Asmaa Waguih / Reuters
A woman shows her inked finger after casting her vote in a constitution referendum at a school in Cairo, on March 19.
By HAMZA HENDAWI, MAGGIE MICHAEL
CAIRO — Millions of Egyptians voted freely on Saturday for the first time in more than half a century, joyfully waiting for hours to cast their ballots on a package of constitutional changes eliminating much-hated restrictions on political rights and civil liberties.
Young people traded mobile-phone pictures of ink-stained fingers that showed they voted. Others called relatives to boast of casting the first vote of their lives. In the well-off Cairo neighborhood of Maadi, a man hoisted his elderly, infirm father on his shoulder and carried him to a polling station.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42175645/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

Perhaps you should ask the Egyptians.;-)

Matt McKenzie
03-20-2011, 09:12 AM
I find it interesting that Lybia's closest neighbors, Egypt and Tunsia, refuse to get involved. I also wonder if the folks we support today will be the ones we have to fight tomorrow. We have a pretty mixed record when it comes to backing the right side.
Hoping for the best, expecting something worse.

BrianW
03-20-2011, 09:20 AM
CAIRO — Millions of Egyptians voted freely on Saturday for the first time in more than half a century, joyfully waiting for hours to cast their ballots on a package of constitutional changes eliminating much-hated restrictions on political rights and civil liberties.

Perhaps you should ask the Egyptians.;-)
In the post you quoted, I was referring to the reports of eastern Libya participation in Irag against the US and the argument by some that "we have to support all attempts for democracy".
But all "democracy" is not the same flavor.

And since you bring in Egypt's vote, maybe we should discuss "What did they vote for?" According to some reports, these constitutional reforms will make it easier for & would allow the Brotherhood and NDP to easily outpoll the dozens of political groups born out of the anti-Mubarak uprising, dividing power between former regime loyalists and supporters of a fundamentalist state — a nightmare scenario for both Western powers and many inside Egypt.


Among those most fearful of the Brotherhood's rising power are Egypt's estimated 8 million Coptic Christians, whose leaders rallied the faithful to vote "no."


If a "popularly elected" anti-Western govt comes into power in Egypt, will it be a good thing "as long as they voted on it"?
These got written up and voted on pretty quickly, I wonder if they had to pass the bill so they can find out what's in it? :confused:
Any bets on how much involvement the ICG had in putting a package together for them?

I can easily foresee a situation develop now where Christians become "enemies of the new Egyptian People's revolution". We're already showing a preference to the Shiites over the Sunnis in Bahrain & Libya, how the Coptics come out doesn't look hopeful, imo.

I'll reserve judgement on this "vote" until there's more details about it.