Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Will US combat operations in Libya have the support of the public?
03/17/2011 | TMMT

Posted on 03/17/2011 4:33:00 PM PDT by The Magical Mischief Tour

Looking for an honest opinion here, not one from your I hate everything Obama drawer.

Will any US combat operations have the support of the public?

Or will it be unpopular? Seen as just one more conflict in the middle east and something Obama need not involve us with. Considering the economy, the jobs situation, Japan and how it will effect the global economy and the possibility this could lead to further uprisings in the ME resulting in more trouble for oil prices...


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: libya

1 posted on 03/17/2011 4:33:02 PM PDT by The Magical Mischief Tour
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

Personally, once the decision is made to put our troops and pilots into harms way I’m all for it.

The support is needed for moral, we must stand behind the troops and pilots!


2 posted on 03/17/2011 4:34:21 PM PDT by The Magical Mischief Tour (With The Resistance...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

I do not support Obama but neither do I support US troops or air operations against Libya. This is not our fight. We gain nothing regardless of which side wins.

Anyone who thinks that a rebel victory will usher in an era of Jeffersonian democracy in Libya is insane


3 posted on 03/17/2011 4:38:53 PM PDT by slumber1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

Hell no, we have no damn business there. On one side you have an a-hole and on the otherside you have an a-hole. Neither one is your friend.


4 posted on 03/17/2011 4:40:16 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
Will any US combat operations have the support of the public?
I'm a 'Nam vet and I've supported (albeit, half heartedly) the "wars" we've been in up to Iraq.
But after years of Bush turning that into a Charlie Foxtrot I said - no more.
Afghanistan is bogus BS too. I'm sick of American troops dieing around the world for no good reason. If any country's "rebels" can't fight and win their own battles - TFB.
5 posted on 03/17/2011 4:40:40 PM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

This is not our fight.

We are not the world’s policeman. And if we try to be, we’ll go the way of the Roman and British empires.


6 posted on 03/17/2011 4:40:42 PM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern, you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

Bomb the crap out of him....it’s what reagan would do...


7 posted on 03/17/2011 4:43:19 PM PDT by Crim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

It has NO stated purpose other than a general support of a revolution of uncertain origins within Libya.

At lease the first war in Iraq had Kuwait invasion as casus belli and the second one had reported WMD, among other things, which, even if one disagrees, it was not simply supporting a revolution out of a general support of any revolution against a dictator.

This precedent will have to be changed by the next President and Congress, as it makes no sense for the U.S. to back any and every revolution that happens. What about if a revolution starts in a Western nation - the U.K., Australia, France ? Do we automatically back every revolution ?

We must not only judge the ruler to be tryannical, but also ascertain that the revolutionaries are not going to be worse tyrants than the tyrant.


8 posted on 03/17/2011 4:43:36 PM PDT by PieterCasparzen (Huguenot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: slumber1

It will depend as always on casualties. If we go in and just take out his air force, bomb him to smithereens and the rebels finish him off then it will have support. If it ends up like a Gulf War 1, Panama, Kosovo type deal it will have support.

If it ends up more like Iraq with mounting casualties, it won’t have support.

Fortunately it doesn’t look like there’s any plan to occupy Libya and nation build. I don’t see high casulaty numbers. He has practically no air force. We’ll finish off his air force and navy in a matter of hours and that will pretty much be the end of it.


9 posted on 03/17/2011 4:46:13 PM PDT by jeltz25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

I will bet Code Pink, ANSWER and the rest of the anti war groups will be awfully silent IF troops are deployed however I would expect Cindy Sheehan to raise a ruckus. She is at least consistent.


10 posted on 03/17/2011 4:48:26 PM PDT by Le Chien Rouge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

You know what? — let the Arabs take care of that clown if they see fit to do so. No more rescuing people whose base ideology is a gross totalitarianism that destroys everything it touches.

From a strictly humanitarian angle though, I’m good with “one shot, one kill” for Qadaffi. Other than that, let’s keep our warfighters out of that sh*thole.


11 posted on 03/17/2011 4:48:32 PM PDT by Rocco DiPippo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

NO


12 posted on 03/17/2011 4:50:37 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
I'm extremely dubious. If the French want to get involved, they can have at it.

I support the men and women of the armed forces, but I'm not sure why were involved in a civil war whose outcome is murky at best. Does anyone really know anything about the opposition to Qaddafi, and what kind of regime will take his place if he is toppled?

And beyond that, are we really certain that air-strikes and no-fly-zones are going to be decisive here?

13 posted on 03/17/2011 4:51:08 PM PDT by mojito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: slumber1

Amen bro.


14 posted on 03/17/2011 4:52:29 PM PDT by 353FMG (Liberalism = Communism under the guise of compassion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
I do not. Should I be presented with a valid strategic objective worthy of the risk of our pilots and the spending of our resources that could change. But as of now, no.

I shall support our servicemembers to the hilt as always. I shall never accept nor remain silent in the face of anything that blames them for this action. That blame falls solely on the shoulders of the Commander In Chief.

15 posted on 03/17/2011 4:55:38 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

“The support is needed for moral,”

That the UN, Obama, McCain and Hillary! support it doesn’t do much for my `moral’.


16 posted on 03/17/2011 4:56:27 PM PDT by tumblindice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

Why the f*ck should we be doin’ this sh*t

Saudis,french, germans have the fire power.

They afraid this sh*t, then fix it.


17 posted on 03/17/2011 4:57:42 PM PDT by maine yankee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25

I hope you are right but I fear there is a bit of a surprise involving a new generation of anti-aircraft systems. This statement reminds me of GW2: ‘We’ll finish off his air force and navy in a matter of hours and that will pretty much be the end of it’.


18 posted on 03/17/2011 4:59:01 PM PDT by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

Are we talking about no-fly and air strikes, or combat on the ground?


19 posted on 03/17/2011 5:00:48 PM PDT by 668 - Neighbor of the Beast (Public education is WELFARE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crim

This is a UN operation. Obozo will do what they order him to do.


20 posted on 03/17/2011 5:02:41 PM PDT by screaminsunshine (34 States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

No War for France’s oil
No War to save Muslims from each other.


21 posted on 03/17/2011 5:02:45 PM PDT by omega4179
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
Not mine. Kadaffy Duck killing Muslims so we don't have to is working for me.
22 posted on 03/17/2011 5:03:08 PM PDT by mad_as_he$$
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito

The opposition is an Al Quida front.


23 posted on 03/17/2011 5:03:45 PM PDT by screaminsunshine (34 States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

If we’re going to jump in, just make sure we at least kill Qadaffy to settle the score for the PanAm bombing.


24 posted on 03/17/2011 5:07:12 PM PDT by Ronald_Magnus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maine yankee

Stay out of it for once.
There is no upside for the USA either way.

On one side you have militant Islamists.
On the other side you have militant Islamists.
They are now killing each other.
When they are killing each other they are not killing non-muslims.
Why interfere?

If Gadhafi prevails he will still hate our guts.

If the revolutionists prevail, with or without our help, they will hate our guts.

I am tired of American patriots dying for no good reason.
If the politicians want to have a war to make themselves look good in the UN, let them go fight it.


25 posted on 03/17/2011 5:08:13 PM PDT by Iron Munro ("Our country's founders cherished liberty, not democracy." -- Ron Paul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

Here’s one vote against it. Why do we want to stick our noses in yet another civil war?


26 posted on 03/17/2011 5:11:47 PM PDT by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven
Maybe if we supported the subhuman muhammadans jihadi "rebels" fighting the subhuman muhammadan Khadafi with the understanding that they will supply the USA with $50 a barrel oil for the next 50 years, then helping them might make sense.

But we all know thats not going to happen.

27 posted on 03/17/2011 5:12:37 PM PDT by Rome2000 (OBAMA IS A COMMUNIST CRYPTO-MUSLIM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro
On one side you have militant Islamists. On the other side you have militant Islamists. They are now killing each other. When they are killing each other they are not killing non-muslims. Why interfere?

EXACTLY!

Whoever wins will repair the production and shipment infrastructure and sell the oil, which will help bring down oil prices worldwide, and we benefit by getting out of the way and letting them have it out.

On one hand we can back the backer of PanAm 103 bombing, on the other the Muslim Brotherhood, with ties to Hamas, Hizbollah, and AlQaida.

I flipped a coin and it landed on edge.

Not our fight.

28 posted on 03/17/2011 5:13:14 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

Surgical airstrikes against terrorist training camps in Mexico would make more sense.


29 posted on 03/17/2011 5:16:40 PM PDT by forgotten man (forgotten man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

Muslims decreasing muslims has my support.


30 posted on 03/17/2011 5:18:39 PM PDT by existtoexcel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
Will US combat operations in Libya have the support of the public?

It all depends on what position Lady Gaga takes on the issue.

31 posted on 03/17/2011 5:18:39 PM PDT by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

Let Qaddafi beat them down until they’re willing to give us access to their govt and oil fields. Then kill Qadaffi and anyone loyal to him or opposed to us. Then move in Haliburton and start “developing” those oil fields. If that can’t happen, let them kill each other and enjoy the show.


32 posted on 03/17/2011 5:21:53 PM PDT by RC one (WHOOPS. lol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC one

I’ve got a better idea.

Ironically enough, the Jews sit on THE ONLY LAND IN THE MIDDLE EAST NOT BLEEDING OIL.

Kill’em all..Move the UN to the Holy Land (see how long they tolerate that B.S. when they’re more worried about exploding jihadis than Manhattan parking laws) And give the Jews Libya.


33 posted on 03/17/2011 5:26:22 PM PDT by hobbes1 (Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to...." ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
We have no business getting involved in an internal conflict. Both sides hate us... I will Never support this action. Our Military is not a political tool for obama to play with.

LLS

34 posted on 03/17/2011 5:31:09 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (WOLVERINES!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

Amen brother.

LLS


35 posted on 03/17/2011 5:32:26 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (WOLVERINES!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

What is the goal and how do we know when we achieve it?


36 posted on 03/17/2011 5:39:37 PM PDT by ops33 (Senior Master Sergeant, USAF (Retired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
Unless we plan on invading the stinking place, taking over the country as an American protectorate, paying for the entire operation with the proceeds from Libyan oil, and using up the rest of the oil ourselves... the answer is "NO"!

I'm getting sick and tired of us being the UN's little on-call mercenary army and azz kisser.

To rephrase Bismark,... "Libya is not worth the bones of a single American airman!"

37 posted on 03/17/2011 5:48:34 PM PDT by Gritty (America is in national suicide on a scale no nation in history has contemplated - Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

No, not the mission.


38 posted on 03/17/2011 5:51:03 PM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
Only if they're clearly successful. Chances are they'll be too little, too late.

But, of course, we support our troops! even as we crap all over the mission.....

39 posted on 03/17/2011 5:53:56 PM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo Persae Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC one

amen.... kill everyone involved, take their oil.... f these muslims.... their religion is a cancer on humanity......


40 posted on 03/17/2011 5:54:01 PM PDT by sentient
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

Think of Obama in a toga, pretending he’s Scipio Africanus....


41 posted on 03/17/2011 5:55:22 PM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo Persae Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; Delacon; ...

Thanks The Magical Mischief Tour.

No, it won’t.

It’s difficult to see how anyone can support this.

But wait, it gets better — let one US pilot get shot down and be put on trial for war crimes or some shit...

Remember, this is the same Gaddafi who imprisoned those Euro-nurses, accusing them of spreading AIDS in Libya.


42 posted on 03/17/2011 5:59:06 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (The 2nd Amendment follows right behind the 1st because some people are hard of hearing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
Under our current military strength I don't support it. Nor do I support POTUS any longer having the power to deploy troops into combat without first approval from congress EXCEPT when our own soil including foreign bases housing U.S. Troops or water where U.S.N. ships are attacked. An immediate military response to an attack should always be allowed even down to it being a command decision.

We're spread too thin with too few troops. We're over extended, over deployed, and grossly undermanned even to maintain a god national defense posture much less be involved in combat. That was the fought of Clinton, GW Bush, and Obama, and the Democratic and Republican sitting congress from about 1994-present.

Unless this is stopped and some serious corrections made we aren't going to have a military left to fight with. I'm not an isolationist but I see the reality of we can not maintain this pace much longer.

Adding to that we're not even sure about those opposing the Tyrant. They might even be backed by Bin Laden. Someone is sure stirring the stick in the M.E. My question about it is someone setting a snare for us to bog us down further in extended military deployments?

43 posted on 03/17/2011 6:16:09 PM PDT by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
Under our current military strength I don't support it. Nor do I support POTUS any longer having the power to deploy troops into combat without first approval from congress EXCEPT when our own soil including foreign bases housing U.S. Troops or water where U.S.N. ships are attacked. An immediate military response to an attack should always be allowed even down to it being a command decision.

We're spread too thin with too few troops. We're over extended, over deployed, and grossly undermanned even to maintain a good national defense posture much less be involved in combat in several venues as we are now. That was the fault of Clinton, GW Bush, and Obama, and the Democratic and Republican sitting congress from about 1994-present. None of them have addressed the End Troop Strength issue seriously since the 1996 level we currently maintain.

Unless this is stopped and some serious corrections made we aren't going to have a military left to fight with. I'm not an isolationist but I see the reality of we can not maintain this pace much longer.

Adding to that we're not even sure about those opposing the Tyrant. They might even be backed by Bin Laden. Someone is sure stirring the stick in the M.E. My question about it is someone setting a snare for us to bog us down further in extended military deployments?

44 posted on 03/17/2011 6:22:18 PM PDT by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour

The supposition is pretty much balderdash. There is no possibility......at all.

To even ask the question indicates misunderstanding


45 posted on 03/17/2011 7:13:41 PM PDT by bert (K.E. N.P. N.C. D.E. +12 ....( History is a process, not an event ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000
they will supply the USA with $50 a barrel oil for the next 50 years
No need.
Look at the price of oil after Bush lifted the ban on offshore oil drilling ...

46 posted on 03/18/2011 5:32:27 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson