Obama Punked by the Arab League on Libya
No doubt Ashton Kutcher is hiding behind a bush at whatever golf course Barack Obama happens to be playing today, ready to jump out and shout at the hapless president, “Dude, you just got punked!”
That’s about the only explanation after the Arab League reversed course and criticized the U.S.-led attack on Libya (via Reuters):
European and U.S. forces unleashed warplanes and cruise missiles against Gadhafi on Saturday in a United Nations-backed intervention to prevent the veteran leader from killing civilians as he fights an uprising against his 41-year rule.
But Arab League chief Amr Moussa said what was happening was not what Arabs had envisaged when they called for the imposition of a no-fly zone over Libya.
“What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone, and what we want is the protection of civilians and not the bombardment of more civilians,” he said.
In comments carried by Egypt’s official state news agency, Moussa also said he was calling for an emergency Arab League meeting.
It only seems like yesterday that Hillary Clinton was citing Arab League support for Obama’s war against Libya. Oh wait, it was only yesterday.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States will support its European, Canadian and Arab partners in their efforts to stop further violence against civilians in Libya by Muammar Qaddafi’s forces, including “through the effective implementation of a no-fly zone.”
Arab nation leadership in efforts to stop violence in Libya has played a key role in mobilizing the international coalition, Clinton said. Clinton said that the Arab League with its “pivotal statement” changed the “diplomatic landscape” with regard to the approach toward the United Nations Security Council resolution this week authorizing “all necessary measures,” including a no-fly zone to end violence and protect civilians in that country.
If I were a betting man I would take the Arab League’s reversal as an indication they believe Gaddafi is going to survive. Welcome to Barack Obama’s AWOL presidency.
So where’s the problem? Since when is firing scores of missiles at ground targets a no-fly? It becomes a competition as to whether the collateral civilian deaths will outweigh the deaths a ‘no-fly’ was meant to prevent in the first place.
Part of what it takes to impose a no-fly zone is … flying? Yeah, I think that’s what I’m thinking of. You know–if the enemy wants to fly, you have to be up there in … planes…. Yeah, that’s it. Planes. In order to keep them from flying, you have to have at least air superiority, if not outright supremacy.
But, but, but. But what? You think we can just magically create air superiority? Sure thing, you betcha. Who cares about those pesky radar sites and AA guns and SAMs. Our planes will just … move out of the way if they’re fired upon, right? We don’t need to destroy those sites. Nope, not at all.
Foolish child. Go play with your Code Pinko stuffed rabbit, and let the adults figure out the hard stuff, mkay?
Don’t be a stupid moron. The whole point is that a truly comprehensive ‘no-fly zone’ doesn’t in fact exist other than in name; it’s like calling a motorcycle a specially adapted bicycle. What does exist is an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation with attendant civilian casualties rather than a ‘don’t fly or we’ll shoot’ scenario. What does exist is a declaration of war by using overkill to protect against every possible scenario.
There are no goals that we have stated as comprising an end game and the Libyans on the side of Gaddafi will view this as their own 9/11 and Pearl Harbor all rolled into one. And what does the U.S. gain from it? No one can say because it gains absolutely nothing other than yet more hostility from muslims as if we needed that.
If attacking infrastructure, tanks, long range bombing of air bases and taking out air defenses is necessary to create a so-called ‘no-fly’ zone, then one shouldn’t have been contemplated in the first place; the whole think reeks of some antiseptic no harm, no foul, operation that never existed from the get go.
The Generals warned Congress that this is what a “no-fly-zone” looks like a few weeks ago. I didn’t think we were dumb enough to actually do it.
If you fly aircraft over untouched anti-aircraft systems (including ZSU23-4′s that look like tanks) even fancy new aircraft will get shot down.
Perhaps the Arab League could show us how it’s do with their mightly navies and air forces.
I understand that Gaddafi has ‘shilka’s', maybe scores of them. Believe me, I get that.
But when you get to the point where targets are more easily talked about in terms of what you are NOT blowing up rather than what is being ‘pin pointed’, this is a problem.
You can’t just start blowing up everything in the entire country that might have some relation to an aircraft flying overhead and call it a ‘no fly’. This is the ‘nuance’ of the military and why they are best left out of things unless it is in defense of the United States.
Now, more marching morons including members of the “I Didn’t Order That Sandwich” Arab League will be gunning for yet more Westerners. “Mission Accomplished” to show off my military expertise. Is “Advance To the Rear” military usage?
How about a hearty “Thank You” for targeting a Command and Control center in Tripoli and hitting a forklift driver in Witchita? Nice shooting there pardner, may I have another?
“The Generals warned Congress that this is what a “no-fly-zone” looks like a few weeks ago. I didn’t think we were dumb enough to actually do it.”
Congress was not consulted by the Obama Admin. He did not call for an Authorization of Force, did not present his case to the American people and explain what compelling national need this represented in addition to what the full mission would be — the goal of th mission, how long might it take, who the “rebels” are (turns out their leader is an AQ-linked Imam!?!?), etc. This is a president pushed into action by those around him, hoping that others would do the leadership thing with US involvement kept to a few missiles and then a quick out. The intervention SHOULD have happened when the rebels held 90% of the country and Khadaffi was on his heels, as opposed to now when Khadaffi holds 90% of the country and the rebels are on their heels.
Do we see a saying being born here? Too much, too late??
Dude…..
Think HELICOPTERS….
They go up for 5 minutes at a time, engage whatever they like, and drop back down almost anywhere…
Without a 24/7 allied fighter presence over Libya, in sufficient numbers, you have no possibility of “no fly” enforcement capacity UNLESS you bomb all his command & control, hangars, radar, armament and fuel depots.
“no fly” doesnt mean you WAIT till somethings in the air…Unless you think circling around FOREVER with magic “infinity fuel pods” and pilots who dont need to eat, sleep, or shit once in a while is practical and effective.
Do you have a Paypal account?
I’ll send you some money to buy a freaking clue
You are hypnotized by words; daddy says ‘no-fly’ and you sit here and anxiously try to stick a round peg into a square hole with your face all screwed up and sweat on your forehead and your tongue sticking out the corner of your mouth.
Wake up, read some Orwell and buy all the vowels you want. George wrote it for people like you.
What does exist is an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation
Sovereignty is a moral concept that only applies to free nations that protest and respect the rights of the people in their jurisdiction. National sovereignty, in other words, derives from individual sovereignty. Those that violate the latter, forfeit the former.
As dictatorships do not pass muster under this standard, neither Iraq 1991, 2003 nor Libya are “sovereign”; they are just organized criminal gangs putting on government airs, and as such have no right to exist. Free nations have the moral right to knock them over, if it serves their interests to do so.
Now, if you want to debate whether there are any American interests at stake in Libya, that’s fine. I am not aware of any at the moment, so do not support the attacks myself (but an open to being convinced).
But anyone invoking the concept of “sovereign nation” in regards to dictatorships, is not credible on the simple grounds of their apparent ignorance of what the concepts they invoke really mean.
Sounds like you think the American Civil War should have never happened and that the South should’ve been left to its own devices.
Nice tap-dance, nice spinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn…but it’s you looking like the moron. Frankly, you come off as a kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar and trying to cover your tracks.
I’m not covering anything but emphasizing what I said. Why the tremendous overkill in the name of protecting pilot’s lives? It is a certainty that this will result in civilian casualties and this so-called ‘no-fly’ is going to result in a trade off where on can argue only that, for the moment, fewer civilians will die in the East than in the West but that there is some kind of deadly civilian exchange rate going on that is a long way from a simple exclusionary zone – well, you got to break some eggs right?
There is also apparently an exchange rate between pilots and any civilian West of a certain line on a map wherein those pilots, who do sign on for hazard pay, can blithely kill women and children who did not sign on for any of this – all this for what, a dozen pilots, less, more?
Further, taking out tanks and APCs that are incapable of near-Earth orbit at last glance, also gives the lie to the idea that this is anything other than D-Day without the follow up invasion – all that’s lacking is nose camera footage of a P-47 lighting up trains.
An exclusionary zone could have been enforced that not only kept in line with the idea of a cease fire but one that was not so aggressive and which will now ring down through the years with more civilian casualties far outside the borders of Libya.
You want to call it a no fly cuz you heard it on the news and say I’m a moron for using my eyes while you are demonstrating the fascinating military expertise all wannabe keyboardist’s demonstrate then knock yourself out. Suddenly everyone’s a General Patton with the predictive abilities of a fakir, nodding their heads in smug satisfaction while failing to realize that any backtracking is being done by those who said not one word about the massive interdictions before they actually took place – why bother, it’s ‘obvious’ to massive intellects. You’re holding a pear and calling it an apple but it still tastes like an pear. Every no-fly is based on specific circumstances and arguing that there is such a thing as a generic no-fly and invoking Iraq is simple minded.
If you geniuses really knew anything you’d know that Gaddafi’s military is old and antiquated to the point of being quaint – half of his gear is in mothballs. Only his Mark variations of the SA-5 are any real threat and difficult to target since they are on flatbeds.
Any geniuses heard of re-fueling in the air? Well, read the papers you get your ‘no-fly’ nomenclature from and you’ll find they’re actually doing it so there’s no need to hover around on dwindling fuel and planes can replace one the other.
What you really have here is tactical overkill towards no strategic purpose. Go read Dr. Seuss and expand your minds.
The real moron James is YOU who thinks you can have a no fly zone patrolled by Allied aircraft WITHOUT taking out the enemies air defenses.
I AM kind of a moron but it has nothing to do with shooting a sleeping goat and calling myself an elephant hunter.
“Duh, I rish my brother George was here”. (Orwell)
Aw, who cares if some extra Muslims die? Kadaffy doesn’t care, Saddam didn’t care. Why should we? They venerate suicide bombers. They celebrate slitting throats. Heck, remember what they themselves said of themselves? “We Muslims love death more than you in the West love life!”
What bothers me is Obama’s rank hypocrisy after condemning Bush, who at least asked Congress to go to war, and had not one, but seventeen UN resolutions supporting his decision, that was nonetheless blasted by the Left for eight stinkin’ years.
And front and center in the criticism was one Barack Hussein “Barry” Obama.
This is easy to understand, though sophisticated Westerners probably don’t get it to start. The members of the Arab League no doubt imagined that a no-fly zone would involve U.S. and (hopefully) other air forces flying patrols over Libya, intimidating Gaddaffi’s air force into not flying and attacking civilians. It would never occur to such people that our planes would be vulnerable to Libyan air defenses, and if you pointed it out to them, they’d be indifferent. Cost of doing business, and if one of your guys winds up prisoner of the Colonel, well those same Arab guys will be publicly regretful, but in private they’ll be chortling at least a little bit because an Arab has twisted America’s tail. Even if they dislike the particular Arab.
None of them imagined that we’d take out his air defenses first, so that when we fly these patrols we’ll be able to take out any air opposition we meet without interference.
Reflecting on the Arabs experiences in wars with Israel, they may not be aware that air defenses exist. I believe it was Moshe Dayan who was once asked to what did he attribute his success as a general. “Fight Arabs !” he replied.
You’re not doing enough reflecting friends since the whole initial strategy and success of the Egyptian Army in the 1973 War with Israel was centered around air defense. When they abandoned it, Pandora’s Box got really smelly.
Duh! I read that in a book. Duh!
It’s not just the air defense suppression that has the Arab League riled up. The French flew missions against Qaddafi’s armor yesterday, destroying several tanks and other vehicles.
The UN resolution says that civilians must be protected, but it’s fairly ambiguous about what force is authorized to do so. The French and British are interpreting it broadly. Sounds like the Arab League has a more narrow interpretation.
Makes you wonder if Sec. Clinton was paying attention to what the Saudis and others were actually telling her last week.
David
Your comments make sense. Now you need to add the Shia-Sunnia aspect. I feel that in the best case we can understand less than 40% of the arab mind.
Peter
Simpler analysis: now that the Arab League has gotten something it wants out of the West, it is now pre-emptively declaring “we didn’t expect this!”, to establish a base for future attacks on the West in order to tamp down potential future accusations of “selling out” to the West, and salvage what it can of its Arab “street cred”.
It’s just a variation of the “cheat and retreat” cycle.
Tribal minds are very, very easy to understand; anyone who has ever dealt with schoolyard bullies has all the basic concepts already.
Yep.
Well, as long as you include the Islam factor. There’s no possibility of understanding the mid-east if you don’t understand that.
Administration
With
Out
Leadership
Apparently.
James May: Check out how the U.S. and coalition forces maintained the no-fly zone in Iraq in the mid and late 90s, after Desert Storm. We did just exactly this, taking out air defenses regularly. Sadaam would go out and buy stuff on the black market (radars, missiles, etc.) and use them, and we’d respond to the radars painting our aircraft, and then he’d restart the process. I used to refer to it as “gardening”. Once the weeds got too thick we’d have to go in with our weedwhacker and cut them back…
A HARM missile makes one heck of a weed-wacker!
This is not Iraq but Libya. The intention of the no-fly was to stop Gaddafi from closing in with the advantage of air support denied the opposition and killing the people in rebellion IN the East. How does firing missiles no where close to Benghazi define a no-fly? Does taking out aircraft defenses around Tripoli protect pilots standing off the coast far East waiting to be vectored onto targets by AWAC’s?
How does taking out a tank and APC column and using B-2′s define no-fly? Is bombing aircraft on the ground no-fly?
Gaddafi will start trotting out civilian casualties and saying, “This is air interdiction?” We should have stayed out. What is the end game and who wins?
“How does taking out a tank and APC column and using B-2′s define no-fly? Is bombing aircraft on the ground no-fly?”
Well, if the aircraft have been destroyed, they certainly are not going to be flying.
A further benefit being that, should Gadhaffi (can we please pick a spelling, btw? I’m happy to comply with a chosen spelling, but I’d like to have it settled) lose and the winners turn out to be Islamists, we won’t have to fight those airplanes.
Since I seem to be in pedant central go read the glossary of U of Wisc Press’ “History of the Crusades”.
There are 18 zillion ways to spell Arabized names and no agreement or ‘right’ way to do it so go stuff yerself.
Please educate yourself about the technical realities of modern aerial warfare. You really shouldn’t even have to ask to why we would attack anti-aircraft weapons to maintain a non-fly zone.
Well thank you for doing the educating by showing me that tanks and APC’s fly and that destroying aircraft on the ground constitutes no-fly.
Gee, I thought it meant attacking things actually in the air.
Asking an imbecile to educate himself is an oxymoron
Sorry to bring this to your attention, but you are too nice and polite with this moron
The no fly zone was a means to an end. An the end is more than just protecting civilians from airstrikes. That would mean an indefinite standoff.
If the loyalists were going to win anyway, why bother? Cruise missiles are expensive. I think it became evident that the loyalists were so close to Benghazi and the other rebel strongholds that they were capable of overrunning the rebellion with armor on the ground.
Rather than engage in a futile mission, the western powers decided to interpret the UN resolution broadly and get rid of the tanks and APC’s as well.
The Joint Chiefs just called me and wanted to know what I thought of the whole situation but I told ‘em I was busy.
Tanks like this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZSU-23-4
Non sequitur. The military tactics don’t change.
Yes, and yes.
Not obviously. That just might be taking a few liberties, or there might be info that we don’t have.
Yes, clearly.
James, you are usually pretty astute. Your obtuseness on this is puzzling. It makes me wonder just exactly is really bothering you about this.
Your comments about an undefined end-game are right on target, but your cavils about the actions not being related to a no-fly zone are just that – cavils.
The actions clearly are associated with the idea of a no-fly zone – so much in fact that the line between an exclusion zone and total war has become blurred to the point of non-existence.
This is even more problematic considering this action was sold as stopping Gaddafi from closing in on Benghazi, saving lives not exacerbating the loss of life, and enforcing some kind of cease fire.
This is not a fun, fun action where everyone can celebrate their military jargon and knowledge of tactics but an action that is tied up in real lives and politics and their consequences and on that level it is an utter failure.
What is puzzling me is why so many here wish to separate out the military semantics and the reality as if it is some kind of video game with points to be lost and won. You want to reduce it to a semantic game that trades kids in Tripoli for kids in Benghazi then more power to you. This is no more a no-fly dedicated to saving lives than was the bombing of Baghdad. Shrinking the English language to prove a point is never a good idea and is something I usually associate with liberals.
You are being sold a bill of goods. Let’s have all the predictive geniuses tell how many tourists will be killed in France and Italy before the end of the summer cuz of the “exclusionary zone”.
I don’t recall the bombing missions being called part of the no-fly zone. They were part of the run-up to the invasion, and discussed as such. The no-fly zone was a concurrent, but separate, operation.
James, I think you are the one who is shrinking the language here. Destroying anti-aircraft defenses is a necessary antecedent (and corollary) to enforcing a no-fly zone.
You might argue that destroying planes on the ground is not legitimately part of enforcing a no-fly zone, but if not, including would be expanding the language, not shrinking it.
Just to be clear, I’m not arguing in favor of the U.S. being involved in military action in Libya (though killing Gaddafi and his son would not be a bad idea), I’m just pointing out the nature of enforcing a no-fly.
Mark if you expand the definition of a thing then you are taking away nuance and shades of meaning. One is using fewer words to define a thing and therefore shrinking the English language. One can say the Libya operation is a no-fly but, like the tricycle crossing the Atlantic, it is something that, at some point, almost from the start in the case of Libya, became a simple attack on every single military asset of Libya. Sure, that’s a no-fly alright, I guess, but buried deep within shock and awe tactics. For me, it is a no-fly no more than the ship was a tricycle.
For me the stupidest thing was that although Gaddafi was using his meager air assets against the rebels, they were in no way the deciding factor and Gaddafi would have easily overwhelmed the rebels in basically the same time frame with or without his air forces. He still would do so if this really was a no-fly, but it’s not. CNN reported 70 vehicles destroyed in one column near Benghaze and I think we can take it for granted that virtually none had AAA.
It’s never really a good idea to shrink the English language but when it’s done for a political reason one should be aware that someone is trying to slip you a political rufie.
It’s why I used the old Monty Python joke about the tricycle that crossed the Atlantic. When did the ‘tricycle’ become a ship? We should not be so mesmerized by words, especially when they are clearly meant to mislead.
And by the way, the no-fly that lead up to the Iraq invasion never really worked in so far as its purpose and killed many civilians.
This entire mission is ill-advised and the U.S. should never have involved themselves, certainly not like this, by bombing everything in sight. The big elephant in the room is that any operation dedicated solely to keeping Gaddafi’s air assets on the ground would not have changed things one bit, not at any time during the rebellion.
Guess the UAL punked you as, after an emergency meeting, they adhered to their prior request to the UN to create a no-fly zone and stated they support such efforts.
No doubt, they are going to be responsible for maintaining the no-fly zone once established and once Gaddafi’s anti-aircraft weaponry is eliminated.
Gates did warn Congress (and by extension, everyone else) about this: “…A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defenses…”
What did they think he was kidding?
Well, America, here we are again.
Simultaneously I’m sick to my stomach and laughing my head off.
Mostly sick to my stomach.
As was pointed out on several news services, the first step in establishing a “no-fly” zone is to remove the other guy’s air-defense systems. Gadhafi had some rather good Russian equipment, and threatening to shoot down his aircraft does no good if he shoots down ours first.
the west is now fair game, sorry but you cannot attack sovereign nations for no reason and with impunity – i hope Gadaffi teaches the west a good lesson, if it’s a choice between the man in green and the united nazis, i know whose side i’m on…
@Mario.
His green uniform doesn’t have anything to do with the environment. He is a self-serving communist dictator is as brutal as they come.
So as his supporter you should have nothing to fear from him.
It is the Libyan people’s responsibility to liquidate such scums who are distorting Libya’s image abroad.
—Gaddafi talking about exiles in 1982.[26]
Gaddafi employed his network of diplomats and recruits to assassinate dozens of his critics around the world. Amnesty International listed at least 25 assassinations between 1980 and 1987.[18][27]
Gaddafi’s agents were active in the United Kingdom, where many Libyans had sought asylum. After Libyan diplomats shot at ten anti-Gaddafi protesters and killed a British policewoman, the United Kingdom broke off relations with Gaddafi’s regime.
In 1980, a Libyan agent attempted to assassinate dissident Faisal Zagallai, a doctoral student at the University of Colorado, Boulder. The bullets left Zagallai partially blinded.[28] A defector was kidnapped and executed in 1990 just before he was about to receive U.S. citizenship.[18]
Gaddafi asserted in June 1984 that killings could be carried out even when the dissidents were on pilgrimage in the holy city of Mecca. In August 1984, one Libyan plot was thwarted in Mecca.[26]
As of 2004, Libya still provides bounties for heads of critics, including 1 million dollars for Ashur Shamis, a Libyan-British journalist.[29]
My boss’ son was on the Lockerbie flight.
Maybe you just don’t realize what you are saying.
“Gaddafi employed his network of diplomats and recruits to assassinate dozens of his critics around the world. Amnesty International listed at least 25 assassinations between 1980 and 1987.”-Malinse
Yeah, and just how did the Amnesty International and other Blame America First types expect Quaddafi to be stopped – hmmmm? (You and I aren’t supposed to ask, that’s what.) When the U.S.A. acts they pout (or clamber all over each other in their haste to volunteer to be human shields for dictators) and pout again when it doesn’t.
Yes, we do know which side you’re on, Mario ….
a sentient being wouldn’t be proud of that, though.
Boy, usually it takes longer for some moron to prove Godwin’s Law. Congratulations on being an early warning moron…
@Mario: for better or for worse, the Commander In Chief has committed our troops to another conflict.
Like you, I question this commitment due to the lack of an explicit political exit strategy. The same was said about President Bill Clinton and the use of US troops in Bosnia and GW Bush and Iraq.
Such commitments often cost far more than anyone cares to think about. But that said, I will back our troops in battle –and SO SHOULD YOU! Once the fighting starts, it will not stop until there is a clear acceptance of political goals. Calling our troops Nazis is reprehensible and wrong.
For you, the shorter version: anyone who describes a dictatorship as “sovereign” loses all credibility right there.
Dictatorships do not have the right to exist (it’s a simple and direct logical outgrowth of the notion that “there is no such thing as the right to oppress”), and so can claim no moral shield, least of all that of “sovereignty”, against invasion by civilized (i.e. rights-respecting) nations.
The question of whether we should have done this, is a separate question. But whatever one thinks about that, no argument presupposing the sovereignty of a dictatorship is worth considering.
The United States looked an awful lot like a dictatorship to the native-Americans; more semantic nonsense – especially considering the fact that it is the West that created Libya’s borders.
Go ahead and choose your sides but stop making up fairy tales to hide the fact that you were simply born on that side.
The west has been fair game for about 1400 years or so, and anyone who does not realize that is not living in the real world.
Give him a new nickname: Obomber
Yep, this is what “no fly zone” means. David W Nicholas has called it, spot on. I wouldn’t be surprised if most of the State-puppeted Arab diplomatic elites didn’t know that, though it’s true that Sec Gates very clearly explained it the other day.
Ghaddafi really is a “communist/socialist” in the true sense. Libya’s is one of the least ‘dictatorial’ and most progressive regimes, with “people’s congresses” very similar to the old USSR. This is why Col Ghaddafi has been such a darling of the Western Left – who were happy to believe the best of him and accept monetary donations, right up until it became politically expedient to throw him under the bus.
The Russians are condemning this also, stating it exceeds the UN mandate.
http://catawbatribune.com/?p=2521&&
Chinese will be next, maybe calling for a UN inquiry.
Any takers on that bet?
maybe an inquiry is good, so Haya Court can process Obomber, Gates, Hillary etc for WAR CRIMES and put them all on jail.
“maybe an inquiry is good, so Haya Court can process Obomber, Gates, Hillary etc for WAR CRIMES and put them all on jail”
No fear. I’m sure they’ll move on that with all the speed that they move on anything with. Heck, they might even indict the people you’re talking about before they all die of old age. That would be contrary to the UN’s record, but we can always hope, right? Hey, I’ve got an even better Idea. The security council could draft strongly worded letters to each of the offenders. If they’re guilty, surely they’ll all fall down dead from the fear.
Seriously, dude. I wouldn’t go to the UN to complain about my neighbor’s dog shitting in my yard. They just don’t have the political courage, not to even mention the physical assets, to do anything meaningful to anybody, anywhere, ever. They are a worn-out exercise in creative ways to waste taxpayer money in plain sight while getting many of the taxpayers to congratulate them for it.
Actions speak louder than words. They did not veto. They abstained. That means they wanted the no-fly zone and the bombing, with the right to verbally stab the west in the back afterwards.
Dear Mr. Poole:
Perhaps, but remember that the Arab press–as well as Arab leaders–frequently have separate messages for mass consumption and for private channels. It would not be out of character for them to disparage our efforts in public while saying “thank God,” to us behind the scenes. It is also possible that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama aren’t experienced enough to understand this and to take advantage of it.
It’s dead certain they are not experienced enough to know this going in and they are not smart enough to figure it out on the fly.
So, now the Arabs cancel their support, and take a few other countries with them.
What’s left hanging out to dry?
The United States of America.
Worked like a charm.
They were just counting on picking up all of the Libyan military equipment for themselves.
On the other hand, as we already know from Assange-gate, what the Arab League says and what it really thinks are two different things, and furthermore it expects American politicians to be canny enough to know that their public pronouncements are lies, which they were until one B. Hussein Obama came along.
Essentially, the Arab governments keep power by blaming everything on Jewish existence and Western imperialism. Any public declarations that Euro-American wars (or the existence of Israel) are OK undermine the foundation of their various regimes.
But again, they don’t actually think WE are stupid enough to believe that. And we weren’t until Obama brought the Change and hit the Reset Button on competency.
With just 25 seconds to go in the first half, Ohio State, President Obama’s pick is leading 49-24. Currently he is among the top 99.8 Percentile for correct bracket picks. Man, he can pick ‘em. Oh, right. Libya. Of course, we have to take out their ground-to-air defenses, that is like such Standard Operating Procedure. If one of our airmen go down, there will be, There Better Be, a rescue. Did the Arab League think we were just going to fire missiles at aircraft in Libya? Or zap them with a laser from a satellite? Didn’t anybody explain this? Oh, right, that Gates guy. The one being marginalized by Hillary and the female White House aides. Let’s not forget to salt the fields before we leave.
(1) 112 and counting US cruise missils. Air strikes by US stealth bombers. France opens the war by attack on a military vehicle. Who is prosecuting this war and who is said to be prosecutiong this war? Obama wants us to believe that Europeans are taking the lead. Why not just take credit where credit is due?
(2) Another Democrat war. That is to say, another limited war. Even Kadaffi himself is reportedly not being targeted. There is talk of a cease fire – as if that would somehow serve our interests. “If you strike at a king you must kill him.” The Butcher of Lockerbie must be run to ground. See G. W. Bush and Manuel Noriega. Kill the beast, there is no second-in-command. Crisis over.
Mrs. Bill Clinton is the singularly most unqualified and inept Sec of State I believe we’ve ever had….or at least in the last generation or three. She had the arrogance and ignorance to believe that jetting around the world and staying in 5 star hotels as first lady qualified her for the position. Now all she ever does is whine about how hard the job is and that she will soon quit. She is a walking disaster and is constantly manipulated, out manouvered and mocked by just about every player in the international scene.
Strong woman? Gimme a break.
Yes, she’s the feminists’ dream – a woman in a pantsuit in a position of power and prestige!
And she got there by riding on her husband’s coattails!
Creating a No Fly Zone is (for the West) a rather simple task. It is somewhat costly and certainly very noisey. It is an exercise in Shock & Awe that lights up large chunks of the nation. And therein lies the problem: it illuminates 1400 years of Arab failure. The Arab world today is just miles and miles of mud hut villages. And they know it. And they hate it.
Are you telling me that I’m burning ancient Arabs in my tank, and not dinosaurs?
Now I understand why the pollution is so bad.
I wish I could agree, but I am old enough to remember Madeline Albright.
So; Tell me; How did she sexually abuse you?
It must make our military people sick to their stomachs every day to think that the Resident is actually in charge of them. It wouldn’t be humanly possible for someone to despise him more than I do, and that same bitter contempt is merited by every one of the 52% that voted for him. Part of the reason I feel this way about him is that I know that for Obastard, American casualties in this affair will be a net plus.
Thanks, 52%. With people like you in our country, who needs external enemies?
My feelings, ditto.
Obama must hate people who he knows are better than he is, or refuse to share his hatred of the US like the men and women of the military.
Ah, the treacherous Towelish people have struck again. Obama may be an African Muslim but he’s no match for the wily desert Towelish.
The Arab League wanted the West to take out Gaddafi, of course, and were frustrated by America’s inaction, so they had to bite the bullet and ask for a no-fly zone. Their backtracking now is strictly for home consumption, so the masses they’ve preached anti-American hate to for decades won’t blame them.
Now we know why camels never turn their back on an Arab.
Duh!
They want us to magically shoot down any flying machines without first disabling all Libyan air defenses! (Thereby ensuring a substantial number of US airmen casualties fulfilling the desires of all moral equivalence ‘proportional response’ mavens)
HAHAHA!
And Ohillary bought it!
…while magically ensuring that it is the civilians doing the flying through the air. Gee, then they can be shot at a second time if we’re quick enough.
Don’t worry, we’ll save you! Just dig a very deep tunnel and don’t stand next to any tanks, APCs, bridges, aqueducts, air bases, radar stations, mobile missile platforms, roads, rich palaces, or anything else that looks blurry on a satellite image.
In fact, may be just best to take a vacation in Tunisia – looks to be a little more hazardous than we planned on. When we say ‘no-fly’ we actually mean we’re going to bomb the burqa off your hide.
I guess I fail to see why destroying anything that could shoot back at a US fighter plane is a bad thing. You’re asking a pilot to patrol a given airspace and risk engagement but not willing to take all measures necessary to protect that pilot? That seems a bit odd to me.
Look, I think the whole damn thing is a SNAFU from the get go just like you do. We have no strategic interest in Libya at all. If the tribes want to kill themselves, I don’t see how we should be the referee. But if you’ve bought into the idea of committing forces, I am all for protecting them wherever necessary.
The French taking out armor? Well, that is certainly not part of a no-fly zone, but it does come under some broad interpretation of the UN resolution FWIW.
Well, now we’re finally getting to the heart of the issue. Endangering the lives of hundreds of people by lighting up Libya in order to safeguard the pilots is a no-fly.
Think about that again since it is escaping so many here: a no-fly that is supposed to protect lives’ greatest imperative is to endanger civilians in order to protect the pilots. That is not a no-fly, that is a plain and simple battering and semantic gibberish.
Yes, James. Exactly. It IS pretty stupid. People should be careful what they wish for.
We do a pretty good job of limiting casualties in our bombardments, but it cannot ever be perfect. I do not fault our military in this. I believe it is far better that hundreds of Arabs die, rather than even 1 of our guys gets captured and have his head slowly sawn off with a dull saw, then have his body parts spread amongst the masses and paraded through the streets.
Of course it were better we stayed out of Arab brawls. Most importantly, it were better that the President did not go off and use American troops to support a UN Resolution, without getting authorization from Congress. If he had asked Congress, I think the people would have told their Congressman, “No!”, and we would not be doing this.
Obama is worse than Bush. Far, far worse. “Miss me, yet?” (sigh)
Yopu can quit now, you kinow, James. You’ve already proved to everyone’s satisfaction you don’t know jack sh!t about military operations.
Neither did your Norman git of a namesake.
By the way it’s hard to imagine what your real name is if you think the moniker of a failed military adventurer is ‘cool’.
Word is that Bohemond used to get his fanny spanked in Sicily by the other boys in the ‘Cloak-of-Armor’ room. This caused him to over compensate and try to conquer the entirety of the Byzantine Empire and the Near Middle East.
Unfortunately he got an ass-whupping from an effete Byzantine Emperor who was reputed to eat whales tongues by the box load and have the enormous carcasses dumped in the Golden Horn by his elite brigade of beautiful man servants.
Tutweiler Glompenpuss? Jargonhaid Katzmeoh? What?
Well, well, well.
EVERYONE knows that a “no-fly” zone means taking out the radar systems first. Tomahawks were a surprise to no one, especially Amr Moussa.
Moussa, running for Pres. of Egypt, was speaking for home consumption – electioneering. The arab League was his platform of the day.
Right Roger.
Besides, payback is a bitch. Obama stabbed our ally Mubarak in the back and in turn Obama got stabbed in the back by the anti-American Moussa who wants to replace him.
I pray to Allah that Baradei is not the next president of Egypt.
The Muslim Brotherhood have already chased El Baradei out cause he quite agree on something.
As to the UAL, words, just words. Obama should understand that.
THE Arab League CAN KISS MY WHITE ASS…
THE Arab League CAN KISS MY WHITE ASS..
IF THE Arab League WANTED Gadhafi OUT THEN DO IT YOURSELVES..
WE WESTERNERS ARE SICK AND TIRED IF YOU ARABS.. WE ARE TRYING TO HELP (BRING STABILITY TO THE ARAB WORLD WHERE ALL ARABS CAN HAVE A FUTURE) BUT IF YOU DONT WANT THAT THEN STFU AND DONT ASK FOR OUR HELP..
we sell a lot of hiteck jets to arab states. it seem to be prudent now to immediately halt all operations by west, turn to the arab states and say: “you do it then”.
Egypt has hundreds of American F-15s. Let them get their hands dirty enforcing the NFZ.
really a no fly zone would only slow Gaddaffi Duck down byut not stop him.
that way more people can be killed.
the other point is the no fly zone was supposed to stop Gaddaffi Duck from killing civilians so the civilians (you know the ones we see on the tele with weapons ..some very large weapons) from killing the military.
Frankly, I think you have it exactly backwards– we punked the Russians, the Chinese and the Arab League– they thought the US was just going through the motions and that Gadahfi would have the rebels crushed before we would do anything. I suspect the Brits at least have had special ops on the ground for a couple of weeks ready to act as forward air observers. In addition, we got the clause regarding “all means necessary” to protect the Libyan population– pretty much a blank check.
Obama’s all too convincing appearance of incompetence and dithering was not allowed to detract from some excellent military preparation. About what you’d expected from a government operating on auto-pilot with the Teleprompter-In-Chief.
Community organizing at the U.N. A step up for Obumbles!
The Presider got prison punked by his Muslim Brothehood.
I know. The way to calm the Arab League abroad, and the Left here at home would be for us to fly our jets over Libya unarmed. That would show them we mean business, but not in an imperialist way.
I love this headline from Fox News:
“Qaddafi’s Compound Destroyed as No-Fly Zone is Enforced”
Well, I guess that’s one compound that’ll never fly again.
Which one of you predictive combined arms geniuses is going to take credit for that one?
How about a champ for the NCAA? I’ve got some extra dough and with your abilities to read headlines, parse them in fake military jargon and parrot them back at us I’m just sure it’ll be a big success.
Some nitwit figured he’d run his affairs from a tent somewhere, and they tried to whack him.
Idiots. This isn’t 1986.
Good God. Does “C3″ convey anything to your militarily-challenged little mind?
Yes, I read about the C and C in the paper like you did. I guess it is a ‘No Command and Control Zone’ now as well as a ‘Don’t Move in Daylight or Dark Zone’, ‘Put Your Kids In A Well Zone’, and any other ‘zone’ one wishes to portray and pass it off to starry eyed military ‘experts’ as semantic crap you eat up with a spoon.
I’m imagining you with a dictionary that is about a quarter inch thick. Today I had a ‘no-fly’ sandwich – I call it that cuz I ate the whole thing.
Let’s trot out some Vietnam era nomenclature that made massacres not massacres but a warm and fuzzy bedtime story about people who were only worth 1/10 as much as pilot who kills people in a no-fly meant to save them. Pretty clever stuff.
In writing about “the bravery of being out of range” Roger Waters had these lyrics:
“…Scans his dials and smiles
Secure in the beauty of military life
There is no right or wrong
Only tin cans and cordite and white cliffs
And blue skies and flight flight flight
The beauty of military life
No questions only orders and flight only flight
What a beautiful sight in his wild blue dream
The eternal child leafs through his
War magazine
And his kind Uncle Sam feeds ten trillion in
Change into the total entertainment
Combat video game
And up here in the stands
The fans are goin’ wild
The cheerleaders flip
When you wiggle your hip
And we all like the bit when you take
The jeans from the refrigerator and
The the bad guy gets hit
And were you struck by the satisfying
Way the swimsuit sticks to her skin
Like BB gun days
When knives pierce autumn leaves
But that’s okay see the children bleed
It’ll look great on the TV
And in Tripoli another ordinary wife
Stares at the dripping tap her old man hadn’t
Time to fix
Too busy mixing politics and rhythm
In the street below”
Your mixing metaphors and not even knowing it and mixing it with blood too. Have a nice semantic, Orwellian day. Screw you and all ‘cease fires’.
Glad you didn’t “read headlines, parse them in fake military jargon and parrot them back at us”.
You’re not a Harvey Girl are you?
Yeah, I bet you got one of those pillows that says, “Oh, you kid.”
OBAMA’S DEFINITION OF NO-FLY ZONE
It seems that Obama’s definition of no-fly zone is much broader than it seems. It seems to mean ‘clipping Kaddafi’s wings and bringing down his regime.’
How about an all purpose, smoke ‘em if you got ‘em, dual purpose, all in one, ‘no-fly’ mushroom cloud?
That oughtta protect a lot of pilots.
Or, we could just spray the entire country with knock-out gas or special purpose Major League Baseball to roll a tarp over the whole damn thing.
A more accurate appraisal would be they meant fly as in house fly – ‘don’t move or buzz and get yer legs up. That’s it, all 17 of ‘em – or whatever.’
People in Tripoli aren’t real people – they’re just cardboard cutouts. Americans are REAL people – all 5/5 of us.
Let’s have a contest to see how many Libyan lives you would sacrifice for one Western pilot. Any takers? Who’d like to start the bidding – or should I say ‘no-bid’?
Muah-ha-ha! Americans! Youse is da crazzziesht peeples!
You are ruled by crazy half-wit mulatto commie person who is conveniently staring at bundas on Ipanema Beach in SA just like Erdogan did in Chile during Gaza Flotilla he engineered. Maybe they can all meet with Gaddafi in Venezuela and play poker with human poker chips as stakes. I’d like to be a ‘no-fly’ on the wall for that one.
“crazy half-wit mulatto commie”
I would certainly go along with this inspired description. It will look good in future history books, too – as long as there are any by the time this Dead-White-Man civilization is finished overhauling itself.
Blood for oil. Where are the WMDs? Did all the world’s intelligence agencies state there were WMDs in Libya? Where is CodePink? Why is Guantanamo still open for business? Military tribunals. Why were Bush tax cuts passed and signed? No waterboarding of confirmed terrorists but quadrupling of drone murders of suspected terrorists and civilians. Transparency blocks virtually all requests for public records. Hope and Change, Obama Biden.
“In Nova Scotia today, Mr Roy Bent of North Walsham in Norfolk became the first man to cross the Atlantic on a tricycle. His tricycle, specially adapted for the crossing, was ninety feet long, with a protective steel hull, three funnels, seventeen first-class cabins and a radar scanner.” by M.P.
In other news today, a group of historians has signed a petition to rename WW II “The Great No-Fly Zone”.
They also have retroactively now declared the “Battle For Midway” as a U.S. defeat.
Wow. Dumber and dumber and dumber.
Using your inability to parse semantics I will interpret that for everyone as “you are looking dumber and dumber”.
Ya know, the book by Orwell is still in print. You know the one, it has that thingy about looking at black and truly believing it’s white?
Will you be attending any of the “America Saved Us Funerals” in Tripoli?
What an achievement,crossing the Atlantic on a tricycle! I hope to learn more about that. It certainly beats any news coming from the White House today.
My theory about obama is that he was raised by people who doted on him and never criticized him at all. It was reassuring to take everyone at their word although, down deep, he must have realized that he was an empty pair of shorts. Therefore he accepts the promises and pleas of his Muslim pals at face value although the rest of us know they are worthless.
James what ever else is said in this comments section your sarcasm is hilarious, I have sat here just about ROTFLMAO. keep up the good work. I agree with your idea that no one should trust an arab when they make requests or promises. Let them settle it themselves.
I thought only Congress could declare war? Or are the U,N. and the Arab League now running the USA?
“I thought only Congress could declare war? Or are the U,N. and the Arab League now running the USA?”
The Saudi king wants a return on his investment…..
He is keeping a close eye on his underling.
Yes. Courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer.
What about that “Tent” today that looked like several tarps duct taped togather on a golf green?????
I like the “broad coalition” of ships that launched the 118 Tomahawks today.
All U.S., except for one UK sub. Really “broad” there, President Hillary.
The USA has been punked by the EU states that supported the UN resolution, intending all along for Great Satan to do all the heavy lifting. The USA got punked again by the AL who pulled its support as soon as the hummus hit the fan and things got messy.
Our president is…incompetent…as you all know, and when he is really backed into a corner, he mimics the behavior of George W. Bush the best he knows how. And hopes nobody talks bad about him. “cept it turns out miserably.
Am I the only one who notices this?
It is still too early to know the outcome of the Libya conflict. But, Obama has accomplished much in establishing a true coalition of the willing. And, willing they are. It seems the French, British and other military forces are taking a leading role. No longer must the US be out in front, seems our coalition partners are doing their part. When has this been achieved before? If the outcome is successful in this crucial part of the world, Obama will go down in history for his brilliant foreign affairs policy.
Oh, the kool-aid is flowing freely today!
KADDAFY PUNKING OBAMA
This “if” is far fetched given the lessons that Kaddafy has learned from Saddam’s catastrophic failure in Iraq. If anyone will be doing the punking of Obama it will be Kaddafy.
You aren’t serious, are you!?? The British and French were the initiators of this Libyan agenda..while Obama dithered and hemmed and hawed. Finally, he was shamed into agreeing to participate. Obama had absolutely nothing to do with ‘putting together a coalition’.
Oh – and Bush’s Iraq war had more than twice the number of coalition forces than this Libyan venture. Got that? More than twice, with the British a major, major contributor.
What ‘brilliant ‘foreign affairs policy? Obama doesn’t have one. He’s insulted all our basic western allies, kowtowed to and supported dictators around the world (remember Obama’s support for Zelaya’s attempt to subvert the Honduran constitution??)…ignored Islamic fascism, renaming terrorism to ‘man-caused disasters’… What brilliant foreign policy???
Oh – and remember WWII? That was quite the coalition too, wasn’t it?
“If I were a betting man I would take the Arab League’s reversal as an indication they believe Gaddafi is going to survive.”
You’d lose. No way will the coalition allow Qaddafi to survive. The Arab’s League buyer’s remorse is bigger that. Infidels killing believers is a mortal sin in Islam, and a Muslim abetting an infidel compounds the sin.
Only punks use words like, “punked”.
Obama is not interest to save civiliens,he went to save to rebale these people on payrole of Obama.
AL ON BOARD FOR NO-FLY ZONE
As the unstated mission of coalition forces in Libya is regime change and the killing of Kaddafy it goes beyond merely establishing a no-fly zone-which is what the Arab League signed on to. Yesterday’s bombing of Kaddafy’s compound shocked Amr Mousa into realizing the true nature of the mission which he and the AL appearently oppose. The AL is on board for a no-fly zone to protect civilians and nothing more.
“…after the Arab League reversed course…”
They are Arabs, after all. [And the proposal was for a straight up fight]
d(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”
We are finally at the cusp…of why this president will be re-elected president. He held fire, then fired when the time was ready, instead of half-handedly doin the “trigger finger” without the support of half the civilised nations. This is a well seasoned thoughtful president. We should all take note. Dont you agree?
I heard he’s staying in Brazil. That’s why he brought the kids and the ‘ol ball ‘n’ chain.
No, he held fire until he had enough cover not to be blamed if things go bad, instead of doing a No Fly when it would have had the most impact — early in this crisis when the rebels held 90% of Libya and Khadaffi was desperate. Instead he waited a month until Khadaffi held 90% of Libya and the rebels are desperate! Too much, too late perhaps?? And what does victory for this measured operation look like? What’s the “end game” and goal? Who are these rebels anyways?? Been reading recently that their leader is an AQ-linked imam!!!
He’s well-seasoned, all right…Vlad the Impaler and Amr Moussa are rubbing plenty of salt into his hide.
Wow, All the Sunday Morning Defense Analysts in here today! For all you whiners complaining that we had no right to take out tanks, SAM’s and AAA- I would not ask 1 American pilot to fly a mission where we had not taken out every possible weapon we could to insure his safety.
It is Commands responsibility to reduce casualties as much as possible. That means taking out all those SAM’s, AAA and command locations.
And remember”No Poor Bastard ever won a war dying for his country, He won it by makeing the other poor dumb bastard die for his.”
G. Patton
Should I take it for granted that you didn’t laugh at the part in “Team America: World Police” where they destroy half of Paris to ‘save’ it from a small group of terrorists?
And, are you sure that ‘Patton’ quote wasn’t from “Dr. Strangelove”?
Oh, yeah, you’re right. Funny how an absurdly horrific comedy can be confused with reality like that.
Hoo-rah! Get ‘em Buster.
What a bunch of morons.
“Morons”? I prefer the term ‘no-fly zone’; it’s endlessly elastic and as useful as a Swiss Army Knife.
Hi honey, I’m no-fly zone. What’s for no-fly zone?
Hi, darling. I’m just putting the finishing touches on some no-fly zone. How was your day at the no-fly zone?
It was no-fly zone, baby.
How about we scoot upstairs and have a nice no-fly zone before no-fly zone?
That’s no-fly zone with me honey.
And Obama got ‘punked’ into an ILLEGAL war:
Defined here, comment # 8:
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/eastern-libyas-tribes-jihadism-did-u-s-consider-its-own-libya-intel/
We have NO reason to be in Libya, Arab nations need to learn how to control their own, but have ignored this dictator for 42 years.
And it is NOT up to US to be ‘policeman’ for UN Security Council resolutions.
In fact, UN needs to be permanently booted out from New York, and find another country to suck up space in. They are responsible for Ahmadinejad setting up tent/camel (his wife?) in New York for a few days a year or so back. I’d suggest all future meetings down at South Pole, they might come across some interested penguins.
James May, you are on this site criticizing Obama’s actions in Libya as if it is OUR fault. Yes, it’s us danged Conservatives!
Well, you are clearly a Lefty, and as such, you cannot simply recognize that this all Obama’s doing, and he’s a Lefty. This is what Lefties actually do when given power. He did not ask Congress for permission. He just did it on his own. Generalissimo Obama.
Before you start on Bush, understand that to us Conservatives, Bush too is a Lefty. He is a conservative Democrat. Socially conservative, but a big government guy.
I read every comment on this thread, and not 1 person stated we should be doing this. We just do not fault the military in their methods. They are doing what militaries do. They break s*** and kill people. I DO fault them for obeying these illegal orders.
So, quit railing at us for the methods. Quit blaming us for what Obama is doing. This is ENTIRELY Obama’s doing. No one else’s. Blame your fellow Leftists. Quit being a Leftist and wake up. Leftism means big government and pointless wars.
You’re as bad as the stupid Arabs. “We didn’t ask for THIS!” Yes, you did! This is EXACTLY what you asked for!
Well, if you read all my comments then you’re a feckless yahoo sorely in need of a reading comprehension DVD since I’ve said nothing about Bush or blaming conservatives.
Elsewhere here at PJM are the Cisco Kid’s videos about an overweight Japanese cat that even looks Japanese which is high on acid and trying to sleep in matchboxes. I’m sure you’ll find them a welcome break from staring in hapless fascination at things that are shiny or at the sun.