France: Military action to take place 'swiftly' against Libya

I find it almost embarrassing they way Obama took so long to do anything, but now he's falling over his own ass to get out. And he can't make up his mind as to whether Q. should leave, be removed, or stay. It's not surprising that someone who holds the military in disdain would have no clue as to what he is doing.

It's going to take CAS to give the rebels a chance. They don't have the arms or leadership to fight a protracted urban war, where the airpower is negated by the negatives associated with fighting in towns. It seems the French are the only ones with the stone to back up the rhetoric.

And I find it hilarious that the Sarkozy has more stones than Obama.

tom

Seems the people of these countries are rioting not for Islam or politics or anti Israel but for common human decency which these tin pot regimes have taken away from them.

The West has no control of events and less control of results.

The events are happening the way any flood happens. Take away the fear and angry people will rise against their oppresser.

that is my point even though without and lacking leadership at the moment these folks are tired of the high mucky mucks ruling their lives, and they are paying some of them the ultimate price. Bobby yes it will most naturally go tribal or the extreme will take control by military force this is one of the concerns that Israel is watching for to her south and north. this also possibly leads to our own national probs within, could give a good scope for what may happen not saying any time of conspiracy theory but we knew that 9/11 though huge would not be the last of the attacks in the US.

hopeful OB is going to state so in his speech Monday night but probably not, it will be vague and we will continue to scratch our heads as to why. America is tired of conflict.

" .. America is tired of conflict."

This is true.

MM

I write this as the rebels get their counterattack underway. My opinion is that finally the UN has done something worthwhile, and we, who so often are critical of their inaction, should just muck in and get the job done. Sure, the process is selective, not all the tin pot regimes in the middle east are getting this treatment, but let me tell you, it sends a shiver down their spines when they see the west smacking some despot around the ears because of his behaviour in terms of human rights. There will be those who try to argue that the UN mandate does not extend to killing pro-gaddafiists or that they should not be supporting the rebel ground offensive. But i watched this British ex-colonel the other night on TV that is now a british MP, and he summed up the issue perfectly. Defensive does not mean you fly aimlessly around in circles not hurting anybody. machines of war mean that you must fire in order to be effective. That means that you fire, and destroy things, and kill people. Killing a few Gaddafiists is less evil than allowing yet another massacre to occur under the UN aegis, which includes allowing it to happen through inaction.

This British MP even thought killing or planning to kill Gaddafi was within the current UN mandate. I tend to agree. Since Gaddafi is the ultimate source of the threat to the the populace, removing Gaddafi is removing that threat, hence it is defensive, and within the current UN mandate.

I have no sympathy for the gaddafis of this world. If I had my way, he should be captured, passed through the process of the law, and then hanged because of what he did at lockaby.

Once we get rid of Gaddafi, the tinpot regimes are starting to fall into the minority. hopefully something would get done about Syria and Yemen at that point......though what to do with the Saudis is becoming a bit embarrassing

The issues that hopefully have been learnt is that Libya needs to be ruled by Libyans. Western intervention can only go so far.

These regimes are failing because they were built on straw. Kick the door in and the rotten structure will fall down.

Israel was useful as a figurehead but the real enemy of the people was the regimes that oppressed them.

What happens in Syria will be key. That one could be proper bloody.

I don't see that it takes stones for Sarkozy to send his military to do the fighting.

I've noticed it's usually the person with the lower levels of personal courage,or people who have doubts of their courage, who are the most willing to put other people at risk.

Resistance is futile

That really made me laugh! Thanks!

Agree with all regards to the intervention. It is I believe the right thing to do but then there are still the situations in Syria/Bahrain etc that aren't getting the same Western support. However we shouldn't go to far as has been said already, we don't really want to be seen as the aggressor/warmongers at the end of the day which will incur more rather from the Middle East in particular.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Guess I'm missing the part where the US becomes the worlds policeman and guarantor of all these things for the population of the world. If the UN and the Saudi's want Ka-Daffy out of power then let them do it AND pay for it. As I said before Ka-Daffy deserves anything that comes his way but it is an INTERNAL matter of a Sovereign nation.
The US has a tough time remembering recent history: In a deal with the Bush administration, he gave up his nascent weapons of mass destruction and paid $2.7 billion to settle claims relating to the Libyan-directed bombing of Pan Am 103.
Libya won a seat on the U.N. Security Council and then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in 2008 traveled to Tripoli to meet with Gaddafi. In 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warmly greeted national security adviser Mutassim Gaddafi—fourth son of the leader-- at the State Department, saying, "We deeply value the relationship between the United States and Libya. We have many opportunities to deepen and broaden our cooperation." And Obama himself shook hands with the "tyrant" at an international summit.
Let's ask some questions about this "so-called" UN coalition:
Which country supplies the largest share of the NATO budget?
Which country in NATO has airborne capabilities that no other country can match?
Who is the ultimate boss of the Canadian general who will be running NATO's operations?
Behind the facade of a NATO-led mission, the United States is running the show.
An the "Liberty for all movement" What are the results so far? In Egypt, Mubarick, a staunch western ally and friend of the US is gone and the Muslim Brotherhood is more than likely going to take over the government and we'll have a non-secular anti-western government in Egypt. There is also strong evidence that Al-Qaeda is behind and promoting the Lybian revolt. By all means let's support and arm them.