No Fly Zone - Page 3

tater · 03-02-11, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Well, not having a degree in political science, I'd have to back out of the conversation. However, I think it a very good point that none of our efforts in the Middle East, Iraq included, have been successful in securing our interests. However, this is likely disputable as I am also lacking a degree in international relations.

Dude, I apologized before. I'm a pedant on some science stuff, can't help it. Makes me an ass sometimes, that comes with the territory.

Show up in NM, and the beer (or wine) and dinner is on me. I'll even cook vegetarian best I can.

Seriously, I apologize.

Oberon · 03-02-11, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

indeed, very interesting. Gaddafi will not go on his own. He will fight to the end and it now looks like we may see a prolonged civil war in Lybia.

Interesting the see the Cameron-Gates two step. No doubt the UK proposal was to basically have the US do all the heavy lifting with a nominal UK presence, something which has zero support in the White House or Congress.

The only way you will see military intervention in Lybia will be if the Europeans actually do something for a change, instead of just asking other countries to send their sons to die in combat.

I'd agree with you completely on the UK proposal, primarily because we have nothing to lift with, something that was noted in just about every British newspaper this morning in varying degrees. It's fast coming up to a crunch time in regards to the military cuts in which Cameron will either have to change his ideas and reinstate units like the Harriers and Ark Royal, or give up all pretense of acting outside of the British shores...and indeed mostly inside.

Bubblehead1980 · 03-02-11, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

But we still went in there without being attacked. And it was the neo-conservative Republicans who presented the evidence and lead the charge. Plenty of Democrats supported it as well, but the NeoCons lead the charge. We went in under the auspices of ending the weapons programs and making the world safer, espeically for America. We accomplished neither, political spin or not. Those are plain and simple facts, and we would all do well to remember that the next time we stick our nose into that region of the world.

We basically agree takeda, no US troops should be sent to Libya or anywhere else right now.Some nation attacks us, sure but no optional intervention, can't afford it and not worth the lives.

Cohaagen · 03-02-11, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

The only way you will see military intervention in Lybia will be if the Europeans actually do something for a change, instead of just asking other countries to send their sons to die in combat.

At last count there were 750 or so European KIA in Afghanistan alone, the dead including Italians, French, Danes, etc., all killed aiding the US in a conflict that doesn't even remotely concern them. I suppose that lonely, isolated, wounded feeling of 12th September 2001 has finally faded completely from the American consciousness...and yet still, to quote the famous banner flown by some socialist Eurotrash destroyer crew, "We Stand By You". Quite why, given the reversion to chauvinistic type, I have no idea. Like the Australians in Vietnam, the European contribution won't feature in the popular record. Being furriners, they count for exactly jack ****.

Bilge_Rat · 03-02-11, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cohaagen

At last count there were 750 or so European KIA in Afghanistan alone, the dead including Italians, French, Danes, etc., all killed aiding the US in a conflict that doesn't even remotely concern them. I suppose that lonely, isolated, wounded feeling of 12th September 2001 has finally faded completely from the American consciousness...and yet still, to quote the famous banner flown by some socialist Eurotrash destroyer crew, "We Stand By You". Quite why, given the reversion to chauvinistic type, I have no idea. Like the Australians in Vietnam, the European contribution won't feature in the popular record. Being furriners, they count for exactly jack ****.

I should have said "rest of the world" instead of Europeans, but could not resist. Apologies

It just seems like the same people who criticized the US for intervening in Afghanistan and Iraq are now asking the US to intervene in Libya.

However, the mood now in the USA is closer to the post-vietnam era. The US has lost the will to intervene in the affairs of another country after the debacle in Iraq. The country is still struggling with a massive recession and huge deficits. It has 150,000 troops tied up in Afghanistan and Iraq. It will not take the lead and shoulder the responsibility for Libya.

The only way a military intervention will occur in Libya is if the European countries take the lead. Libya and North Africa are in the French and Italian sphere of interest, as they have been fonding of rubbing in for decades. France and Italy, with the support of Germany and the UK (and USA and Canada) could mobilize the required force.

On the other hand, if the big 4 european countries cannot be bothered to organize a proper military response on their own, in their own backyard, why should the US be expected to shoulder the responsibility?

yubba · 03-02-11, 09:47 PM

What you think and what would the rest of America think if we were sitting on more oil than all those middle east countries all put together and the elites are waiting and wringing there hands waiting for the price to hit the magic number of 200 dollars a barrel before they start drilling and bankrupt us into socialism. All this time all the death for nothing think about it.

Skybird · 03-03-11, 06:53 AM

the most logical choice for basing an air force to enforce a no fly zone, would be Italy, or carriers.

However, relocating a really not small force of fighters to bases in southern italy, and reorganising the logistics to maintain and supply them there, is no small task. I think it would be easier with a carrier whose wings already already are autark.

The US should be payed financial compensation for the operation by it'S NATO partners.

This is not to stay out of the action by paying money. I just think that it would be easier with a carrier indeed. From mItaly, there could be additional sorties of tankers and AWACS.

However, take into account to deal with SAMs. Any enforcing of a no fly zone would need to include planning for substantial anti-SAM campaigns.

It would not be enough to just throw in a handful of fighters there.

Oberon · 03-03-11, 07:08 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12633415

Is this the beginning?

Skybird · 03-03-11, 07:19 AM

Sounds as if once again planners were basing on the assumption that there are no enemies that are hostile and that the opponent's good will and cooperation could be taken for granted.

Why send in the military then!?

Do it in force, or don't do it at all. But don't make yourself depending on the cooperation of the enemy - never. I learned that in chess, but is it really any different in reality?

Castout · 03-03-11, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Do it in force, or don't do it at all. But don't make yourself depending on the cooperation of the enemy - never. I learned that in chess, but is it really any different in reality?

Yes it is different in reality. There's interests and hidden agenda in RL. In chess it's so straightforward, to defeat the other color. In life?! Well the politicians would like to tread carefully and only act in the name of best self interest instead of good will or mere conscience.

The short form is there's no politicking in chess.

I'd wager a hundred bucks that Gaddafi will be out without Libya descending into full scale protracted civil war or general chaos. Libyans would have their way. Gaddafi will be out of power. Alive or dead I do not know but out of power will he be before any other Arab country get their evolution to be successful. Libya will be the bloodiest evolution of them all. It already has. Another country will follow to get their evolution after Libya and it will be the last one of the string that has been sweeping the middle east.

Jimbuna · 03-04-11, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

The US should be payed financial compensation for the operation by it'S NATO partners.

Most definitely

Jimbuna · 03-04-11, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12633415

Is this the beginning?

Oh Christ!!...what a potential mess

krashkart · 03-04-11, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

The Krashkartista Freelance Liberation Front should be payed financial compensation for the operation by it'S international network of clandestine financiers.

Fixed.

Jimbuna · 03-04-11, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krashkart

Fixed.

WTF!!

TorpX · 03-04-11, 07:50 PM

I'm not going to worry too much. I think he'll be gone before they can work out the details of a no-fly zone.

03-03-11, 06:53 AM	#37
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,660 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	the most logical choice for basing an air force to enforce a no fly zone, would be Italy, or carriers. However, relocating a really not small force of fighters to bases in southern italy, and reorganising the logistics to maintain and supply them there, is no small task. I think it would be easier with a carrier whose wings already already are autark. The US should be payed financial compensation for the operation by it'S NATO partners. This is not to stay out of the action by paying money. I just think that it would be easier with a carrier indeed. From mItaly, there could be additional sorties of tankers and AWACS. However, take into account to deal with SAMs. Any enforcing of a no fly zone would need to include planning for substantial anti-SAM campaigns. It would not be enough to just throw in a handful of fighters there. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

03-03-11, 07:19 AM	#39
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,660 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Sounds as if once again planners were basing on the assumption that there are no enemies that are hostile and that the opponent's good will and cooperation could be taken for granted. Why send in the military then!? Do it in force, or don't do it at all. But don't make yourself depending on the cooperation of the enemy - never. I learned that in chess, but is it really any different in reality? __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

03-02-11, 09:47 PM	#36
yubba Admiral Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: in a neighborhood near you Posts: 2,478 Downloads: 293 Uploads: 2	What you think and what would the rest of America think if we were sitting on more oil than all those middle east countries all put together and the elites are waiting and wringing there hands waiting for the price to hit the magic number of 200 dollars a barrel before they start drilling and bankrupt us into socialism. All this time all the death for nothing think about it.

03-03-11, 07:08 AM	#38
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12633415 Is this the beginning?

03-04-11, 07:50 PM	#45
TorpX Silent Hunter Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 3,975 Downloads: 153 Uploads: 11	I'm not going to worry too much. I think he'll be gone before they can work out the details of a no-fly zone.