• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. to pull strike jets from Libya mission

Ron Mars

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 10, 2011
Messages
1,194
Reaction score
170
Location
Central Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Huh? The US is no longer going to participate in the air strikes in Libya? WTF?

The US will only conduct strike missions "to back up the allies in case of need" but not participate on a regular basis apparently. I support the President on Libya but this is a major mistake that may very well doom his stated policy.

What do you guys think about this?



U.S. to pull strike jets from Libya mission
By Slobodan Lekic - The Associated Press
Posted : Monday Apr 4, 2011 8:36:38 EDT

BRUSSELS — The U.S. military was pulling its warplanes from front-line missions Monday and shifting to a support role in the Libyan conflict, officials said.

Britain, France and other NATO allies will now provide the fighter jets for intercept and ground-attack missions that enforce a no-fly zone over this North African country.

The hand-over is expected to take place later Monday, a NATO official said.

“There won’t be a capabilities gap,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of regulations.

Another official, who could not be named for the same reason, said the U.S. would continue to play a major role in the operation, with one of the largest national contingents. Most U.S. planes will perform support tasks, leaving offensive tasks to their NATO allies.

In Washington, Defense Department spokesman Navy Capt. Darryn James said U.S. activity will formally end at 2200 GMT (6 p.m. EDT). U.S. aircraft currently account for 90 of the 206 planes deployed by NATO in the Libyan conflict.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Congress last week the U.S. would continue to provide assets that others don’t have in sufficient numbers. These will likely include AWACS air surveillance planes, electronic reconnaissance aircraft and aerial refueling tankers.

American air power — including Air Force AC-130 gunships and A-10 Thunderbolts, and Marine Corps AV-8B Harriers — will still be available to back up the allies in case of need.

Western jets have been hitting the forces of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi for more than two weeks. They initially targeted anti-aircraft missile defenses and quickly crushed a government offensive by destroying a large number of tanks, armored vehicles, artillery and other vehicles advancing into rebel-held areas.

But military experts say Gadhafi’s forces have rapidly reorganized since then, shedding their heavy armor and relying on light forces to repeatedly ambush the lightly armed rebels.

NATO said its aircraft flew 154 sorties over Libya on Sunday, the fourth day since the alliance assumed full control over the mission from the U.S.-led international force. It described 58 of those flights as “strike sorties.”

NATO does not release information on the number of targets bombed.

In the first four days of the NATO operation, alliance aircraft have flown a total of 701 sorties, the statement said.

Flights by fighters and attack jets accounted for 40 percent of that total. The rest are by AWACS surveillance aircraft, aerial refueling tankers, maritime patrol planes, search and rescue helicopters, and other support aircraft.

Associated Press writer Pauline Jelinek in Washington contributed to this report.
U.S. to pull strike jets from Libya mission - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times
 
In other unrelated news, Gaddafi feels free to show himself in public without the worry he might eat a missile.

President 0bama has got to change the direction in Libya or it will be lost.

Gaddafi salutes supporters in Tripoli

RABAT (Reuters) – Libyan state television Monday showed live footage of leader Muammar Gaddafi saluting supporters from a jeep that drove outside his fortified compound of Bab al-Aziziyah in Tripoli.

A written newsflash read: "The brother leader among his supporters."

Gaddafi briefly waved to his backers through the roof of his vehicle as bodyguards tried to prevent his supporters from mobbing him.

His appearance came as one of his envoys shuttled around southern Europe in an effort to convince the international community a negotiated end to the fighting was possible.

Gaddafi salutes supporters in Tripoli - Yahoo! News
 
Huh? The US is no longer going to participate in the air strikes in Libya? WTF?

The US will only conduct strike missions "to back up the allies in case of need" but not participate on a regular basis apparently. I support the President on Libya but this is a major mistake that may very well doom his stated policy.

What do you guys think about this?

U.S. to pull strike jets from Libya mission
By Slobodan Lekic - The Associated Press
Posted : Monday Apr 4, 2011 8:36:38 EDT

BRUSSELS — The U.S. military was pulling its warplanes from front-line missions Monday and shifting to a support role in the Libyan conflict, officials said.

Britain, France and other NATO allies will now provide the fighter jets for intercept and ground-attack missions that enforce a no-fly zone over this North African country.

The hand-over is expected to take place later Monday, a NATO official said.

“There won’t be a capabilities gap,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of regulations.

Another official, who could not be named for the same reason, said the U.S. would continue to play a major role in the operation, with one of the largest national contingents. Most U.S. planes will perform support tasks, leaving offensive tasks to their NATO allies.

In Washington, Defense Department spokesman Navy Capt. Darryn James said U.S. activity will formally end at 2200 GMT (6 p.m. EDT). U.S. aircraft currently account for 90 of the 206 planes deployed by NATO in the Libyan conflict.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Congress last week the U.S. would continue to provide assets that others don’t have in sufficient numbers. These will likely include AWACS air surveillance planes, electronic reconnaissance aircraft and aerial refueling tankers.

American air power — including Air Force AC-130 gunships and A-10 Thunderbolts, and Marine Corps AV-8B Harriers — will still be available to back up the allies in case of need.

Western jets have been hitting the forces of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi for more than two weeks. They initially targeted anti-aircraft missile defenses and quickly crushed a government offensive by destroying a large number of tanks, armored vehicles, artillery and other vehicles advancing into rebel-held areas.

But military experts say Gadhafi’s forces have rapidly reorganized since then, shedding their heavy armor and relying on light forces to repeatedly ambush the lightly armed rebels.

NATO said its aircraft flew 154 sorties over Libya on Sunday, the fourth day since the alliance assumed full control over the mission from the U.S.-led international force. It described 58 of those flights as “strike sorties.”

NATO does not release information on the number of targets bombed.

In the first four days of the NATO operation, alliance aircraft have flown a total of 701 sorties, the statement said.

Flights by fighters and attack jets accounted for 40 percent of that total. The rest are by AWACS surveillance aircraft, aerial refueling tankers, maritime patrol planes, search and rescue helicopters, and other support aircraft.

Associated Press writer Pauline Jelinek in Washington contributed to this report.
U.S. to pull strike jets from Libya mission - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times

I actually think that President Obama is trying to be true to his word...that this is a UN mission; not a US mission. That's what the Senate Resolution gave authority to -- the UN, not the US. Let's see if it's possible. If it's not, then he needs further Congressional approval, imo.
 
So much for the US doing NATO's heavy lifting, lol. I see this as a good thing.
 
So much for the US doing NATO's heavy lifting, lol. I see this as a good thing.

I wish I could agree SB.

Gaddafi will see it as a good thing too but for different reasons.

BTW, your new avatar is great!
 
I wish I could agree SB.

Gaddafi will see it as a good thing too but for different reasons.

BTW, your new avatar is great!

Thanks :)

Gaddafi's got other things to worry about. Between people in his camp defecting and his financial resources drying up, he knows his days are numbered, American strike aircraft in the equation or not.
 
Last edited:
They must be gearing up for military action in other parts of Africa where the slaughter of thousands is an affront to our American values and the president will vow to step in because we MUST...
 
They must be gearing up for military action in other parts of Africa where the slaughter of thousands is an affront to our American values and the president will vow to step in because we MUST...

Cote d'Ivoire is next lol.
 
Gaddafi's got other things to worry about. Between people in his camp defecting and his financial resources drying up, he knows his days are numbered, American strike aircraft in the equation or not.

I sure hope that's right SB.

Gaddafi is a survivor and will not leave unless he's forced out.
 
In other unrelated news, Gaddafi feels free to show himself in public without the worry he might eat a missile.

President 0bama has got to change the direction in Libya or it will be lost.

Gaddafi salutes supporters in Tripoli

RABAT (Reuters) – Libyan state television Monday showed live footage of leader Muammar Gaddafi saluting supporters from a jeep that drove outside his fortified compound of Bab al-Aziziyah in Tripoli.

A written newsflash read: "The brother leader among his supporters."

Gaddafi briefly waved to his backers through the roof of his vehicle as bodyguards tried to prevent his supporters from mobbing him.

His appearance came as one of his envoys shuttled around southern Europe in an effort to convince the international community a negotiated end to the fighting was possible.

Gaddafi salutes supporters in Tripoli - Yahoo! News

What's the matter with the French, why can't they change the direction in Libya?
 
I sure hope that's right SB.

Gaddafi is a survivor and will not leave unless he's forced out.

I'm not sure if Obama (or maybe it was Gates) who mentioned this, but I think it is important to give him an out. People like Gaddafi are most dangerous when they are backed into a corner with nowhere to go. The flip side of the equation is, there's not much incentive for Gaddafi to give up and go into exile if he knows the international community will bring him before the ICC the moment he does so, so you might have a point Ron.
 
What's the matter with the French, why can't they change the direction in Libya?

Why can't ANYONE change the direction in Libya? Because there is a disconnect between stated goals and stated means. The international community wants Gaddafi out of Libya. In reality however, a no-fly zone is a pretty piss-poor way to effect regime change.
 
Why can't ANYONE change the direction in Libya? Because there is a disconnect between stated goals and stated means. The international community wants Gaddafi out of Libya. In reality however, a no-fly zone is a pretty piss-poor way to effect regime change.

As shown in Iraq, of course in Iraq that was never the reason for the no fly zone. But hey, let's not let that get in the way of the current politicians of the "international" community. The EU (NATO minus US) is proving to be weak, and showing that they can't step up without the US. This is not just a criticism, it's a ****ing concern. Why can't we ever count them to do anything on their own; besides criticize us of course?
 
Why can't ANYONE change the direction in Libya? Because there is a disconnect between stated goals and stated means. The international community wants Gaddafi out of Libya. In reality however, a no-fly zone is a pretty piss-poor way to effect regime change.

0bama could change the direction if he decided to take decisive action. He could do that today.

If the US accepts a situation where Gaddafi remains in power it will be a disaster for the President and the country.
 
This is why if you are going to get involved in wars, you need a damn plan. Obama should not have called for Qadaffi's removal if he didn't actually plan to actually do get it done. If he had instead consistently promoted a message of "we are only stopping the slaughter not getting involved in local politics" this would actually make sense. Still, the overall result is little more than a missed opportunity rather than a complete disaster so I'll give Obama credit on that front at least.
 
0bama could change the direction if he decided to take decisive action. He could do that today.

If the US accepts a situation where Gaddafi remains in power it will be a disaster for the President and the country.

All we're doing in Libya is showing everyone that we a busy-bodies in everything, and that the EU is weak. There is no national interested in Libya, therefore we should have stayed out. Now they'll say we can't ever stay out of anything, and Iraq/Afghanistan will look more like world policing than going in for a reason such as 9/11 and/or oil. Those are national interests.
 
This is why if you are going to get involved in wars, you need a damn plan. Obama should not have called for Qadaffi's removal if he didn't actually plan to actually do get it done. If he had instead consistently promoted a message of "we are only stopping the slaughter not getting involved in local politics" this would actually make sense. Still, the overall result is little more than a missed opportunity rather than a complete disaster so I'll give Obama credit on that front at least.

The disaster is that no one is going to take him seriously when he says such things again.

He will have much more difficulty building coalitions in the future if his words are percieved as rhetoric instead of an actual cohesive policy.
 
I don't see how many conservatives don't support this decision by Obama. Many people often complain that Europe is too dependent on US forces to keep the peace and do their dirty business while they sit back and do nothing, this is the equivalent of throwing a kid in the deep end so he learns how to swim. He's forcing them to live up their words with actual action, or at the very least that seems to be the plan.
 
In other unrelated news, Gaddafi feels free to show himself in public without the worry he might eat a missile.

President 0bama has got to change the direction in Libya or it will be lost.

Gaddafi salutes supporters in Tripoli

RABAT (Reuters) – Libyan state television Monday showed live footage of leader Muammar Gaddafi saluting supporters from a jeep that drove outside his fortified compound of Bab al-Aziziyah in Tripoli.

A written newsflash read: "The brother leader among his supporters."

Gaddafi briefly waved to his backers through the roof of his vehicle as bodyguards tried to prevent his supporters from mobbing him.

His appearance came as one of his envoys shuttled around southern Europe in an effort to convince the international community a negotiated end to the fighting was possible.

Gaddafi salutes supporters in Tripoli - Yahoo! News

Why does he have to change direction in Libya? Why is Libya even our problem? Maybe we should quit pissing through money on these foreign wars and focus on our own problems.
 
Why does he have to change direction in Libya? Why is Libya even our problem? Maybe we should quit pissing through money on these foreign wars and focus on our own problems.

Because 0bama made it our problem and established a policy that Gaddafi must leave.

Should he backpeddle now it will be viewed as weakness and indecision.

No one will take him seriously. That's a disaster for him and the country.
 
Cote d'Ivoire is next lol.

I say they go after niger for not having enough g's in their name.

Seriously though. The US taking a back seat has been the plan from the start. France and Italy were the ones to lead this and thats fine by me, they can pay for it if they want. I don't think keeping promises will make the US look weak as well.
 
Last edited:
0bama could change the direction if he decided to take decisive action. He could do that today.

If the US accepts a situation where Gaddafi remains in power it will be a disaster for the President and the country.

In my opinion, the only way "decisive action" that could be taken in order to actually take Gaddafi out would be to put boots on the ground. That would likely be a disaster as well.
 
Because 0bama made it our problem and established a policy that Gaddafi must leave.

Should he backpeddle now it will be viewed as weakness and indecision.

No one will take him seriously. That's a disaster for him and the country.

For the country? Yeah right. Nothing would happen to the US if we did the right thing and GTFO.
 
Back
Top Bottom