The Misadventures of Operation Odyssey Dawn

Pages: 1 2

As the war in Libya entered its fourth day, UN coalition airstrikes continued along the Coastal Highway upon which Muammar Gaddafi’s army was attempting to reorganize. While the largest number of sorties were logged by coalition air forces on Tuesday, NATO unity appeared to be strained, as several member states sniped at one another over details about President Obama’s desired hand-over of control of combat operations to a NATO command structure. But cohesion and leadership are not the only problems. As more time elapses, the remarkable maladministration of Operation Odyssey Dawn, with no explicit objective, is turning into far more of an “odyssey” than it was perhaps intended to be.

Allied planes attacked pro-Gaddafi positions in the east near Benghazi as rebels tried to move forward and retake the strategic city of Ajdabiyah. But Gaddafi”s forces have dug in inside the town, and because of hazy rules of engagement covering who and what they can bomb, coalition planes can’t get at Gaddafi’s armor and artillery, which is well-hidden in the densely packed city.

In the western town of Misrata, government forces shelled the city while tanks moved through the streets and snipers took shots at any civilian who came out of his or her house looking for food and water. It is believed that up to 40 civilians have been killed and dozens of wounded are being treated in hospital corridors because of overcrowding.

The problems in Ajdabiyah and Misrata expose the weakness and confusion that is accompanying this military operation. Byron York, writing in the Washington Examiner, asks the right questions. “Are opposition fighters civilians?” he asks. “Are they military? What about civilians who are loyal to Gadhafi? Do they warrant protection, too?”

American commander Carter Ham said the situation was very “problematic.” He added, “It’s not a clear distinction, because we’re not talking about a regular military force. Many in the opposition truly are civilians, and they are trying to protect their homes, their families, their businesses, and in doing that, some of them have taken up arms. But they are basically civilians.”

So do we protect the pro-Gaddafi civilians or not? General Ham couldn’t answer that question, which is why this entire operation couldn’t be more muddled. We don’t know exactly who we are fighting, or even who we are fighting to protect, although it is likely that some of the rebel forces are made up of al-Qaeda fighters and other affiliated terrorist groups. We don’t know who we can bomb and who we should leave alone. We don’t know how to unite the rebel forces under a unified command to make them more effective. One rebel told Reuters, when asked who was in charge, “Nobody is. We are volunteers. We just come here. There is no plan.”

The same might be said for the United Nations’ forces themselves. The question of the day is: who is in charge? President Obama is determined that it won’t be America for much longer. “When this transition takes place, it is not going to be our planes that are maintaining the no-fly zone,” the president said in a news conference from El Salvador. “It is not going to be our ships that are necessarily enforcing the arms embargo. That’s precisely what the other nations are going to do,” he added.

The president can say that, but is NATO buying it? The administration is working very hard to “handoff” responsibility for the war to a NATO command structure, but the Daily Mail is reporting that NATO’s unity is coming more unraveled by the hour. The Germans have pulled assets out of the Mediterranean, expressing the fear that NATO would be drawn into the conflict even more heavily than they are engaged now. Turkey has made it clear that they believe coalition military action has exceeded their UN mandate. The Italians have accused the French of fighting for oil contracts, while making it clear they would support a NATO-led coalition or no coalition at all. Italy’s support is vital because we are using their air bases to launch attacks into Libya.

Pages: 1 2

  • http://www.fxexchangerate.com/ fxgeorges

    Keep Odyssey Dawn. Perhaps not consciously chosen, but as a name for this operation it may prove, like a spastic uttering from a blind oracle, perfectly suited to events once they unfold. The dawn of The Odyssey is the end of the Trojan War, a 10-year campaign in the Middle East that ended arguably in pyrrhic victory for one side. In the events that make up The Odyssey, a general, thinking he’s finally on his way home after this war, is trapped in the region for another ten years, enduring a series of nasty misadventures and losing his entire army.

  • G Dub

    Rick Moran ends his piece with: "When all is said and done, this adventure may go down as one of the most careless, reckless, incompetently prosecuted military actions in US history."

    I believe that the last 27 months could be summed up with: "When all is said and done, this adventure may go down as one of the most careless, reckless, and incompetently administered Presidency in US history."

    • Chezwick_Mac

      Amen. Particularly the reckless deficit spending.

  • http://www.fx-exchange.com/ Bowmanave

    Operashun Libiya Smack Doggy from da hood of Brazill, yea Boyzzz!

  • davarino

    Its funny watching the libs on MSNBC trying to contrast what O did in this situation with the "cowboy" attitude of GW in going into Iraq and Afgan. I cant believe they can say such things with a straight face. At least GW got congress buy in. At least GW was enforcing UN resolutions. O didnt even get congress to approve going into Libya. These media libs, Chris Matthews, Rach Madcow…., should revive Air America. It would be great theatre.

  • geez

    This is exactly what Obama (leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in America) loves to do. Make the US look weak, ignorant and incompetent, this he is very very good at doing.
    Please hurry 2012!

  • preacherbilly

    This whole Libya thing is a mess, because Obama waited to long to make a decision. If he had followed the Bush Doctrine (immediate support for rebels as in the first days of Afghanistan) Khadafi might already be gone, and we could be talking about the complexities of post-Khadafi politics. If Obama had stuck to the dictator loving “Carter Doctrine,” and done nothing (or at least nothing but TALK like he did during the recent uprisings in Iran) there would be another of many blood baths in world history and the region would return to an oppressed “stability.” As it is, Obama tried to have it both ways and we have the worst of both worlds.

    Obama could have ridded the world of Khadafi in about three days by parking one carrier in the Med when this all started – but when the US did nothing Khadafi remembered that he had armor and an air force.

    Since when does America ask for permission to do the right thing? You know America has changed when our president looks to France for bold action!

  • tagalog

    Let's see: Obama campaigned for the presidency by claiming, among other things, that it's dumb to go to war when the national security interests of the United States are not at stake, and he was clearly an antiwar candidate, being the Anti-Bush. He was going to get us out of Iraq in a year or two and out of Afghanistan shortly after that. Now he's gone to war along with the U.N. without even talking to Congress, thus embroiling us in yet a third Middle East war, and without any clear-cut authority from Congress. We don't even know who we're supporting; could be Muslim fundamentalists. Maybe Obama thinks that by sucking up to them we can get them not to bomb us.

    Makes me think of George W. Bush as a senior statesman by comparison.

    And don't forget that Hillary Clinton played a major role in getting us involved in this. Watch out if she decides to run for President. She'll be the LBJ of the 21st Century.

  • tagalog

    Let's see: Obama campaigned for the presidency by claiming, among other things, that it's dumb to go to war when the national security interests of the United States are not at stake, and he was clearly an antiwar candidate, being the Anti-Bush. He was going to get us out of Iraq in a year or two and out of Afghanistan shortly after that. Now he's gone to war along with the U.N. without even talking to Congress, thus embroiling us in yet a third Middle East war, and without any clear-cut authority from Congress.

    Makes me think of George W. Bush as a senior statesman by comparison.

    And don't forget that Hillary Clinton played a major role in getting us involved in this. Watch out if she decides to run for President. She'll be the LBJ of the 21st Century.

  • preacherbilly

    Obama missed the opportunity to make something good happen in Libya when he couldn’t make a decision to act swiftly. The rebels had Khadafi ready to flee the country, until he remembered that he had tanks, an air force and nothing like a conscience to bother him about mass murder. Since when does America need anybodies’ permission to do the right thing? How the world has changed, when the White House thinks that France has greater moral authority to lead?

    One US carrier group parked in the Med three days after the uprising started, would have been all we needed to have Khadafi looking for vacation property in Venezuela. We could be talking about the politics of post-Khadafi Libya, but now we have the worst possible situation: nut jobs are still on the job in Tripoli and DC.

  • USMCSniper

    "The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation." – Sen. Barack Obama December 20, 2007. Only Congress can authorize military operations, otherwise. Obama gets a pass on Libya which is of no interest to the United States but Bush get a public threat of from Brain-damaged Biden. Watch this f*&ktwit with tingleleg Mathews. Back in December 2007 Then Senator Joe Biden appeared on Hardball with Chris Matthews and talked about the new NIE report that showed Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Biden said that if the president chose to bypass Congress and invade Iran he would immediately call for his impeachment. Biden stood behind those comments, saying they were a warning to President Bush and that he has no constitutional authority to take us to war without congressional approval.

    • USMCSniper

      And it just got worse. About 2,200 Marines from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, or 26th MEU are being deployed to Libya. Their mission is to help end the violence directed at the Libyan people. ( Marines missions are to kill people and break things, not babysit al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood). This is what you get when you put three post menopausal hags in charge of foreign policy (Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power) and the President Obozo who lies and says "no boots on the ground" and then goes on vacation to Brazil.

      • preacherbilly

        Wow! Going to check the news right now, did not know until I saw your post about the Marines. The USMC returns to the "shores of Tripoli," but somehow I don't think our president will inspire a new verse in the Marine Corp Hymn.

        Those first-generation Marines knew why they were going to fight – I'd like to know what the NCO's version of THIS mission's briefing sounds like.

        • USMCSniper

          And it really gets worse under Obama, because it is no longer "The Marine Corps Needs a Few Good Men", as Congress has mandated that the Marines now recruit manly girls and girly mans. Next the ptogressives will be demanding that the Marines recruit transgenders, and even those self-made freaks who call themselves shemales. Look up shemales on google and you may just puke.

  • BLJ

    The idea of Obama running a military operator is like Charlie Sheen running a clinic for substance abusers. We have a C-in-C who hates the military in way over his head.

    Personally I don't think these so called "rebels" in Libya are any better than Gahdafi. I would not be surprised if they are being backed by our Islamic enemies.

    • BS77

      I see the image of M Dukakis riding in that tank with his helmet bouncing all over, with that grin……WHEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!

  • sodizzy

    Way over his head, or executing perfectly and above all expectations, what he has been trained from birth to do!! get it, people.

  • UCSPanther

    I knew this would be a repeat of the Balkan war…

    • preacherbilly

      You have called it right; much more show than substance. If Khadafi wants to kill people and is not afraid of throwing away the lives of his own troops (don't imagine he's losing to much sleep) high level bombing is NOT going to stop mechanized infantry and tanks once they get into a populated area.

  • BS77

    Yeah, what about these "rebels"??? Are these mobs of people shooting their guns off in the air (wasting loads of ammunition) pro-democracy? I doubt it. The whole thing is a tar baby, and now we're into it, brambles and all. 120 Tomahawks and Cruise missles…gee what's the bill for that? What exactly are we doing in LIbya anyway? I feel terrible for the millions of Libyans…the elderly, women and children, and ordinary people who are caught in the middle….where is the water, food, medical care??…Blowing up their buildings, roads and bridges insures continuing chaos and instability.

  • Rochmoninoff

    Tagalog hit this one on the head. Dittos!

    Every time I hear Obama say something to the effect that we'll be handing over leadership of this shortly I'm horrified.
    1. Somebody else's general gets to tell us where to bomb? When was that ok?
    2. So now America starts wars and cuts and runs… immediately? When was THAT ok?
    3. And the fact that Obama started a war without first relocating to a command and control center – when WAS THAT ok?

    It simply boggles the mind. No wonder Jon Stewart is mocking him. Even liberals think this is a bridge too far.

  • umustbkidding

    Is it too much to hope for the end of NATO here?

  • Bigol

    So frustrating to watch the lack of leadership, or a clear and well articulated strategy.

    Argh… My thoughts and prayers to the poor men and women in our military that must operate under this self imposed fog of war.

    My own view on this exercise? http://herbegerenews.wordpress.com/2011/03/23/mis

  • Amused

    Gingrich on March 7

    Exercise a no-fly zone this evening. … We don’t need to have the United Nations. All we have to say is that we think that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we’re intervening.

    Gingrich on the Today Show, March 23:

    GINGRICH: The standard [Obama] has fallen back to of humanitarian intervention could apply to Sudan, to North Korea, to Zimbabwe, to Syria this week, to Yemen, to Bahrain. … The Arab League wanted us to do something. The minute we did something, the Arab League began criticizing us doing it. I think that two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is a lot. I think that the problems we have in Pakistan, Egypt — go around the region. We could get engaged by this standard in all sorts of places. I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi. I think there are a lot of other allies in the region we could have worked with. I would not have used American and European forces.

    Neo-cons …..make up your minds .