Libya: Another UN Disaster in the Making


Pages: 1 2

Facing defeat and a possible massacre at the hands of a vengeful Muammar Gaddafi, Libyan rebel forces in the besieged city of Misrata have for the first time called for NATO or UN ground forces to intervene in the two-month old conflict. Up until now, the anti-Gaddafi insurgents have said it was important they alone depose the Libyan leader without the help of foreign troops. But the pounding the rebels are taking in Misrata from the Gaddafi forces’ heavy shelling, rockets and possibly cluster bombs, which NATO admits it is unable to stop, is causing the city’s battlefield and humanitarian situation to deteriorate daily.

“We are calling for foreign forces to protect our citizens immediately,” said a member of Misrata’s leadership committee on Tuesday. “We want the UN or NATO on the ground. This is not a Western occupation or colonialism. This is needed to protect our people.”

The Misrata leadership committee’s urgent plea, however, flies in the face of UN Security Council Resolution 1973, which only allows NATO to set up a no-fly zone over Libya for saving civilian lives. It forbids intervention by foreign ground forces. President Barack Obama has stated on more than one occasion American soldiers will not land in Libya.

But the fact is, ground troops are now necessary if the civilian lives the UN said it wants to save are to be rescued. And if a reluctant NATO does acquiesce to the rebels’ urgent plea for help and send in “boots on the ground,” the Libyan ordeal shows the folly of attempting to wage war through UN mandates. Their rigid positions simply do not match a battlefield’s requirements and can lead to disaster, as may yet occur in Misrata.

Even before the Libyan rebels’ request, the United States and her NATO allies appeared to be preparing to circumvent Resolution 1973 and readying themselves for a ground force deployment. NATO labelled Misrata its “number one priority,” while Barack Obama, David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy, in a joint release last week, called Gaddafi’s assault on Misrata a “medieval siege…to strangle its population into submission.” The three leaders said it would be “an unconscionable betrayal” to leave Gaddafi in power to wreak “a fearful vengeance” on Misrata’s “brave citizens.” Such “an unconscionable betrayal,” as these three leaders well know, can now only be avoided by NATO arms.

Britain is taking the first steps towards sending in ground forces. While NATO and other countries already have Special Forces operatives in Libya, the British government was the first to announce it was sending a contingent of “experienced” officers to Benghazi as a military liaison team. The British were reported to have put a brigade of Royal Marines on standby a month ago for possible intervention in Libya, and these officers probably constitute an advance team. Naturally, the British government contends the officers’ presence in Libya is in accordance with UN Resolution 1973.

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.

    .