New NATO Ultimatum

"It is hard to conceive that this has come about through a genuine change of heart, and easier to presume that NATO is tired of the conflict and wants out on the least worst terms."

So we,the forces of the West/NATO draw down and become ever less resolute,next we'll be asking Ghaddafi and the Rebel Leader to shake hands and do "the bridge", a zero-tolerance-to-violence too, used with great success in our schools.

We should have listened to Ron Paul in the first place,and stayed the F***out of there.

Now all we've done is show our enemies how weak we really are,and that we can be easily defeated with a bit of patience and a lot of violence that they must be sure gets to our living rooms via TV every night.

"Hague and Juppe received support for the proposal from former British Foreign Secretary Malcolm Rifkind, who said it would be important to avoid a “blood bath in Tripoli” — seen as a likely outcome if a final military push to the Libyan capital triggered close combat."

Whose blood?

Let's hope it's a little more dignified than our "exit strategy" from Saigon.

Hang on tight: Free rides on the helo skids.

"NATO is seeking an urgent exit strategy from Libya that will end the fighting and decide the future of embattled leader Moammar Gadhafi, even if that means letting him stay in the country though out of power, it emerged Tuesday after British and French foreign ministers met in London."

Yeah, because letting him stay in Libya, out of power, will work out so well for him. Sheesh, even if he were a good guy, there would hundreds of people gunning for him. Since he was most definitely not a good guy, that means there will be hundreds more.

Maybe we should offer him asylum in Canada. He could bunk at Paul Martin's place. They're old buds.

What a bunch of losers. Just hand China the keys and get it over with.

Why not divide the country into three parts (as it once was)? Leave Ghadaffi in one part, give a second part to the rebels, and hand one part over to the Italians, so they can provide a homeland for all the Libyans, Tunisians, and other Africans who wander through their streets selling lighters, batteries, and knock-off Gucci bages.

"A single, unambiguous aim is the keystone of successful military operations. Selection and maintenance of the aim is regarded as the master principle of war ..." Carl von Clausewitz.
Oh well, back to military college.

DrD at July 27, 2011 1:31 PM

Since NATO's aim was supposed to be to protect Libyan civilians from being targeted by K-Daffy, and K-Daffy never was targeting civilians, then NATO can declare 'mission accomplshed' and go home.

The problem is that the real aim was to mitigate the result of France's foreign policy blunder of recognizing the 'rebels' as the de facto government of Libya when the 'rebels' didn't even have control of the country.
It was always about regime change and our own government has been lieing to us about their aims and reason for being there.
(and if the Canadian government wasn't lieing then they are simply trusting dupes)

gordinkneehill at 12:52 PM

there's a job opening at the NDPee, be a good fit

Oz: and that's the second time the Euros have done this to us. Remember, what triggered off the decade-long intervention in former Yugoslavia was Germany's preemptive recognition of Slovenia. And the result was the Canadian army's biggest battle since Korea.

"...and our own government has been lieing to us about their aims and reason for being there."

Yes, which is the key difference from Afghanistan. Kicking out the Taliban was always the aim from day one. It may have been difficult or impossible, but there's never been any confusion about why we were there. But the excuses about Libya have been a lie and a cheat from the get-go.

may as well... at least kadaffyduck isn't quite as much of a lunatic as the jihadists they want to replace him with....

FAISALABAD: A man gunned down six of his daughters on suspicion that two of them were in relationships with boys in the neighbourhood.

On Tuesday morning, Arif Mubashir called his teenage daughters to his room and shot them while the rest of the family, including their mother, watched. His wife Musarrat called the police after the incident.

Mubashir shot the girls after their brother said two of them were in a relationship. He told police officials that he had killed his daughters because they were both “without honour”. The man said his daughters Sameena, 14, and Razia, 16, were in a relationship with college boys from the neighbourhood and the sisters had helped each other. “I should have been told immediately but the girls sided with each other. They were both corrupt,” Mubashir told Tandlianwala Police Inspector Javed Sial.

Police officials have taken Mubashir into custody and filed a case against him. “He does not regret what he did. He boasted that he would do it all over again if he had to,” Sial told reporters.

Pakistan has repeatedly been termed as one of the least women-friendly countries. In June, the Thompson Reuters Foundation ranked Pakistan as the world’s third most dangerous country for women.

Before we started bombing it, Libya was the wealthiest country in Africa.

Qadaffi spread the oil wealth amongst the people, unlike say, our fiends in Saudi Arabia and Texas.

The average Libyan's lifespan is only slightly less than that of an American, and they are better educated.

Libyans had a fairly decent life until we started murdering them.

Kicking out the Taliban was always the aim from day one.
~cgh

True.
But establishing a new Islamic Republic in Afghanistan ensures that the Taliban will either rule Afghanistan again after NATO leaves by being elected to the Afghan government or by being the Islamic scholars who determine whether each new law that is enacted complies with Sharia as the Afghan Constitution states or both.

If Mullah Omar's ruling Jurga had handed Osama bin Laden over to the U.S. when they received the ultimatum to do so or be invaded, then the Taliban would still be the government of Afghanistan, but of course the majority ethnic group in Afghanistan are the Pashtun and the Pashtunwali code by which all Pashtun are to live forbids a host from betraying a guest to an enemy(especially infidels).

Sorry ... "bags".

So has France secured another source of Oil?

So has France secured another source of Oil?
~rroe

France has got their own independent diplomatic back channel trying to make a separate deal with K-Daffy.
If they come to an agreement, they'll be in the catbird seat, bug out, and leave NATO twisting in the wind despite the fact that France precipitated the outside involvement in Libya's civil war.

I think we should just appologize to G. Perhaps some flowers will help.

It is more likely that the overthrow of "Go'Daffy" was tied to certain promises made to the
west being kept by his various opponents outside of Libya. The reason for the glacial pace
of his ouster might also be the result of taking the time to train a suitably PC force to the
level necessary to defeat his forces in a deciding battle.

The reason for the glacial pace
of his ouster might also be the result of taking the time to train a suitably PC force to the
level necessary to defeat his forces in a deciding battle.
~Sgt Lejaune

Contrary to the MSM and some here on SDA, K-Daffy is a popular president.
Since the 'rebel's' airforce(NATO) has destroyed most of K-Daffy's heavy support weapons, what is going on in Libya is essentially a guerrilla war and in a guerrilla war the side that has popular support from the citizenry wins.

The reason the 'rebels' haven't won yet isn't because they lacked training.
The 'rebels' haven't won because the 'rebel' insurgency in Libya isn't a popular rebellion.

Unless Gaddaffi's head is on a pike, this was a waste of time.

"The 'rebels' haven't won because the 'rebel' insurgency in Libya isn't a popular rebellion."

Yet Britain, the U.S. and the Council of Foreign Ministers of the European Union want to free up Libyan frozen assets in their countries to hand over to the rebel forces.

"The Council of Foreign Ministers of the European Union (EU) has called on member states to hand over Libyan assets, frozen in Europe, to the Libyan rebels of the National Transitional Council (CNT), in order to enable them establish their own administration, according to an EU statement issued here Tuesday.

The Council of Foreign Ministers of the European Union (EU) has called on member states to hand over Libyan assets, frozen in Europe, to the Libyan rebels of the National Transitional Council (CNT), in order to enable them establish their own administration, according to an EU statement issued here Tuesday.

However, the issue caused disagreement among EU member states, with many believing that it required a decision by the UN Security Council, the body which adopted Resolution 1973 mandating the use of force to establish a no-fly zone over Libya.

The International Contact Group on Libya, which met last week in Istanbul, Turkey, recognized CNT as the legitimate government body in Libya."

http://www.africanmanager.com/site_eng/articles/17069.html

chutzpahticular,
How would you feel if foreign governments were making such decisons about your country, without your input, and declaring a new group of people to be the government when neither you nor even these foreign governments know who leads this group or what they stand for?

What gives these European A-holes the right?

What goes on in Libya is none of NATO's, the U.S. or our business.

The interventionism there is neo-conservatism(disguised Liberalism) gone mad!

Oz, (sigh) I agree. I never said it was a good plan, but at least there were no barefaced lies about why we were there.

"What gives these European A-holes the right?"

Oh, you mean like, Quebec separates and tries to claim by force all those areas in Canada where Francophones are the local majority? No kidding.

As to who gives them the right, BLAME Lloyd Axworthy. That's the idiot who created this Right to Protect UN doctrine in the first place.

When the UN was created after WW2, its principles included the recognition of absolute sovereignty. That is, the UN would not interfere in the internal affairs of any UN member, including in times of civil war, unless such disturbances included aggression against neighbours. Axworthy's RTP destroyed that principle, after it had already been weakened by the Yugoslav breakup. Thus creating the perfect international legal excuse to butt into any nation's business.

This is why Canada has no choice but to remain in good standing with the UN. It's become a club of thieves and murderers, turning on any who aren't one of them.

Yes, Khaddafi is a thug and a terrorist. But can anyone pretend that anything better is going to come of this intervention in a tribal civil war?

It's also done hideous damage to international efforts for nuclear disarmament. After Iraq, the Colonel decided he'd better play nice, turned over the Lockerbie bomber, dismantled his nuclear weapon development program. And then the thug gets beat on. So the lesson to all the brutal thugs in the world is NOT to do what the Colonel did. If you have a clandestine weapons program you keep it. Which is why North Korea is still standing.

Which just goes to show that Obama has the brains and foresight of a newt.

Walking our way into a new dark age, following cowards & scoundrels.
Libya, the Obama diversion.

"How would you feel if foreign governments were making such decisons about your country, without your input, and declaring a new group of people to be the government when neither you nor even these foreign governments know who leads this group or what they stand for? What gives these European A-holes the right?"

Canadians would be up in arms.

I'd like to know what justification is being used to free up Libyan funds and hand them over to rebels which have been reported to include al Qaeda members.

So the lesson to all the brutal thugs in the world is NOT to do what the Colonel did. If you have a clandestine weapons program you keep it. Which is why North Korea is still standing.
~cgh

All well said, but that is my favorite part.

The other bad lesson is that Russia or China could use what NATO is doing in Libya as a precedent to foment government overthrows in other nations and use the R to P doctrine as an excuse to back the 'rebels' that they themselves put up against the government if they can't dupe NATO into doing it for them.

That's why I say NATO being fought to a stalemate in Libya encourages these destabilizing interests.

Canadians would be up in arms.
~chutzpahticular

Just as the Libyans are.
Clearly the Libyan people are supporting K-Daffy against the 'rebels' and NATO or K-Daffy wouldn't still be fighting after 4 months, he'd be quietly in hiding by now like Saddam Hussein was.

Just gotta stop messing in things that are none of our business. No one appointed us to monitor every crackpot running a country. We have enough of our own crackpots in power. Despot in Libia ?, Afghanistan?,Iraq, Iran?,Somalia? N.Korea or umpteen other countries?. None of our business. Their human rights?. None of our business. Nato is useless and these stupid wars are breaking the piggy bank of every country involved.No exit strategy and doubt about what we have won even if we were to win. Let them sort out their own problems. We have enough of our own.

Chutzpahticular: to paraphrase a famous movie line, "Justification??? We don't need no steenking justification."

Oz: that's precisely why the original UN charter was based upon non-interference in sovereign nations. But RTP changes all that. Seems that nobody's remembered that this was almost precisely the ploy used by Hitler with respect to Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia. And we all know, I think, how well that worked.

Are all of these supposed world statesmen f*&king MORONS??? Do none of them remember history for which there are still living witnesses? Do they really WANT to demolish a here-to-fore rather successful voluntary nuclear disarmament program?

Make no mistake on the last point. Countries feel less need for nuclear weapons when they perceive their national security from foreign attack or interference in their domestic affairs is good. RTP only increases a sense of national insecurity. Fact is, the intervention in Libya would never have happened if the Colonel had even a handful of functional nuclear weapons. And now every other tinpot tyrant knows it. I can think of no better way to make Iran dig in its heels and REALLY make nuclear weapons.

"That's why I say NATO being fought to a stalemate in Libya encourages these destabilizing interests."

Yes indeed. Among other things it emphasizes NATO's weakness. A poker hand is infinitely strong, until it's laid on the table and shown to be nothing more than a pair of deuces.

@cgh
"A poker hand is infinitely strong, until it's laid on the table and shown to be nothing more than a pair of deuces."

Excellent comment!

My two cents, either invade outright and assume control or just out of it. All in or nothing. Generally speaking.

Posted by: cgh at July 27, 2011 6:17 PM:

You mean like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr8DIg3oHFI

My apologies in advance.

chutzpahticular: "I'd like to know what justification is being used to free up Libyan funds and hand them over to rebels which have been reported to include al Qaeda members."

The proffered justification is "human rights".

But a gifted goldfish can see that the real reason is control of the oil.

(I think there's a lesson for Canadians buried in here somewhere.)

Dystopian Optimist, the bastards can't have our oil.

PiperPaul, exactly like that, which was indeed the reference I had in mind. And no one should ever apologize for a Monty Python reference, particularly when it's accurate.

Google wars France has won..

My favorite is-

France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting ...
their first taste of a Marlborough,
which they have loved every since. ...

They won the French Revolution,
primarily due to the fact that their opponent was also French.

Anyway...

If France ever gets us involved in another war we should issue weapons with white flags under the barrels.

-

psst.. Hey Buddy!

You wanna buy a great gun?

Never been fired and only dropped once!

"Canadians would be up in arms."

I don't think so,chutz. Maybe a tiny number of Canadians would actually take up arms,but they'd quickly be arrested by the RCMP,to the relief of their acquiescent neighbours.

Make no mistake, Canadians are the most complacent people on the planet, probably more "civilized" even than the French. We've never experienced a revolution or even widespread domestic violence. The whole Country has been in shock for 20 years over the Lepine/Gharbi shootings in Montreal.

No, Canada, if told to toe the line by a foreign government, would quickly find that it's Leaders are actually descendents of the Vichy French.

Somehow,we'd be told to accommodate the foreign government,and why not,as long as it kept our politicians in place in THEIR cushy jobs and secure lifestyles,what reason would any of them have to rock the boat?

The taking up of arms has to be lead by someone,and I don't see a single true Leader among any of our current crop of politicians, only civilized bureaucrats anxious to accommodate lest they place that pension in jeopardy.

The Euros, particularly the French, are really good at getting others to fight for them. I don't give a crap about Libya and Canada sure has no business there.

If people want to use Nato or the UN as a guise for involvement then the red flags should have been flying higher from the get go. Nato is a joke and the UN a bunch of 3rd world thieves!

It occurs to me at this late moment, that Libya is Obama's own Bay of Pigs. Over estimating the rebels support and under estimating his own (er NATO's) military might.