Skip to comments.Up to the job? NATO criticized over Libya campaign (AP pretends it's not Obama's war)
Posted on 04/08/2011 1:45:34 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
BRUSSELS NATO holds its fire as Moammar Gadhafi's forces advance 100 miles into rebel territory. It then blasts a rebel tank, saying it didn't know the rebels had any even though footage of rebels with tanks had been on YouTube for weeks.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Nato’s the ragtags airforce.
Well, it must be said that Sarkozy and Cameron have behaved like idiots. Sure, it was Obama who sent his agitators over to Egypt to start all this trouble in the first place. But Britain and France have been in the forefront.
And, for whatever reason, France is also busy helping the Muslim terrorists seize control of the Côte d’Ivoire. A thousand Christians mass murdered there by their stooges, and they don’t seem to give a damn.
ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW!
Let the Arab savages and Europe work it out. When it settles, we will either make friends with the winner, or conquer them then.
Otherwise known as quagmire. And obama's flunkies are now beginning to hint at troops on the ground.
If you had a son or daughter in the military, how would you feel about Owebowmao deploying him to Libya?
As crass as you are, there is a real argument to be made for this!
Ultimately Europe is at far greater risk than we are from the Islamic threat. We “made” ourselves the number one target by being the leader of the pact in NATO, ANZUS and elsewhere. Our presence, symbolic significance and leadership role have made us the target of choice by any Islamist. They have the larger Islamic populations, they are closer geographically, more economically dependent, have via land direct lines of communications over which people and or bad things can come their way more easily. It is THEY that are at greater risk may it be a nuclear Iran with long range missiles, a Libya where Qaddafi regains power and becomes a pariah as in the 80s, Egypt if it falls into the hands of radical Islamists, Turkey playing the Islamic card more and aligning herself with the Russians (a result of the EU rejecting Turkey), Iran developing a long range missile and nuke........ You know, the Germans publicly were against missile defense, let them deal with it when Iran does become nuclear!
If we take a back seat and actually let things run their course, if we adopt exactly the type of strategy some of our allies like the Germans advocate, it will long term be they that will be forced to take greater action. In essence, by stepping back we will force the moochers and freeloader to step up to the plate eventually because even though we can't force them, they will have to take action for their own survival and their own European partners will exert pressure eventually on those that try to hide out in the rear doing nothing. Let their ships get plundered. Let the Suez get shut down. Let a Qaddafi make a come back and go on a rampage. After bombs go off in Europe, do nothing. Make a nice speech and send little in troops, restrict your own forces from really doing anything....... maybe while not the goal and philosophical intent of the Obama administration, the US withdraw will force our European partners long term to take a greater role especially if things go to hell and we don't step in which we ALWAYS have since post WWII. In all reality, Iran won't have a global reach for a while, but they'll be able to reach Europe.
Only protect those that are within the circle of allies that truly carry their own weight, i.e. UK, Netherlands, Poland....a few others.
There is a real argument to be made for an intentional US NON-involvement.
Yes to all.
The only thing I would add is that with a more aggressive role and a real threat, Europe will finally come out of the PC cocoon they have been in since WWII.
It is easy to protest and censure the US and Israel when they have nothing in the mix.
Once they are in the lead, my feeling is the PC Liberal constraints will fall away. This will allow them to fight the external war for real, without all the whining and protesting, and clean up their own house at the same time.
Yes. Disengagement is a viable and intelligent option. Best for us. Best for Europe.
Keystone Kops - not your grandfather’s NATO.
Very good post, Red6.
That being said, I see no way to tell the difference between Libyan tanks being used by the government or by islamic rebels.
They certainly aren’t using NATO IFF and short of actual boots on the ground to spot in real time, I see no way to do so.
NATO is in a cluster screw of it’s own makings - They should leave and work to constrain Quadaffi in political, business, & economic ways.
Thanks E. Pluribus Unum.
Zero led everyone to believe he was sending US forces to intervene, and this would all be over in a week or so, maybe with footage of some charred remains of the ex-dictator (Gaddafy, not Obama). Then boom, handoff, no no, let NATO do it.
The Germans didn’t fall for it, neither did various smaller powers, such as some of the Balkan states.
Now France and the UK, and maybe Italy and some others, are left not only holding the bag, but FIGHTING ON BEHALF OF JIHADISTS.
Kudos to the Kenyan-born Muzzie, nice maneuver. I mean really, credit where credit is due.