Thread: Libya - Not what was advertised?

and so when some people said...."gee I wonder when the boots hit the ground?"

The Libyan mission is creeping, no doubt | Simon Tisdall | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Mission creep is an unpleasant condition brought on by a surfeit of military ambition and lack of self-knowledge. Symptoms include fantasy-like delusions such as the highly contagious belief, known as Sarkozy-itis, that the sufferer alone knows what's best for the world. This is typically followed by cold sweats and hot flushes when political reality proves otherwise. Mission creep is not treatable and hindsight is the only cure. It usually ends in disaster.

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Alundil, were you for or against the Iraq invasion?

Not that this has anything to do with Iraq, trigger, but I'll bite.

Yes, I was in favor of the Iraq Invasion. The first time in defense of Kuwait and in concert with the UN.
The second time under the pretense of enforcement of UN Resolutions and the accepted intelligence at the time (understanding, now, that some pertinent portions of it turned out to be false, inconclusive, containing errors, overblown or some combination thereof).

With that said, and with full intention of not getting into a much-hashed discussion of Iraq, it is no secret that Saddam was not a good individual or that the region has a better future without him.

But getting back to Libya and my "harping" if you will. If there is a case to be made for military engagement in Libya (and make no mistake I think that there is a definite case to be made there) don't hem and haw around the issue. Simply state the case and act decisively. This business of "...well we're evaluating...", or "....we're going to contain..." or "we're going to enact a no-fly, only..." followed by implied guarantees that there would no force escalation or "boots on the ground" is disingenuous at best. It's an end-around to try and avoid direct public outcry and is fairly weak in my opinion. That goes for the global response thus far, lest some here think I am only taking shots at a certain politician.

People in charge just beating around the bush and not wanting to really commit. FFS. While the world waits or delays or equivocates, people die. Gaddhafi (sp) is an ass and has been for at least 3 decades. It would've been very freaking easy, especially given the worldwide support for his removal and the rebellion, to simply drop a bomb on his compound and call it a day. But no....the civilized world is hell-bent on appearing civilized at all cost, even though very uncivilized people are doing very uncivil things.

But whatever, it'll be someone's talking point at some point, I am sure of it.

Originally Posted by SmokenScion

Tim Hetherington in Memoriam - LightBox

restrepo film maker Dies in Libya

yeah saw that hit the wire a few minutes ago. RIP

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/21/wo...er=rss&emc=rss

France and Italy said Wednesday that they would join Britain in sending some liaison officers to support the rebel army in Libya, in what military analysts said was a sign that there would be no quick and easy end to the war in Libya.

“Some countries thought the Libya operation could be over quickly,” said a senior NATO ambassador. “But no military commander thinks so.”

“You want to send Qaddafi a message of collective will, that there’s no way out, that he’s facing a determined and unified opposition,” Mr. Niblett said. “And he’s seeing a European-led NATO that is not sufficiently cohesive.”
“If I were him, I would look at European disagreements and take heart from them, especially when the opposition appears so weak,” Mr. Niblett said.

And this supports my point. Hemming and hawing and trying to be "civil" about it. Drags out and the only people injured by this are the ones that the coalition was supposed to be there supporting.

That picture is funny. As are the silly comments and ideas attached to it. No one should've thought that the Mission was accomplished. I feel sorry for those that did.

So trigger - what would you like to hear? I agree that there was mission creep there as well. I wasn't happy about that either. I am of the opinion that the War in Iraq could've been prosecuted far more efficiently and with far less loss of life. I am not sure what point you're trying to make unless the object is to attempt and stereotype what my thoughts on issues might be.

I also think that there is "mission creep" in the 'stan'.

I think that they US would be better served not trying to be the World Police. I think that there are some places that are simply going to fail and burn, regardless of outside intervention. But I also think that there are things domestically that will fail and burn. Sometimes it is right to let them do so. Otherwise there is no renewal.

It'd be truly something if the US pulled back from the world stage a bit and quit throwing $$ at problems. They're not worth that much anymore to begin with.

It would be truely tragic if the US stopped doing what we do. You think people die in poverty stricken nations now wait till our aid stops. If you think our economy taken a dive was felt globally wait for that aid to stop. Then you will see how much we impact this spec of dirt.