So, about that mission creep. We haven’t even begun and we’ve already got it.
With the advances made by loyalists, there is growing consensus in the Obama administration that imposing a no-flight zone over Libya would no longer make much of a difference, and that the White House is considering more aggressive airstrikes, which would make targets of Colonel Qaddafi’s tanks and heavy artillery — an option sometimes referred to as a “no-drive zone.” The United States or its allies could also send military personnel to advise and train the rebels, an official said.
Some of us could tell you, and did tell you, that it was too late for a no-fly zone and that a no-fly zone was never going to be sufficient. What people are asking us to do is to go into Libya and oust Gaddafi and set up a replacement government. No doubt, this isn’t a totally unreasonable request considering who Gaddafi is and what he will probably do to the people who rebelled against his rule. But we’re busy right now. We have a lot of other things on our plate. And becoming the de facto rulers of Libya is not something we need to be taking on. And let me be real clear about something. If we’re thinking of bombing Libya’s ground forces and sending in military advisers and equipment, let’s not bother with the latter half of it. Just go in strong and get the regime change part of it over quickly. We know how to do that without any post-invasion planning. We know how to do it without having a clue about the local power players. We know how to create a really deadly civil war and preside over the total collapse of an Arab country. Maybe Libya won’t be as bad as Iraq. Maybe they’ll really throw roses and chocolates at us this time. Maybe all the tribes will get together and have a wonderful constitutional convention and agree to split power and spoils equitably. Or, maybe they won’t. Who cares anymore? Let’s just do something because god forbid we let something bad happen somewhere in the world when he had the power to stop it.
So, I’m serious. Don’t dick around with no-drive zones and military advisers. Either stay out of it entirely, or go get the bastard and put him in the Hague.
Obama knows.
Except on torture. He’s 100% in favor of the torture of Bradley Manning.
The lesson to be learned from Libya, already demonstrated effective in Iran, is: kill the rebels before they kill you.
Bahrain welcomes Saudi troops. God is with autocracy, and God willing the oily theocracies.
Cheap gas is an American birthright, and anyone who threatens to stop the oil deserves the ire of Allah, not our support.
Cynical about Obama? What would McCain, or Palin do?
I think you’re right. Although if France actually wants to do it, let them do it.
“No doubt, this isn’t a totally unreasonable request“
Ummmm – yes, it is, and it is definitely in nobody’s long-term interests, particularly the Libyans’, and probably not in the short-term interests of most either.
Hasn’t anyone figured out yet that regime change must take place from within or not at all?
We’ll never figure that out. We are too stupid.
.
Good to see you recognize and are willing to acknowledge this. Acknowledging a problem is the first step in correcting it.
Is it not taking place from within? The Security Council just imposed a no-fly order, which the rebels had been pleading for. If they hadn’t done that, could there be any effective indigenous resistance movement?
It began from within, and so far it has been taking place from within. However, the moment the western powers in general and the United States in particular become involved it will no longer be owned by Libyans.
As for the no-fly zone, it is somewhat better if it is truly coming from the U.N., and not the U.N. as a cover for the U.S. as were the murderous 13 years of sanctions against Iraq, 8 of them presided over by Bill “I feel your pain unless you are Iraqi” Clinton. However, it will still result ultimately in taking the revolution and its results out of Libyan hands, and putting them into the hands of outsiders, who will inevitably manupulated the situation to serve their interests.
So you’re preferring what? The rebels and a whole lot of other people slaughtered?
Because it’s not hyperbole, that’s the other option. It’s not a great situation either way as I said before.
It is the “not at all” that we are seeing happening in Libya, Bahrain, and now Yemen. Egypt was unique in the sense that the revolution was graced by an over the hill cancer patient leader.
So, so many deaths, and for what? There was a time when revolutions were probably easier to accomplish than today, watching the Gaddhafi’s tanks and mercenaries approach Benghazi prepared to wipe out the revolutionists. At least when the Minutemen faced the British rifles in Concord, they had a fighting chance. But this, it is just slaughter. Gaddhafi will win, and the next day, we will be waiting in line for his oil.
Well, so the news was interesting for a few weeks. So what. Back to Seinfeld reruns.
Yes, but those kinds of people don’t have any political influence.
I think one reason most haven’t come to this conclusion is the inability of Americans to be introspective about the effects and consequences of our foreign policy decisions. We’re too isolated from the aftermath.
Exactly.
Is the memory so short that we have forgotten Afganistan under communist-Russian rule?
And how about those many central American countries run by governments we didn’t like and toppled?
And so on.
So where are all the nice western governments lining up to do something to protect the citizens of Bahrain currently being massacred by some fascist feudal dictator with the help of foreign mercenaries and a foreign army or two, whihc is a length even the murderous Gaddafi hasnt gone to?
Of course Bahrain is home to the Imperial fleet and a good old pal of the west, so nobody in the west is going to even be overly critical especially with high ranking administration figures of course totally coincidently planted in the embassy as the invasion goes on.
For students of poltics and especially real politik this is all recommended study as to how the western regimes act in reality rather than how they want their people to think they act. Imperialism is alive and well and on open display and if anyone didnt understand why things like 9/11 happen they may get it now.
It took the nice Western governments at least a week to decide that Muammar Gaddafi’s use of mercenaries to kill peaceful protesters with anti-aircraft guns indicated a loss of legitimacy.
You question is on target. Will Western countries apply the same standard to Bahrain (and the Gulf Cooperation Council) and to Yemen? In both cases, there nominally is more leverage for Western countries because of economic and military aid. So one wonders how much this has been used behind the scenes to restrain the leaders from violence against their own people. The recent event in both Yemen and Bahrain seem to indicate that events in Egypt (the travel ban on the Mubarak family) might have made these leaders less open to this leverage and that Gates might have been told on his latest visit to “Bug off”. Local rulers can use the dependence of empire on strategic locations in their countries to their advantage.
It is amusing to see Saudi Arabia and Iran suddenly become concerned about the suppression of protest in the other country. This in response to Iran’s criticism of the Gulf Cooperation Council’s actions.
Actually US action shows its declining imperial power. At the height of its power, the US ousted Mossadegh without help. Now it seeks help from NATO in Afghanistan and anybody, please anybody, to deal with Gaddafi. And Saleh and the Khalifa family blow them off. The large budget deficit and political paralysis reduces the credibility of American power.
Students of realpolitik see this. Most of the South American nations (lates is Uruguay) are recognizing an independent Palestine within the pre-1967 borders. Gulf rulers are going their own way after being asked to support a no-fly zone against Gaddafi’s government. The European Union is taking the lead in driving international community actions against Libya. The US is conflicted over what to do. The world of 2001, the world of the arrogant hyperpower, is not the world of 2011. The difference is the Bush administration’s squandering of the illusion of US superior power. Not any great loss of arrogance. The world has not caught up to this change. On the one hand, there are demands that the US do something. On the other there are the assumptions that whatever happens must have been the result of US machinations and power.
I don’t know who got into the mix, but pitch-perfect diplomacy has suddenly turned into old habits.
The call for Benghazi today was “send us some Stingers”. I don’t know who the guy was but it was just a little bit too cute in the way that it played into Gaddafi’s narrative.
Then Susan Rice hinted as all options being considered in the UN Security Council, some beyond the no-fly zone. And golly wouldn’t you like to be a fly on the wall in Hillary Clinton’s talk with the Egyptian transitional government.
And to add to the confusion, the Secretary General sent an envoy to talk to both parties about a cease-fire–most likely a cease-fire in place. That would likely be a precondition to a limited Blue Helmet peacekeeping force to separate the sides and allow a degree of security for civilians.
If the international community has decided he should go, if the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Arab League have decided there needs to be a no-fly zone, they should pony up the weapons and let the US provide AWACS intelligence.
I detect a definite “fear of a repeat of Somalia or Rwanda” in the current talk from the administration.
I find it strange that with rebels talking about being attacked from the sea that no one has mentioned a coastal blockade (it is no less an act of war).
As for “getting the bastard and putting him in the Hague”, I don’t think that the US has the capabilities to do that. We’ve proved very ham-handed about those sorts of operations. However the folks with the most experience in snatching people are absolutely the wrong folks to involve.
I think that this is one of those situations in which the principle for the international community is “first, do no harm.” So far that’s been the action.
The more Gaddafi moves to consolidate power, the thinner he has to spread his loyal troops. And the more he depends on their pay to hold their loyalty. In Bahrain, they avoided part of this problem by importing Pakistanis and other foreign workers and giving them citizenship and housing. Gaddafi’s mercenaries work for “crowd control” and most likely are what he is depending on to take the bulk of the fight in Tripoli.
No one really knows the true sentiments of the Libyan people; I suspect that they mostly are hunkering down and hoping it passes.
All of which adds up to inaction. Let’s face it: Gadhafi has won the day. My sympathies go to the rebels, and when Gadhafi begins executing them by the thousands, we will again throw words at the dictator.
But we shouldn’t worry: the oil will continue flowing, gas prices will drop again, and Obama will be saved.
It’s not over until it’s over and there is something at play in the UN Security Council. Taking a city of 1 million will not be as easy for Gaddhafi as the towns he has taken so far. Misurata has a population of 300,000 and the pro-Gaddhafi forces haven’t taken it yet.
Send him to the Hague! When the US doesn’t endorse the court? That’s not justice. An irritating tidbit is Clinton’s announcement in an Egyptian TV interview that she will not continue after 2013 as Secretary of State. Has anyone ever heard of a lame-duck Secretary of State? Evidently she doesn’t known she’s not president. She can no longer be taken seriously abroad because she has, as it were, already thrown in the towel. It’s all about me, you see, my picture is now plastered across the world on the front pages of newspapers: I’m leaving. I’ve hardly arrived and I’m leaving. Why didn’t she just stay home and bake cookies in the first place? I just had to get that off my chest. But it’s more than on topic: US diplomacy and commitment to a coherent, sincere line is more than part of the problem. What a vain bunch of fools. The poor people of the world who still to the US for support for change: Mr O.
I’m gonna keep my powder dry for a change and not bite on unsourced speculation in the NYTimes.
When the administration says the planes are in the air or the bombs are falling, I’ll get pissed. Until then all I see is a hell of a lot of talk.