"Residents divided on Libya attacks; Support aims, worry about added role" by Jenna Russell and Travis Andersen and Matt Byrne, Globe Staff | Globe Correspondent / March 21, 2011
From suburban living rooms to the raucous sidelines of South Boston’s St. Patrick’s Day parades, the city and region watched closely yesterday as military strikes in Libya intensified, with many observers struggling to balance sympathy for Libyan rebels with unease about the likely strain on American forces.
Tony Flaherty, 79, a Navy veteran from South Boston and an organizer with Veterans for Peace, called the air strikes as misguided as he said the 2003 invasion of Iraq was.
“Were the Iraqis coming over to Castle Island?’’ he said. “Are the Libyans coming over to Castle Island? It’s America’s war for empire.’’
Some of those hardest hit by recent US military action chose not to watch the unfolding conflict.
Victoria Foley of Norwood, whose 20-year-old son, Alexander Arredondo, was killed in Iraq in 2004, said it was hard for her to express what she felt.
“It brings up a lot of emotions,’’ said Foley, whose son was shot by a sniper in Najaf, Iraq, while checking on the members of his squad. “I just think, what is going on? What’s next?’’
A poll conducted by Fox News last week, before the airstrikes started, found a majority of Americans, 65 percent, opposed to military involvement in Libya.
Yes, world, we are GOOD, PEACEFUL PEOPLE who DO NOT WANT WAR!!
The poll, of 913 voters randomly chosen from March 14 to 16, a majority of both Republicans and Democrats opposed.
And yet today we are being told: In U.S. poll, 60 percent back Libya military action
They just MAKE THINGS UP in the AmeriKan media, don't they?
Pick a number, any number that sounds like it will sell s***.
Carl Johnson, 82, a retired construction supervisor from Brockton whose son is serving in Iraq, agreed that fighting in Libya will stretch resources, but said he sees no alternative.
“In my opinion the president should have taken action sooner, maybe two weeks ago, because rebels, civilians, were being killed, and he was doing nothing,’’ Johnson said.
He's right about that. And now the action is killing even more people.
Like some others interviewed, he said he believes the fighting could go on for some time, and that it is unlikely to be resolved without the use of American ground troops. President Obama has pledged that no ground troops will be used.
I wonder when he is going to break that promise (if he has not already).
“I don’t think it’s realistic,’’ he said. “Someone’s got to bring it under control, and shooting missiles is not going to do it. Missile wars never bring the enemy down; the boots have got to get in there and do it.’’
In Andover, Anne Chay said she was too busy to pay close attention to the news, but she didn’t like what she had heard.
I can understand that feeling!!
Her 23-year-old son spent five years in the military and 15 months in Iraq; Chay said she worries about the other young people who will be sent to fight and about the consequences of increased military spending for public schools and other needs....
Hey, we have been in a war economy for a long time.
Why do you think the infrastructure is crumbling?
In Harvard Square, where newsstand headlines and photos were dominated by the Middle East violence yesterday, people on the street voiced mixed opinions. Sam Sampanthan, 26, a first-year student at Harvard Law School, said intervention by the United States is a tough sell.
“I thought it was ironic because [Obama] got the Nobel Peace Prize, and now he’s flying planes over [Libya],’’ he said....
See: Calls Begin For Revocation Of Pres. Obama's Nobel Peace Prize
He never should have gotten that useless prize in the first place.
Others backed the current action but warned against future commitments to the region....
Watching her grandsons, ages 5 and 8, play on a sunny afternoon in Copley Square, Marti Mirken lamented that another global conflict had to happen.
Oh, it HAD to HAPPEN, huh?
“This is what the world is supposed to be like,’’ the 60-year-old social worker said. “Little children having fun, not ducking bombs.’’
And the ones they are ducking are mostly ours (and Israel's), no matter where they be on this planet!!!!!!
--more--"
"West presses attacks on Khadafy; rebel soldiers regroup; Pentagon cites heavy damage to Libyan forces" by David D. Kirkpatrick and Elisabeth Bumiller, New York Times / March 21, 2011
TRIPOLI, Libya — A day after a summit meeting in Paris set the military operation in motion, some Arab participants in the agreement expressed unhappiness with the way the strikes were unfolding.
Too late now.
See: Arabs Angry at Libyan Airstrikes
The former chairman of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, told Egyptian state media that he was calling for an emergency Arab League meeting to discuss the situation in the Arab world and particularly Libya.
“What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone, and what we want is the protection of civilians and not the bombardment of more civilians,’’ he said, referring to Libyan government claims that allied bombardment had killed dozens of civilians in and near Tripoli.
In assessing the results for the military mission so far, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the allies had made great progress toward their short-term military roles. “We hit a lot of targets, focused on his command and control, focused on his air defense, and actually attacked some of his forces on the ground in the vicinity of Benghazi,’’ Mullen told Fox News.
Same s***, different war.
But it remained unclear just how those short-term military objectives — establishing a no-fly zone and protecting Libyan civilians, as mandated by UN Security Council — aligned with the political objectives of the Obama administration. Both President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton have said in recent days that Khadafy must go.
Mullen said the military was focused only on the mission given to it by Obama and the United Nations, protecting Libyan civilians from attack and opening up humanitarian relief, by whatever means necessary. He did not mention ousting Khadafy or arming the Libyan rebels as an objective.
That led Christiane Amanpour of ABC’s “This Week’’ to ask if it was possible that Khadafy could end up remaining in office, with the allies operating a no-flight zone over Libya for 12 years, as happened with Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
“I think circumstances will drive where this goes in the future,’’ Mullen said. “I wouldn’t speculate in terms of length at this particular point in time.’’
And whatever Israel wishes.
In Libya, Khadafy delivered a fresh and defiant tirade against the allied military action yesterday, pledging retaliation and saying his forces would fight a long war to victory.
He was speaking in a telephone call to state television, which, apparently for security reasons, did not disclose his whereabouts. The Libyan leader has not been seen in public since the United States and European countries began their strikes.
“We will fight you if you continue your attacks on us,’’ Khadafy said.
--more--"
Related: Rebels celebrate after airstrikes on Khadafy’s forces
Who are these rebels, anyway?
"As it gained force, the allied air campaign met a rising tide of criticism from around the world, notably from Russia and China....
The wall is up, readers; and besides, who really wants to read NYT propaganda anymore?
--more--"
"Khadafy is not target, US says" by Robert Burns, Associated Press / March 22, 2011
But we BOMBED HIS HOUSE anyway!!
WASHINGTON — Army General Carter Ham, the lead US commander, said it was possible that Khadafy might manage to retain power. “I don’t think anyone would say that is ideal,’’ the general said, foreseeing a possible outcome that stands in contrast to President Obama’s declaration that Khadafy must go....
Better check with Israel and get your stories straight.
The full dimensions of the Libya crisis are still coming into view, with questions remaining about how far the Obama administration is willing to go to stop Khadafy, whether the international military coalition will hold together, and whether dissent in Khadafy’s own ranks will soon doom him.
Traveling in Chile, Obama said removing Khadafy is not the military’s mission. A combination of other measures, including United Nations sanctions designed to isolate the Libyan leader, are the correct approach to hastening his fall, Obama said, adding that the UN Security Council resolution authorizing military action did not sanction regime change.
The president has little choice if he wants to hold Arab and other backing and hand off front-line responsibility for a no-fly zone to European or other allied forces in the coming days.
In Russia for an awkwardly timed visit on other topics, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said....
I've stopped listening to U.S. government liars.
Attacks continued last night, but....
I'm so sick of seeing that word in my newspaper "reports."
My college writing instructor told me that was a bad word for a "report."
--more--"
Also see: US, allies seek accord on Libya campaign (By Mark Landler and Steven Erlanger, New York Times)
NATO flotilla to start patrolling off Libyan coast
The Boston Globe then did a switcheroo with the lead Libyan story from the NYT, and I lost the title and link. Sorry.
I wonder if the update mentioned the jet being shot down and the resulting helicopter slaughter by the rescue team.
Libya releases four New York Times journalists
4 Times journalists held captive in Libya faced days of brutality (By Anthony Shadid, Lynsey Addario, Stephen Farrell, and Tyler Hicks, New York Times)
Getting back some of the agenda you helped push, huh?
The war pimps really do not think I'm going to feel sorry for them, do they?
Obama insists actions in Libya serve US interests
I no longer listen to U.S. government liars, sorry.
Next!
"Allies intensify assault on Libyan forces; US-led attacks pound units near rebel-held cities" by Elisabeth Bumiller and David D. Kirkpatrick, New York Times / March 24, 2011
WASHINGTON — The United States and its allies shifted to ferocious airstrikes yesterday on Libyan ground forces, tanks, and artillery, marking the second phase of a military campaign that drew the Pentagon deeper into the fight....
This after WE WERE TOLD we were going to be HANDING IT OFF PDQ!!!
Hey, what is ONE MORE LIE in a LIBYAN DESERT FULL of 'EM, huh?
US military officials said that the first stage of the military campaign, when more than 160 Tomahawk missiles fired from ships at sea largely destroyed Khadafy’s air defenses and air force, had made the skies safe for coalition warplanes. The allies were conducting stepped up attacks on ground troops, military officials said, without fear of being shot down....
I've read this before about eight years ago.
As the war intensified, Obama faced new pressures in Congress.
Yeah, sure he did: Congress Comes Together On Libya
Anyone other than Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich calling for a cease fire?
The House speaker, John A. Boehner, sent the White House a letter yesterday, demanding answers about the cost of the war, an exit strategy, and when the United States would hand off the lead role to the allies. He also asked a question central in Washington: “Is it an acceptable outcome for Khadafy to remain in power after the military effort concludes in Libya?’’
This is all shit show fooleys for public consumption.
Since when have the Repugs cared about the cost of the wars? Both parties still fund the f***ers!
Obama administration officials continued to say that although they were not specifically seeking to attack Khadafy, the Libyan leader might be ousted from power by his own family or inner circle. “I think there are any number of possible outcomes here, and no one is in a position to predict them,’’ Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said during an official visit to Cairo.
Both Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton cited defections within Khadafy’s ruling circle and alluded to divisions within his family, although they provided no details.
So who have we cut a deal with?
“We’ve been hearing a lot of things from many different sources,’’ Clinton said at the State Department. “But what is very clear is that Khadafy has lost his legitimacy to govern and the confidence of his people.’’
So have you, Madame Secretary.
--more--"
Then it should all be over soon, right?
"Allies Are Split on Goal and Exit Strategy in Libya
A military campaign that could last for weeks.
Or even longer!
The United States has all but called for Colonel Qaddafi’s overthrow from within — with American commanders on Thursday openly calling on the Libyan military to stop following orders — even as administration officials insist that is not the explicit objective of the bombing....
Even though they bombed it.
And can you imagine the U.S. reaction if anyone (except Israel, of course) told its troops to stop following orders? I mean, they SHOULD, but imagine the government reaction.
Only on Thursday, the sixth day of air and missile strikes Joseph W. Ralston, a retired general who served as NATO commander and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “We did a no-fly zone over Iraq for 12 years and it did nothing to get rid of Saddam. So why do we think it will get rid of Qaddafi?”
Well, it KEPT the IRAQI PEOPLE in a state of hunger and suffering, but who remembers that anymore?
In Paris, the French foreign minister, Alain Juppé, expressed confidence in the success of the operation so far, even as he urged patience.
Do these guys just break out the statements from the last war and reuse them or what?
“The destruction of Qaddafi’s military capacity is a matter of days or weeks, certainly not months,” he told reporters....
That is the SAME THING Rumsfeld said about Iraq!
But any exit strategy will depend on the climate on the ground, and whether rebel forces can be effective in defending themselves without international support. So far, the rebels in the east have failed to punch through the line of Qaddafi forces at the strategic city of Ajdabiya, even with foreign forces battering Libya’s air and ground forces.
Translation: We are not leaving.
In one potentially significant shift in momentum, the rebels were negotiating the surrender or withdrawal of one unit of Qaddafi troops in Ajdabiya.
--more--"
Related: Deal set for NATO to lead Libya ‘no-fly ’ mission (By Elisabeth Bumiller and David D. Kirkpatrick, New York Times)
I'm sick of AmeriKan media updates, readers.
Did they mention the hospitals hit by the airstrikes?
Also see: Libya bombing resounds for Lockerbie kin
Yeah, when all else fails flog the "terrorism" bit.
Related: Libya’s supply on hold, oil prices rise
Also see: Depleted uranium: a strange way to protect Libyan civilians
Libya: Largest Military Undertaking since the Invasion of Iraq. Towards a Protracted Military Operation
The Surprising PNAC Connection to Libya
The 1st Great War of 21st Century Has Begun!
