Libya: Another UN Disaster in the Making

Pages: 1 2

France is also wrestling with getting around the UN’s prohibition against sending in troops without calling it an intervention. A foreign ministry official in France’s lower legislative house proposed sending in 200-300 non-combat troops to help spot targets for NATO warplanes. But France’s foreign minister said he opposed the idea.

“Mission creep” also appeared in another announcement earlier this month. Catherine Ashton, European Union foreign policy chief, offered to have NATO soldiers protect aid workers and humanitarian shipments in Libya. A Gaddafi official immediately said such a deployment would be regarded as a military action that would cause fighting. So far, the UN’s humanitarian organization responsible for the aid programs has not requested the EU’s military assistance.

The reason for NATO slowly reversing its position regarding a ground troop deployment is that the rebel forces are weak, untrained and disunited. They can barely hold on to their own territory in Eastern Libya and are definitely not strong enough to conquer Western Libya or take Tripoli, Gaddafi’s stronghold. Both the rebel forces and NATO want Gaddafi gone and are now facing up to the fact NATO “boots on the ground” are the only way to bring this about. It is also the only path to a short war that does not drain their treasuries and will get the oil and gas flowing again as soon as possible.

In the end, the restrictive and weak UN no-fly zone measure will cost many Libyan non-combatants their lives, contradicting its purpose. While well intentioned, it has created the worst possible scenario. U.S. Army General Carter Ham, head of the U.S. Africa Command, said NATO air strikes may have prevented a Gaddafi victory, but they created a stalemate, in which the fighting will go on for many months. Such a prolonged conflict will see thousands of casualties and the country’s ruination. Already, the dead in the Libyan war are estimated to be between 2,000 and 8,000 with the toll climbing daily.

If NATO intended to intervene militarily, it should have done so in full force in the first weeks of the rebellion when the Gaddafi regime was shocked and off balance, and rebel forces held towns and cities in Western Libya only 30 miles from Tripoli. Instead, led by Obama, NATO countries waited three weeks to get a UN resolution before acting, allowing Gaddafi to recover. By that time, the rebel forces had been driven back to Benghazi and Gaddafi’s forces almost captured the city. Since then, with their hands tied by Resolution 1973, Western governments have been twisting themselves into knots, trying to figure out how to end the stalemate without violating the UN’s mandate.

War is a serious business that requires strong measures. The great British military analyst Sir Henry Basil Liddell-Hart said war is also only profitable when victory is gained quickly. The UN can produce neither. As a result, the killing in Libya will go on for a long time yet.

 

Pages: 1 2

  • logdon

    And it's one, two, three, four, what are we fighting for? (Shows my age!)

    Here's what

    Mounting Evidence of Rebel Atrocities in Libya
    Video clips depict summary executions, lynching of an alleged mercenary and a beheading. Black African prisoners are singled out for abuse.
    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/mounting-evidence-of

    • UCSPanther

      With the rebels behaving like that, we would better off to leave them to Gaddaffi's hounds.

  • Hershek

    I agree with your premise that the UN mission is a disaster but I argue that non intervention -not deepening the foolhardy military adventure on behalf of a band of radicals – is the way to go.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    This is needed to fight our jihad for us like we suckered you kafir infidels to do for us in Bosnia and Kosovo against Christian Serbs like useful idiots.

    But the fact is, ground troops are now necessary if the civilian lives the UN said it wants to save are to be rescued.

    Uhm…apparently you haven’t figured it out yet, but Islam is a militant theo-political totalitarian ideology that demands total and complete submission to the will of Allah, whereby Muhammadans who submit to the will of Allah are forbidden from questioning, much less challenging the texts and tenets of Islam, via the penalty of death, and Islam unfortunately commands all Muhammadans to wage jihad against unbelievers for the spread of Islam, which makes all devout Muhammadans, for all intents and purposes, our enemies and the enemies of the West. Hence, why are you lobbying and advocating for us like a useful idiot to intervene to save the lives of our enemies, when not only should we never intervene to stop Muhammadan on Muhammadan violence, but also we should be fomenting and inciting Muhammadan on Muhammadan violence.

    Moreover, those so-called civilian lives that are really our enemies are also really rebels opposed to Qaddafi. Hence, go fly a kite.

    If ever there was a jihad we should have stayed out of, this jihad is the one. I only wish that in Afghanistan we would have concentrated only on eradicating OBL and AQ in retaliation for the 9/11 terrorist attacks and then gotten the hell out of Afghanistan ASAP, instead of also jumping into the middle of a civil war between the Northern Alliance and the Taliban to pursue an endless fantasy based nation-building mission to win the hearts and minds of Muhammadans who are obligated to have nothing but enmity in their hearts for unbelievers. Some of you guys can’t get past the political correctness to learn from your mistakes.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    “This is needed to protect our people.”

    This is needed to fight our jihad for us like we suckered you kafir infidels to do for us in Bosnia and Kosovo against Christian Serbs like useful idiots.

    But the fact is, ground troops are now necessary if the civilian lives the UN said it wants to save are to be rescued.

    Uhm…apparently you haven’t figured it out yet, but Islam is a militant theo-political totalitarian ideology that demands total and complete submission to the will of Allah, whereby Muhammadans who submit to the will of Allah are forbidden from questioning, much less challenging the texts and tenets of Islam, via the penalty of death, and Islam unfortunately commands all Muhammadans to wage jihad against unbelievers for the spread of Islam, which makes all devout Muhammadans, for all intents and purposes, our enemies and the enemies of the West. Hence, why are you lobbying and advocating for us like a useful idiot to intervene to save the lives of our enemies, when not only should we never intervene to stop Muhammadan on Muhammadan violence, but also we should be fomenting and inciting Muhammadan on Muhammadan violence?

    Moreover, those so-called civilian lives that are really our enemies are also really rebels opposed to Qaddafi. Hence, go fly a kite.

    If ever there was a jihad we should have stayed out of, this jihad is the one. I only wish that in Afghanistan we would have concentrated only on eradicating OBL and AQ in retaliation for the 9/11 terrorist attacks and then gotten the hell out of Afghanistan ASAP, instead of also jumping into the middle of a civil war between the Northern Alliance and the Taliban to pursue an endless fantasy based nation-building mission to win the hearts and minds of Muhammadans who are obligated to have nothing but enmity in their hearts for unbelievers. Some of you guys can’t get past the political correctness to learn from your mistakes.

  • Just a messenger

    Posted by: AdinaF, Israel
    Apr 21, 05:33 AM American Thinker

    Living in the epicenter of the Islamic beast I do not have the luxury of being blind to reality. The facts on the ground are indeed ominous. I – and many other non fantasists in Israel – firmly believe that in the near future there will be a mega war in the Middle East where Israel will be their main target. It is not for nothing that the Samson Option is being spoken about in many forums.
    Westerners must understand the following – while our leaders often leave alot to be desired, in one arena they are adamant. IF our very existence is on the line there is no doubt that we will employ the Samson Option. The Mahdi may, or may not appear, but every area in the Mid East will be rendered comatose, Mecca and Medina too. Moreover, some 'other' capitals are in Israel's sites, as they too will deserve their comeuppance. We may very well go down, but we will take millions upon millions with us.
    ….

    • P.D.

      Nuking Mecca is the right idea. Make sure the islamic dogs understand the penalty of their ideology. Make them pay and never give up. First attack on Israel should mean an ex-Mecca, then an ex-Medina and definitely and ex Terhan. They worship death, so give it to them in spades.

  • Marco

    The following news today might help the situation in Lybia:

    .U.S. approves use of armed drones in Libya

    WASHINGTON — The United States is using armed Predator drones in Libya to target Muammar Gaddafi’s forces with the approval of President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Thursday.

    The unmanned aircraft, already used to target militants along Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan, will allow for precise attacks against Col. Gaddafi’s forces, Mr. Gates told a news conference.

    “He (Obama) has approved the use of armed Predators,” Mr. Gates said.

    The first two Predators, which carry Hellfire missiles and can stay in the air for 24 hours, headed to Libya on Thursday but had to turn back due to bad weather, said General James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
    The U.S. military plans to maintain two patrols of armed Predators above Libya at any given time, permitting better surveillance — and targeting — of Col. Gaddafi’s forces as they dig into positions next to civilian areas, Gen. Cartwright told the same briefing.

    .