Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Sat 03/19/2011 View Fri 03/18/2011 View Thu 03/17/2011 View Wed 03/16/2011 View Tue 03/15/2011 View Mon 03/14/2011 View Sat 03/12/2011
1
2011-03-19 Africa North
U.S. Launches First Missile Strike Against Qaddafi's Regime
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by tipper 2011-03-19 15:52|| || Front Page|| [11140 views ]  Top

#1 How many wars are we in now? I've lost count.
Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2011-03-19 16:03||   2011-03-19 16:03|| Front Page Top

#2 Another war for EUs and ungrateful Moslems. Waste of US treasure. Let's hope no loss of US blood.
Posted by regular joe 2011-03-19 16:09||   2011-03-19 16:09|| Front Page Top

#3 Tomahawks are cheap. All we need do right now is back up the Brits and the French.

We're their allies, fergawdsakes. The Brits helped us in Iraq when it was deeply unpopular back in Britain. Now the Brits want our help? Damned straight we help them.
Posted by Steve White 2011-03-19 16:21||   2011-03-19 16:21|| Front Page Top

#4 
Posted by g(r)omgoru 2011-03-19 16:24||   2011-03-19 16:24|| Front Page Top

#5 I'd argue 1 war. Should have taken out Kadafy 25 yrs ago. Glad we are helping allies do so finally.
Posted by JAB 2011-03-19 16:33||   2011-03-19 16:33|| Front Page Top

#6 "We have every reason to fear that left unchecked, Qaddafi will commit unspeakable atrocities," Clinton said.

And what evidence do we have that the "rebels" we are trying to put in power won't also?
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2011-03-19 16:38||   2011-03-19 16:38|| Front Page Top

#7 Regarding the rebels; what evidence? Zero. An unknown. Not certain.

But what Qadaffi can be expected to do based on history? And how about his statements? That is a near absolute certainty.

And I can't get this line from a 2005 book out of my mind; "...a United Nations battle group, clustered around the U.S.S. Hillary Clinton (named after "the most uncompromising wartime president in the history of the United States"), is tasked in the year 2021 with stopping ethnic cleansing by an Islamist regime..."
From Weapons of Choice, by John Birmingham.
Posted by Whiskey Mike 2011-03-19 16:49||   2011-03-19 16:49|| Front Page Top

#8 "We have every reason to fear that left unchecked, Qaddafi will commit unspeakable atrocities," Clinton said.

Is that anything like "weapons of mass destruction"?
Posted by kelly 2011-03-19 16:54||   2011-03-19 16:54|| Front Page Top

#9 I must have missed congress' declaration of war.

After the crap we went through about Iraq I don't want to hear one word from anyone left of Stalin. This is none of our business and unless there has been some valid reason why this is, we should not be involved.
Posted by AlanC 2011-03-19 16:59||   2011-03-19 16:59|| Front Page Top

#10 Correction: That's one word from anyone RIGHT of Stalin about GWB.
Posted by AlanC 2011-03-19 17:00||   2011-03-19 17:00|| Front Page Top

#11 Regarding the rebels; what evidence?
They're Islamists, Whisky Mike.
I'm not aware of any instance in history where the god bothering, spittle spraying, homicidal thugs haven't committed atrocities.
No need to give the benefit of the doubt.
Posted by tipper 2011-03-19 17:04||   2011-03-19 17:04|| Front Page Top

#12 I'm for taking out heavy weaponry used against the rebels. They can take it from there. No boots on the ground.

And Obean's administration is saying that since this is a UN resolution it is therefore not war, and we are just piling on like everyone else.

By the time the dust settles from that argument, it will be too late.

Yeah, we've seen it before, and we've disagreed with proceeding before its constitutionality can be verified.
Posted by gorb 2011-03-19 17:08||   2011-03-19 17:08|| Front Page Top

#13 110 missiles at 20 sites - per Fox just now
Posted by Frank G 2011-03-19 17:19||   2011-03-19 17:19|| Front Page Top

#14 I'm only for taking out air assets.
Posted by Penguin 2011-03-19 17:25||   2011-03-19 17:25|| Front Page Top

#15 And what do we do when the first pilot is downed?

I just don't like limited wars with Rules of Engagement. If we're going to kill people, let's fight to win. If not, stay out. The problem is, the definition of winning is not even ambiguous in this case, it's non-existant.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2011-03-19 17:31||   2011-03-19 17:31|| Front Page Top

#16 I'm for taking out Duffy.
Let the Libyan sort out the rest.
Posted by European Conservative 2011-03-19 17:32||   2011-03-19 17:32|| Front Page Top

#17 Reckin he will have to return the Novel Peace Prize they awarded him before he took office.
Posted by Titus Elminemp4781 2011-03-19 17:38||   2011-03-19 17:38|| Front Page Top

#18 Having read the original, naming the operation "Odyssey Dawn" is not a good choice.
Posted by Penguin 2011-03-19 17:40||   2011-03-19 17:40|| Front Page Top

#19 We're their allies, fergawdsakes. The Brits helped us in Iraq when it was deeply unpopular back in Britain. Now the Brits want our help? Damned straight we help them.

We lost 500,000 men helping the Brits in WWI and WWII. When Brit casualties in their interventions in our behalf approach the 1% mark (of our losses), I'll consider us even.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2011-03-19 17:46||   2011-03-19 17:46|| Front Page Top

#20 Update
Posted by tipper 2011-03-19 18:15||   2011-03-19 18:15|| Front Page Top

#21 We're their allies, fergawdsakes. The Brits helped us in Iraq when it was deeply unpopular back in Britain. Now the Brits want our help? Damned straight we help them.

They were also tight w/the Locherbie bomber as I recall. How's he doing these days now that he's no longer subjected to the tender mercies of the NHS.
Posted by regular joe 2011-03-19 18:31||   2011-03-19 18:31|| Front Page Top

#22 Did I miss the Authorization to Use Force from Congress, or is that just a thing Trunk Prez's have to do? /rhet question
Posted by Procopius2k 2011-03-19 18:34||   2011-03-19 18:34|| Front Page Top

#23 Granted this should have been done last week, but practice, practice, practice makes perfect.

Consider this a live-fire exercise for our boys and girls in uniform. We need them sharp in these interesting times.
Posted by Pollyandrew 2011-03-19 18:40||   2011-03-19 18:40|| Front Page Top

#24 Did I miss the Authorization to Use Force from Congress, or is that just a thing Trunk Prez's have to do? /rhet question

Senator Lindsay Wagner authorized it via press conference. Does that qualify?
Posted by Zhang Fei 2011-03-19 18:57||   2011-03-19 18:57|| Front Page Top

#25 So it begins. Death of the American Constitution and birth of the Unlimited Executive: Article 1, Section 8 no longer valid.

Maybe Obama should, with impunity, lay taxes and raise another army. And get rid of the Constitution as such?
Posted by Shereter Poodle9774 2011-03-19 19:03||   2011-03-19 19:03|| Front Page Top

#26 "Maybe Obama should, with impunity, lay taxes and raise another army. And get rid of the Constitution as such?"

He's been trying to do that for the last 2 years.
Posted by Barbara Skolaut 2011-03-19 19:28||   2011-03-19 19:28|| Front Page Top

#27 "And what do we do when the first pilot is downed?"

I don't think Tomahawks have pilots, NS. IIUC, the Brits and the French are sending airplanes; we're "sending" missiles.
Posted by Barbara Skolaut 2011-03-19 19:31||   2011-03-19 19:31|| Front Page Top

#28 Maybe he tried to do some of these things in the last two years. Today, on the 8th anniversary of the start of the liberation of Iraq, Obama is waging war without Congress having said anything.

How many other wars will he be allowed to start without Constitutional authority? against whom? his chosen foreign and domestic enemies?

I'm all for the death and dismemberment of Qadaffy. But not at the cost of the Republic.
Posted by Shereter Poodle9774 2011-03-19 19:35||   2011-03-19 19:35|| Front Page Top

#29 So much of this has that old Groundhog Day feeling about it. It's not the end of the world or the Constitution, and goofus is not the anti-Christ. These times are merely the result of an collective MSM Obamagasm and its corrosponding trickle down its leg.

Chill. This is effing Libya, for chrissake --just another tempest in another tin horn nitwit's teapot. Yet another in a never-ending series of them. Remember La Pina?

Life goes on. Two steps forward, one step back.
Posted by Pollyandrew 2011-03-19 19:41||   2011-03-19 19:41|| Front Page Top

#30 Meanwhile, back in 1986:

For the Libyan raid, the United States was denied overflight rights by France, Spain and Italy as well as the use of European continental bases, forcing the Air Force portion of the operation to be flown around France, Spain and through the Straits of Gibraltar, adding 1,300 miles (2,100 km) each way and requiring multiple aerial refuelings.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2011-03-19 20:04||   2011-03-19 20:04|| Front Page Top

#31 Did Reagan need congressional approval for the '86 strike? How about the Tanker War w/ Iran? No? Then shut the fuck up about special treatment for the asshole in the White House. War Powers '73 is still in goddamn effect, he can bomb whatever the fuck he feels like, and can invade Hell itself in support of a demonic rebellion against the Infernal Seat if he pulls the troops out after twenty-nine days. Don't like it? Well, neither do I, but it's still jake with the Constitution and established law.
Posted by Mitch H.  2011-03-19 20:16|| http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/  2011-03-19 20:16|| Front Page Top

#32 No need to swear.

Is the country already under attack or serious threat? the War Powers Act is not a blank check.
Posted by Shereter Poodle9774 2011-03-19 20:23||   2011-03-19 20:23|| Front Page Top

#33 Whether it is jake with the Constitution is arguable. Perhaps someone will finally test that. What would Preble do?
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2011-03-19 20:38||   2011-03-19 20:38|| Front Page Top

#34 The obtuse point made is that the Left(tm) and the MSM sock puppets have spent the best part of the 00's criticizing Bush about legalities and the like but even though he crossed all the T's and dotted all the I's in the process, we'll now be entertain by the Classical Leftist Double Standard(tm) for their creation. It's not about law or process for the Left. It's about Power.
Posted by Procopius2k 2011-03-19 21:10||   2011-03-19 21:10|| Front Page Top

#35 Granted this should have been done last week, but practice, practice, practice makes perfect.

Two weeks ago. Ideally, three.
Posted by Pappy 2011-03-19 22:45||   2011-03-19 22:45|| Front Page Top

#36 The French have blown up four Qaddafi tanks near Benghazi.
Posted by  Anonymoose 2011-03-19 23:03||   2011-03-19 23:03|| Front Page Top

#37 The west is perhaps zealous in Libya, but underzealous in places like Iran and North Korea. It doesn't compute.
Posted by Fi 2011-03-19 23:06||   2011-03-19 23:06|| Front Page Top

#38 Wow, lots of excellent points made here. Overall. I'm with pollyandrew.

Question: is 110 Tomahawk missiles a lot? It sounds like a lot. Depends on where you point them, I suppose, but is that enough to smash the hive, or just piss off the bees?
Posted by RandomJD 2011-03-19 23:20||   2011-03-19 23:20|| Front Page Top

#39 My main beef is that if we were going to lay Libya bare to airstrikes, doing it 10 to 15 days ago would have kept several cities on the "free" side, and likely KaDaffy would be looking for a retirement spot in Venezuela, getting the Swiss to let his funds go, and cutting a deal about now.

Militarily, SEAD is step one. K-man now knows his entire country is open to airstrikes, and the French armed forces are not as observant nor press-vulnerable as the US when it comes to collateral damage. The dont give a shit, and neither does Sarkozy, basically.

We likely completed step Zero a while back when the AWACS was observing and GMTI and FTI and ELINT/SIGINT assets were put in place catalogueing - if they followed the usual way of doing things.

From here on out, if the Italians French and Brits want to fly and hold the airspace they can, because they do inter-operate with out battle management assets in the area. And they can direct the Egyptians and Saudis who are likely to be joining the fray was "Arab League" squadrons. They'll want to get their pilots some stick time in a shooting war.

If we are content to fly INT missions, fling cruise missiles at harder targets, and put some drones up, than hell go for it - its not putting our people's lives directly on the line, and its about time our Allies pulled some trigger time after all the lopsided efforts we have seen for NATO in Afghanistan.

If we start flying manned combat missions, there are SOCOM SAR and USN Seals and Rescue, USMC Recon, US Army SOAR and Rangers, USAF PJ's and others trained specifically for rescue. This seems to be stuff you wannabe warriors seem to either not know bout or else are denigrating the courage and capability of these units.

Lets be VERY clear about things gentlemen - I will brook none of that bullshit about "what happens if our guys get shot down". Our forces will operate as they have been trained to do. That's what will happen. And if you are too stupid, or too ignorant, or too much of a pussy to deal with that, then just shut your pie hole or I'll ram the truth down your throat.

Yes I AM pissed by this behavior here.
Posted by OldSpook 2011-03-19 23:21||   2011-03-19 23:21|| Front Page Top

#40 The powers inherent in the office of Commander In Chief do contain sufficient room to where the president can take unilateral military actions, as long as he answers for them within reasonable time. The intent is to not place the nation at war without Congress consent, not to handcuff the executive to where he cannot act at all in the interests of the country as he sees best as the Commander In Chief. Whether this is or isnt in the interests will be decided later, as per the rule of law.

NS and others - stop this shit about it being unconstitutional. The War Powers Act is in force, hgas nto been held unconstitutional, and Obama is within his powers, as was Bush, and as was Reagan, and even Clinton. President Obama (/spit) has already consulted with Congressional Leaders (and that means GOP house leadership) twice in classified briefings. He has 29 days.

You may not respect the man, but I sure as shit am not going to silently put up with you armchair admirals disrespecting the office, and by extension the forces acting under that office.

Look guys, I hate Obama, but IM not going to turn into a little whinging bitch like you guys have. You are sounding just like the Left when we last went to war.

If our guys are in harms way, shut up and get behind them - sort the rest of this our after Obama's 29 days of freedom to act expire.
Posted by OldSpook 2011-03-19 23:23||   2011-03-19 23:23|| Front Page Top

23:38 Ominous1
23:23 OldSpook
23:21 OldSpook
23:20 RandomJD
23:07 49 Pan
23:06 Fi
23:03  Anonymoose
23:01 Skidmark
22:53 OldSpook
22:45 Pappy
22:42 Barbara Skolaut
22:37 49 Pan
22:35 49 Pan
22:11 Ebbuger Gray8270
21:59 Dale
21:27 Anguper Hupomosing9418
21:22 Anguper Hupomosing9418
21:10 Procopius2k
20:38 Nimble Spemble
20:32 swksvolFF
20:23 Shereter Poodle9774
20:16 Mitch H.
20:04 Zhang Fei
19:41 Pollyandrew









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com