Author Topic: US is sliding into long-term military involvement in Libya  (Read 608 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Christians4LessGvt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11139
    • View Profile
    • "The Religion Of Peace"
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
US is sliding into long-term military involvement in Libya
« on: March 27, 2011, 11:43:05 PM »
US is sliding into long-term military involvement in Libya

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis

March 28, 2011, 12:38 AM (GMT+02:00)

Rebel victory depends on US air strikes against Qaddafi's forces

Despite protestations to the contrary, debkafile's military and intelligence sources find the American role in the operation against Muammar Qaddafi heading only one way: Instead of a transition "in a few days" to NATO i.e. Europe - which US President Barack Obama will no doubt reiterate when he addresses the nation Tuesday, March 29 - the United States is sliding deeper day by day into a third war in a Muslim country.

In the last three days, US air strikes have beaten Qaddafi's forces into tactical retreat from all its conquests in the rebel-held eastern province of Cyrenaica. This operation rescued the rebels from the certain defeat they faced in the middle of last week, allowed them to retake the strategic oil towns of Ajdabiya, Brega and Ras Lanuf and opened the way for them to drive forward to Qaddafi's home town of Sirte, the key to Tripoli.

In the view of debkafile's military experts, the Libyan opposition's gains are no more than a victory on paper, not the battlefield. Qaddafi and his commanders executed tactical retreats from those towns - not because they were beaten in battle but to avoid being ground down by superior US sea-based and air power. That power opened the door for the opposition rebels to recover the towns they lost in the last three weeks and pose as victors.

For Washington, the implication is clear: Continuing rebel momentum against Qaddafi's forces depends on United States commitment to two steps:

1.  Keeping up the aerial and sea-based bombardment of government forces. Nothing, otherwise, will stop Qaddafi's troops turning around and heading back east to recapture the towns they left.  Containing Qaddafi's army cannot be left to the limited capabilities of France and Britain or any other members of NATO which has assumed token command of the Libya operation.

2. Organizing the rebels into regular combat units and furnishing them with arms, funds and military instructors. The other alternative would be for the Americans to invest increasing numbers of ground forces into Libya to defend the eastern provinces against Qaddafi reasserting control.

Saturday, March 26, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted, "Libya did not pose a threat to the United States before the US began its military campaign." Asked whether ongoing developments indicated that US military involvement might continue at least until the end of the year, Gates replied: "I don't think anybody knows the answer to that."

In other words, no one in Washington, including no doubt the president, can say with any certainty exactly where the American campaign in Libya is heading or its duration.

In just a few days, the gap has widened exponentially between America's first commitment to supporting a European-Arab operation mandated by the UN for enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya and protecting civilians plus an imminent transition of the US lead role and President Obama's pledge not to involve ground troops all the way over to an expanding commitment to supporting an armed revolt against the Qaddafi regime.

Aware of the Obama administration's quandary, Qaddafi offered Washington a way out. By pulling his troops out of the eastern towns, he gave the Americans a chance to chalk up a rebel victory or at least a standoff - and leave it at that. At this stage, he would accept the loss of Cyrenaica so long as the Americans give up their assaults.

However, should the Obama administration decide to persist in its active military support for the rebellion, the Libyan ruler may consider three counter-steps:

One, to carry out the threat he made prior to the coalition campaign against his regime to strike back at American, British and French targets in the Middle East and Europe;

Two, to activate Libyan undercover terrorist networks in Europe against US targets as well as local ones;

Three, to retreat along with his family to a secret sanctuary among loyal Saharan tribes and from there to fight for his survival against both the Americans and Al Qaeda which he accuses of penetrating the opposition and turning his people against
« Last Edit: March 28, 2011, 10:03:45 AM by Christians4LessGvt »
"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - Ronald Reagan - June 12, 1987

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US is sliding into long-term military involvement in Libya
« Reply #1 on: March 28, 2011, 01:52:48 AM »



   No I don't think so.

   Stalin was once told that he could retreat all the way to the Mountains and return to win, but Quaddifi if he retreats inland will be in the unimproved desert, if he goes to his southern border he will be facing Chad, imagine the welcome that Chad would lay for him!

   The best part of Libia is near the Meditarianian Sea , the area he can retreat to is resorce poor , water poor , and far from friends. He has to hold the coast or he has nothing.

  Quaddafi may talk a long war , but time is not on his side , he could foul us up the best by sueing for peace right now.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: US is sliding into long-term military involvement in Libya
« Reply #2 on: March 28, 2011, 03:39:18 PM »
Qaddafi's hero is Omar of the Desert, who was leader of a group that his grandfather belonged to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Mukhtar

Libya is HUGE, at least twice the size of Texas. There is an extensive network of underground water pipelines connecting the cities with fresh artesian water in the interior. The desert is not all that unimproved these days. I imagine that Qaddafi could easily hide for quite some time. The question is, what good would it do him if he were replaced?
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."