Posted on 07/27/2011 9:49:48 AM PDT by Nachum
While the outcome of NATO’s intervention in Libya is still uncertain, the ongoing drift toward a negotiated solution is fraught with potentially debilitating problems for the Western alliance. Ousting Qaddafi remains a possibility, and could have been achieved much earlier with swift and decisive action, but the prospects for a clear NATO victory are now quite uncertain.
The collapse of NATO’s resolve came in several stages, with the seeds planted right at the outset of the military action. First, President Obama signaled hesitancy and weakness by waiting until Qaddafi’s forces had nearly taken Benghazi , the rebels’ key stronghold, and then held NATO hostage to approval from the Arab League and the UN Security Council.
Second, after very robust U.S. participation in the opening days of the attack, Obama, demonstrating his penchant to “lead from behind,” ordered U.S. strike activity diminished almost to zero. While American forces assigned to NATO continued to provide vital command, control, intelligence and logistical support, the bulk of the strike mission fell to Britain , France and smaller NATO members, on which the strain began to show relatively quickly. America ’s hesitancy and Europe’s inadequacies have significance well beyond the constraints they imposed on the action in Libya , foreshadowing both future failures in U.S. leadership and a far broader hollowing out of Europe ’s contributions to NATO.
NATO’s credibility, in the region and globally, is already deeply wounded because this minor military operation, for ostensibly humanitarian purposes, has lasted so long with the outcome still uncertain (and Ramadan fast approaching). If NATO cannot rapidly depose a rogue like Qaddafi, why should other rogues fear the prospect of NATO intervention?
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
The list, ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
Obama’s To Do List:
-Destroy NATO....Check!
Maybe Quad-Daffy can achieve regime change here in the US first?
My question about the whole Libyan thing is not so much Obama’s action or lack of action, but who are the Libyan rebels? Qaddafi is an SOB no doubt, but we’ve dealt with him for a long time for better or worse. Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t. In the back of my mind I am wondering how connected are the Libyan rebels (you can say the same for the Syrians as well) to salafist groups. I thought the situation was a lot clearer in Egypt, although there may be some hope for Egypt — between the Wafd and the army not really wanting to give up too much turf to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Nachum, my thoughts concur. Hussein would be victorious regardless of the outcome.
Qadaffi gets ousted, Hussein gets praised by the media and poses as a hawk.
Qadaffi stays, NATO is undermined while the press ignores Hussein’s failure...and Hussein privately celebrates America’s defeat.
The Libyan rebels are Islamic fascists with ties to the major terror groups. Bleh
Thanks Nachum, so we shouldn’t be wasting our time there.
Not one cent of our treasure and not one drop of our boys’ blood.
Obama on Libya: ‘Days, not weeks’.
I think too much of it has already been lost in that part of the world—no disrespect to our troops-they are serving the country—but the politicians (W & O) never went in there with a clear cut vision of what they wanted. Forget nation building in that part of the world—they mostly want a Califate. Our rules of engagement have been ridiculous.
...and the MB celebrate their new cash flow for their North African caliphate enterprises.
...Obama gets roses from the brothers.
Recently I read an article about the atrocities the “Rebels” were perpetrating on Libyan civilians. Burning towns to the ground, beatings, rapes, etc. They also were wondering why their stories were not being told.
As horrible as Kaddaffi is, Libyians had a decent standard of living from what I have read.
American credibility plummets.
America becomes untrustworthy internationally.
NATO becomes a criminal mercenary military force.
American military undermined
US Constitution and War Powers act undermined.
Islamic terrorist organization gains legitimacy and diplomatic recognition.
Russia and China replace the United States as worlds moral and ethical authority.
Establishes precedent that no one in America will act against a lawless President.
Obama has tricked America into committing moral and ethical suicide.
Bolton should know better. Very disappointing. The chief “misstep” was to fight this war on the wrong side in the first place.
No, Kaddafi isn’t a nice guy, and he killed Americans in the past. But he paid a price for that, and changed his ways. He turned from Arab terrorism to helping black Africans get food and water.
So, why are we helping gangs of Muslim terrorists? And what excuse do we have for bombing a country that is no threat to us, and killing innocent civilians?
Not every war is a good war, Mr. Bolton.
Bump to that post.
“Everything I touch turns to sh*t.”
-Robert Mitchum, in “Farewell My Lovely.”
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.