The Consequence Of Inaction In Libya - Page 2

Richard · 03-10-2011, 06:45

Any such recognition by a Western power can be of consequence. Remember what happened in the Balkans after Germany recognized Croatia?

Richard

mark46th · 03-10-2011, 09:50

I am wary of providing assistance to any Middle Eastern/Islamic culture in "Rebellion". They already hate us. They would hate us if we help them because it would remind them how impotent they are compared to the U.S. If we don't help them, they will hate us because it will be our fault that their rebellion failed. It's a lose/lose proposition...

Also, remember Cuba- We provided assistance to Tio Fidel and he threw it back in our faces.

Truckie117 · 03-10-2011, 10:53

I agree a wise woman once told me. A good deed does not go unpunished. It is a lose/lose situation.

akv · 03-10-2011, 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark46th

Also, remember Cuba- We provided assistance to Tio Fidel and he threw it back in our faces.

True, though IIRC we also withheld air support during the Bay of Pigs, which may have altered that outcome in our favor. Cuba's proximity alone likely warrants US involvement more than Libya, it may well be in US interests to do nothing about Libya, but Obama's needless passive comments on the issue are embarrasing IMO.

For example,

Quote:

On Libya, Obama willing to let allies take the lead

By Scott Wilson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 10, 2011; 12:21 AM

President Obama is content to let other nations publicly lead the search for solutions to the Libyan conflict, his advisers say, a stance that reflects the more humble tone he has sought to bring to U.S. foreign policy but one that also opens him to criticism that he is a weak leader. (continues)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...030905672.html

mark46th · 03-10-2011, 15:17

AKV- The Bay of Pigs came after Fidel took over. He had already turned on the U.S. Fidel took over on Jan 1 1959 then threw the U.S. out. The Bay of Pigs landing took place in April of 1961...

Ret10Echo · 03-10-2011, 18:51

So back to Richard's point concerning the importance of a Western power recongnizing the "rebel" leadership (who apparently took a pounding today).

The unilateral, French move seemed to catch the rest of the EU unprepared. I found that interesting although based on the French influence (or lack thereof) in neighboring Algeria, it is not surprising that they were the first to recognize the group. Somehow I don't see any inclination by anyone in Europe (or elsewhere) getting involved. EU forces or NATO don't seem to have the desire currently.

"International problem"...right.

Lacking some form of military support, it would appear that they are in for some punishment as Gadaffi does not appear to discriminate in attacks on rebel held towns. Also, barring some event that limits use of aerial platforms there aren't very many positive scenarios that I can see. Gadaffi can get along fine by controlling key cities, ports and oil resources. Keeping himself insulated and the rebels confined to the interior of the country.

That has been the practice in Algeria for some time now.

Does any scenario create further stability/instability in the region? Or does it matter all that much the outcome?

akv · 03-10-2011, 19:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark46th

AKV- The Bay of Pigs came after Fidel took over. He had already turned on the U.S. Fidel took over on Jan 1 1959 then threw the U.S. out. The Bay of Pigs landing took place in April of 1961...

Yes Sir I realized that I meant both dictators are benefited by our reluctance to committ air assets, and we were much more culpable in Cuba as we were inciting the rebels. For whatever reason the decision was made to let the rebels fend for themselves in Cuba, and thus far in Libya.

alright4u · 03-11-2011, 17:39

I say we stay out of this. I am no fan of the Colonel. He does beat AQ to me. I am inclined to quietly support those who are opposed to AQ Jihad types and deny it in public.

Ret10Echo · 03-11-2011, 19:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by alright4u

I say we stay out of this. I am no fan of the Colonel. He does beat AQ to me. I am inclined to quietly support those who are opposed to AQ Jihad types and deny it in public.

Despotism is the major stabilizing force in the region. As that is undone I think you are correct as to who the advantage goes to.

Time will tell.

perdurabo · 03-12-2011, 15:49

I don't have much to contribute here. But has anyone else noticed the number of people who are against our involvement overthrowing oppressive regimes in Iraq and Afghanistan criticizing our government for not getting involved in Libya? Seems rather hypocritical to me.

Richard · 03-12-2011, 18:03

Quote:

But has anyone else noticed the number of people who are against our involvement overthrowing oppressive regimes in Iraq and Afghanistan criticizing our government for not getting involved in Libya? Seems rather hypocritical to me.

Did your alarm clock finally go off?

Richard

incarcerated · 03-17-2011, 09:57

http://www.washingtonpost.com/as-gad...YNh_story.html

Obama administration seeks more U.N. authority to intervene in Libya

By Scott Wilson, Colum Lynch and Karen DeYoung,
Thursday, March 17, 11:29 AM
The Obama administration pressed Thursday for greater United Nations authority to confront Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi’s forces by land, air and sea, while insisting that Arab governments play a central role in any possible military action.

After a day of negotiations Wednesday in the U.N. Security Council, it remained unclear whether the United States or allied governments were making concrete plans to intervene militarily against Gaddafi’s forces, which have made significant gains on the ground against rebel strongholds.

But U.S. diplomats sent the clearest signal yet that the Obama administration is willing to contemplate military operations even beyond a no-fly zone to resolve the crisis in the oil-rich nation.

In Congress, lawmakers were split on whether the United States should support a U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing military intervention in Libya. Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called on the council Thursday to pass such a resolution immediately. But in a Thursday morning hearing on the issue, Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), the senior Republican on the committee, said the administration “should first seek a congressional debate on a declaration of war” against Libya before agreeing to any military intervention.

In the administration’s most direct endorsement of a new resolution, William J. Burns, undersecretary of state for policy, told the committee that “we are pressing for a new U.N. Security Council resolution to authorize a range of further actions against the Gaddafi regime....”

Doc Diego · 03-17-2011, 14:16

I agree with Sen. Luger, look to the Constitution.

**Pete** · 03-17-2011, 14:24

A better question..........

Why us - the US?

Why not the EU? It seems to be on their doorstep.

Or is the EU a paper tiger backed up by NATO - which means the US?

Richard · 03-17-2011, 15:15

Quote:

A better question..........

Why us - the US?

This was an important question we were asking our numerous allies (NATO, EU, UN) as we were moving Vll (US) Corps (+) out of Central Europe and sending them to SWA for GW1.

The best answer we in the DAO could come up with at the time was an analogy to a Raiders of the Lost Ark scene where they excavate a buried map room and remove the large stone slab covering its top. Upon dropping a lit torch into the large chamber, they discover it is filled with snakes...and their boastful Egyptian excavator, Sallah (John Rhys-Davies), turns to Dr Jones and exclaims, "Asps! Very dangerous! You go first."

When it comes to global affairs, it seems as if we have a lot of 'excavators' for friends in the world.

And so it goes...

Richard