Tell me, why was it necessary for the US and Europe to take the lead on Libya?

[Hugabear]

Another poster brought up a very good point in another thread. The Arab League countries have their own air forces. We know they're not very fond of Gadhaffi. So why couldn't they have handled Libya on their own? Why couldn't they have approached the UN, and announced that they would take care of operating a No-Fly Zone?

For that matter, why can't they take over the entire operation themselves at this point?

[MadHound]

1. Well, see, this way we can blow up more of our munitions, destroy more of our material,

So that it can then be replaced, all the while making an obscene profit for the MIC and the wealthy elite in this country.

Apparently the ongoing wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan simply weren't achieving this goal at a rapid enough pace to satisfy our government's corporate masters.

[TorchTheWitch]

2. they're the countries that want to install the new friendly leader

They who push for the intervention and take the lead on the intervention get to choose the new friendly leader to their own liking thereby getting the best business deals.

[patrick t. cakes]

3. because we're more humanitarian by nature...

that's what we excel at.

(sarcasm)

[napoleon_in_rags]

4. Its all about the UN Security council.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council

And really, its all about the permanent members. What happens with war anywhere involves US, UK, France, Russia or China.

[Hugabear]

7. Nonsense.

The Arab League could have asked for a resolution allowing them to establish a NFZ in Libya. The Arab League could still take over the entire operation if they wanted to.

There's nothing in the resolution that compels Security Council members to take action themselves.

[napoleon_in_rags]

8. That wouldn't just wouldn't happen.

Its delegating too much, the prosecution of war to the Arab League. They just wouldn't do it.

What really amazes me in all this is the fact that the US can't let France handle it. I heard on the news today France was prepared to act alone, operating from a command center in Paris, and the US basically jumped. Just look at that for all the answers you need on why they can't let the AL do it, they can't even let France, a almost superpower ally do it. You can almost hear the hushed voices in back rooms: "Okay, let me ask you one thing. What if France carries this thing, what if they nail it. How will the world's great superpower look leaving the middle east with its head down just as the French - the FRENCH come in looking like glorious conquerers, looking like they did what we couldn't"

You may think that sounds surreal but politics can be REALLY stupid sometimes, that's one thing I've learned from keeping up with the news.

[joshcryer]

11. That pisses me off, too. The US got NATO involved (probably to send a unity message)...

...but I think that it's going to hampers France's ability to affect regime change.

[napoleon_in_rags]

15. Lets face it: France has picked some good rebels to back in the past...

Including these guys:



The trick is here is really a gentle hand, and hand which almost seems weak. If the rebels don't stay hungry then the supporting forces can easily get sucked in. Its Libya's war, its their revolution. The exit strategy and motivation for the rebels must be one: there won't be much help. I think France is eager because they get that, but the US, with its entire media and populous bemoaning the costs of our long term commitment to this new babysitting contract in Libya whilst stroking off over our unique military might are sending the exact opposite message to the rebels than they need to hear: the message that they can't do it themselves, they need us. In this context its interesting to remember Gandhi's rejection of foreign support, saying Indians must do it themselves, and look at what a stable democracy grew in India out of that idea. Similarly, I believe a stable Democracy is coming to Egypt as well - Democracy is the form of government that arises when the people have faith in themselves. Dictators are what happen when they don't.

[Hugabear]

18. Didn't they also give us Vietnam?

Just sayin', and it's a lot more recent

[napoleon_in_rags]

20. I wouldn't characterize that as supporting a rebellion though.

It seems like the VC were the revolutionary force in that situation. So maybe the French are good at revolutions bad at suppressing them?

Honestly I think it would be good to have any outside force at the helm. These narratives going around in the middle east that its all about the US and Israel need to be shot down if they are being used to suppress. People should see that the WORLD stands up against you when you start gunning down innocent protesters.

(Plus I gotta admit after hearing all the "surrender monkey" French jokes it would be satisfying to see them kick a little ass to put it to rest...But that's just me)

[The_Casual_Observer]

5. Obama is happy have an opportunity to look decisive.

No need for those countries to bother.

[Amonester]

6. They don't have the training to implement it.

Nor the *Space* gear (sattelites).

[joshcryer]

10. That too. Little known fact, but DoD's "space" money is more than NASA gets.

That is, the money we spend on launching DoD spy satellites and operating them is more than we give NASA.

[Amonester]

14. True, and it's a shame (as is many other *cuts* to *pamper* the haves).

Anyway, and sadly for us (and better for them), if that creep and his goons don't give up, once the rebels will be able to "resist" them and the arms blockade will be fully in place, many here would prefer they will be able to 'take over' so the US can 'leave' quickly.

http://moland.org/index.php?page=lafayette_joins_the_american_revolution

[joshcryer]

9. 'cause we have the firepower and willingness to spend $2-3 million a minute.

[Rex]

12. Because they were afraid that the somewhat peaceful revolutions going on

would get to Lybia and there would be a bloodbath in the streets and maybe a little information as to why Omar is still our friends and yet Castro is an enemy. The House of Saud gets a free pass, you know why as well as I do. They could butcher anyone they wanted to...ally in our war on terr-itory.

[joshcryer]

13. What? Libya was never going to be peaceful ever again while Gaddafi is there.

[Rex]

17. Yeah I know, that is why I said he was a-gonner.

Guess you misunderstood. We kill off or imprison some of our most famous on again/off again dictators we support and then cry foul over. Saddam was a flub. If he would have given up from the beginning, he would be drinking mint-juleps with Noriega right now. Castro never played ball...thus never got the good treatment for having a 'nice' dictatorship.

This goes out to all you wannabe dictators...don't let anyone get a picture of you shaking hands with an American leader...you will be ass out 20 years later when they come calling for the check.

[Prometheus Bound]

16. This is not very nice but I have a feeling it's true.

We're Saudi Arabia's collective bitch.

- Pepe Escobar
What many don't know is that Operation Odyssey Dawn is personal - and has nothing to do with Greek heroism but Bedouin hatred. It revolves around the extremely bad blood between King Abdullah and Gaddafi since 2002, in the run-up to the war on Iraq, when Gaddafi accused Abdullah of selling out the Arab world to Washington. So this is not Operation Odyssey Dawn; it's Operation House of Saud Takes Out Gaddafi. With all the heavy lifting subcontracted to the West, of course, and the eastern Libya protesters posing as extras.

Odyssey Dawn - a "just war" - started exactly eight years after the Iraq war. In 2003, at the start of Operation Enduring Freedom - still ongoing, having "liberated" over a million Iraqis from life - George W Bush said, "American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger".

This Saturday, at the start of Operation Odyssey Dawn, Barack Obama said, "Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world."

Maybe we should call this whole thing Operation Enduring Odyssey - and send the bill to the House of Saud.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MC22Ak02.html

[Rage for Order]

19. The European countries want to prevent a mass influx of refugees from North Africa

They want to ensure that people stay in Libya, Tunisia, etc rather than fleeing to all points north