NATO will have to intervenePosted Wednesday, April 20, 2011, at 9:08 AM
If you've ever wondered how good our military is, all you have to do is look at the operations in Libya.
When U.S. forces were involved, we were able to make precision strikes on Kadaffi's forces, even when they were in the suburbs of cities, without hitting civilians. We could do it day and night, regardless of weather.
As the rebel forces are learning, the rest of NATO, which now conducts the UN-authorized operations, doesn't have that capability. The technology and training just isn't there. Nobody else has A-10s and AC-130 "Spectre" gunships, or the targeting capabilities and precision ordnance of our F-16 and F-15 aircraft. Civilian and rebel "friendly fire" casualties have occurred since the U.S. ended its share of the operations, and some weather conditions that wouldn't have stopped U.S. forces have halted NATO.
We're glad we're no longer directly involved there, but without us, the force multiplier for the rebel forces isn't as great.
In the long run, the rebels are going to need more than they've been getting, which is why our withdrawal from direct involvement is a good thing. To win the civil war they're going to, eventually, need some limited ground forces from NATO or (preferably) the Arab states.
This civil war can't be allowed to drag on forever, and Kadaffi can't be allowed to remain in power. The longer he's allowed to stay, the higher the risks of him returning to his old ways and sponsoring terrorist attacks against the western powers that have worked against him.
NATO and the Arab states need to move beyond the UN mandate and push him out of power soon.
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]
Hot topicsWe can't afford to lose battle against terrorism
(45 ~ 12:56 PM, Feb 28)
Elected officials can't have it both ways
Education proposal deserves merit
Thoughts on the president's education proposal
All lawmakers had to do was approve four words