"It's not a War, it's the appearance of a War."
Posted on 03/20/2011 6:47:14 AM PDT by library user
With President Obama making only brief remarks during his trip to Latin America, most of what we know about the beginning of the war in Libya comes from two briefings Saturday, from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in France and from Vice Admiral Bill Gortney at the Pentagon. And those two high-ranking officials sent strikingly different messages about the extent of United States involvement in the war.
Clinton played down the U.S. role. "We did not lead this," she said flatly of the coalition currently attacking Libyan Moammar Gaddafi. "We did not engage in unilateral actions in any way, but we strongly support the international community taking action against governments and leaders who behave as Gaddafi is unfortunately doing so now."
But Clinton said something else that was more revealing of the true U.S. role. "America has unique capabilities and we will bring them to bear," she said at one point. "We have unique capabilities to bring to the international efforts," she said at another point. And at still another time, she said, "We think that the most important step for us to take now is to assist in every way that is unique to American capabilities with the enforcement of [UN Security Council Resolution] 1973…"
What Clinton meant by "unique capabilities" is that the United States has military power that other participating nations don't, and that it is that power, and virtually that power alone, that made the Libyan war possible. Clinton's two key statements: 'We did not lead this" and "America has unique capabilities" are simply not consistent with each other. Because of America's unique capabilities, it is in fact leading the Libyan effort.
That became entirely clear in Gortney's briefing. "In these early days, the operation will be under the operational command of General Carter Ham, commander of U.S. Africa Command," Gortney told reporters at the Pentagon. "And the commander of Joint Task Force Odyssey Dawn, which is the name of this operation, is Admiral Sam Locklear, who is embarked on board USS Mount Whitney in the Mediterranean."
The United States, Gortney stressed, is in full charge of the Libya operation. Although Gortney said there would be an "eventual transition of leadership to a coalition commander in the coming days," he also added: "That said, the U.S. military has and will continue to use our unique capabilities to create the conditions from which we and our partners can best enforce the full measure of the U.N. mandate."
"Unique capabilities" again.
Later, a reporter asked Gortney, "To be clear, this is a U.S.-led operation, but in the hours leading up today there’s communications or talk to try to talk that down?"
"We are on the leading edge of coalition operations where the United States under General Ham in Africa Command is in charge," Gortney responded. "He’s in command of this at this point. And in the coming days we intend to transition it to a coalition command."
Gortney offered no details on how long the period of "coming days" might be. But he did offer details on just how much of the Libya operation is being borne by U.S. forces. Early in the briefing, Gortney said that the attack involved "110 Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from both U.S. and British ships and submarines." Later, a reporter asked: "Can you specify how many British ships were involved compared to the U.S. ships?"
"We had one British submarine," Gortney said.
"And the rest were all U.S.?"
"Yes, ma'am."
Gortney's briefing made clear that the United States is not only leading the Libya operation but is virtually the only force involved in the operation. With America's "unique capabilities," it could hardly be any other way. And few Americans would want U.S. forces to go into combat under anything other than U.S. command. But why would the Secretary of State step onto the world stage and announce, "We did not lead this"?
Clinton’s two key statements: ‘We did not lead this” and “America has unique capabilities” are simply not consistent with each other. Because of America’s unique capabilities, it is in fact leading the Libyan effort.
We’re launching cruise missiles and stealth bomber sorties.
Maybe it would be easier to explain what the others are doing. Air traffic control?
the US Pilots in the cockpits must be real happy knowing the US is not leading this
General Rodham is not leading
General obomba is doing the samba in Brazil
General Biden is playing with his choo choo set at home
Thankfully the Daly script calls for us to drop 100 tons of ammo on Libya and declare victory by next weekend before Barry’s Sunday AM tee time at the Back Nine chapel
What the hell are we doing in now attacking a third Muslim country? This will just fall into the hands of the Muslims through their news networks to use against us as proof that the U.S. is the “great Satan.”
Unfortunately, the no-fly zones over Bosnia-Herzegovina and Iraq demonstrate that this tactic—threatened or enforced—neither protects civilians nor compels dictators to abandon power.
I quote at length Rear Admiral J.C. Wylie:
The ultimate determinant in war is a man on the scene with a gun. This man is the final power in war. He is control, he determines who wins. There are those who would dispute this as an absolute, but it is my belief that while other means may critically influence war today, after whatever devastation and destruction may be inflicted on an enemy, if the strategist is forced to strive for final and ultimate control, he must establish, or must present as an inevitable prospect, a man on the scene with a gun.
http://www.cfr.org/libya/us-military-intervention-libya/p24362
They say that this will not be a ground war. Oh yeah?
What will the U.S. do when one of our planes is either shot down or crashes due to a mechanical malfunction and the pilot ejects over land? Will we abandon the pilot or send ground troops to the rescue?
This sounds so much like another Vietnam intervention.
Just asking...”Where in the Constitution does it say that the President can commit us to war without congressional assent?” Is that in the same sub section that mentions a womans right to abortion? It may be in the part that allows foreigners to become president. I must have missed it. Darn!
Because American politicians had their personal money hidden in gold bullion in Libyan banks, they are leading the effort, no expense spared.
"It's not a War, it's the appearance of a War."
Clinton’s two key statements: ‘We did not lead this” and “America has unique capabilities” are simply not consistent with each other.
Since it is unlikely you are a communist-sympathizing, socialist-loving, anti-America (when Demonrats aren’t in charge) libtard, I’m not surprised you don’t see the “obvious” symmetry between these statements. It seems plainly obvious to me that that the O-hole, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Dick Turbin et al “smart diplomacy” is at work for all to see.
I guess the big question that will never be asked by the propogandists in the MSM is, “Does “smart diplomacy” always lead to war?”
So, at last the US has managed what has been an underlying theme in US policy for many a moon: provided Al Quaida and its subsidiaries and allies with unique military capabilities.
Congratulations. The rest of the world may have to fight US islamist forces for a hundred years.
Let the muslims fight each other.
"Playin' with my choo-choo? Bite me!
Ya know, growing up in Scranton, we faced a lot tougher than this Goodaffy guy.
Got into a lot of scrapes with some real bad dudes. But Champ, that's what my old man called me, Champ.
Champ always came out on top of things, man."
Happened every time.
Besides. We have allies now. They're going to fund this and we're going to put boots on the ground right??
Or is it going to cost us treasure AND blood this time too?
Once again we step into the middle of someone else's fight, where we got no place bein'. No wonder the Bahraini's are asking the UN/US to come to their rescue. I'm sure the Syrians then the Iranians then the Yemeni's are all standing in line for Uncle Sugar to come to their rescue too.
Oh. I'm sorry. They're all waiting for the U*N* to come to their rescue and we all know what that means, don't we?
This truly sucks. And the Big O is partying away in Rio on the tax dole.
Charming. Just charming. :(:(:(
Saudi control of Bahrain relative to usurpation of control by Iran, and the US/Brit move in Libya, may be all about preserving the US dollar as the oil exchange medium. Certainly, Libya as did Iraq under Saddam, desires to trade oil (as does Venezuela and Iran) in currency other than dollars. Obama’s visit to Brazil certainly will deal with this issue regarding Petrobras and Brazilian oil intentions...the granting of Petrobras oil supply and storage facility in the Gulf of Mexico in the last 48-72 hours demonstrates the priority the US has to conserving Brazil’s continued trading with the BRIC countries of oil in dollars.
If oil is not traded in dollars, the dollar will collapse from that alone.
Yeah, the Man be partyin'. You got a problem wid dat, white man?
Did anybody ax you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.