[TheRealVille]

U.S. and British warships launch more than 110 Tomahawk missiles at defense facilities on the Libyan coast, a naval commander at the Pentagon says. The strikes are intended to help an international coalition establish a no-fly zone in Libya.

Reporting from Washington— U.S. warships launched airstrikes at targets along Libya's coast on Saturday in an opening attack to degrade Moammar Kadafi's air defense systems and allow international allies to establish a no-fly zone aimed at protecting civilians.

The U.S. and Britain launched more than 110 Tomahawk missiles at more than 20 targets. The strikes targeted specifically surface-to-air missile sites and radar detectors that are part of the Libyan military's air defense infrastructure, said Vice Admiral William E. Gortney, commander of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command.

The U.S. had identified sites along the coast of Libya, including around the capital of Tripoli and the city of Misratah, the Pentagon confirmed.

While President Obama has emphasized that American forces would play a subordinate role in enforcing the no-fly zone over Libya, the Pentagon said the U.S. had to lead the operation in its early days because it has the greatest capability to destroy Kadafi's air defenses, a key prerequisite to taking control of Libya's airspace.

Once that portion of the mission is accomplished, international partners led by France, the United Kingdom and Arab partners will enforce the no-fly zone, U.S. officials said.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/...9064.story




Can we afford it? Are we stretching ourselves too thin?

[Hoot Gibson]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/...9064.story




Can we afford it? Are we stretching ourselves too thin?

No and yes. At this point, there is no reason for US intervention in Libya. Libya has not recently threatened this country in any way and it is too late for limited military force to swing the momentum to the anti-Gaddafi forces anyway.

Obama's foreign policy has been erratic and unpredictable. This belated action is indefensible. Had he acted earlier, Obama could have at least made a rational argument in favor of military action but he blew that opportunity. At this point, we are just wasting money and putting American lives at risk for no good reason.

[TheRealVille]

No and yes. At this point, there is no reason for US intervention in Libya. Libya has not recently threatened this country in any way and it is too late for limited military force to swing the momentum to the anti-Gaddafi forces anyway.

Obama's foreign policy has been erratic and unpredictable. This belated action is indefensible. Had he acted earlier, Obama could have at least made a rational argument in favor of military action but he blew that opportunity. At this point, we are just wasting money and putting American lives at risk for no good reason.

We wouldn't be putting American lives at risk at this point, unless you mean American lives that are inside Libya. These strike are coming from far out in the ocean. I think you and I agree, except for the Obama stance. I don't think it really matters on his belated reaction. I don't think it matters or not whether he acted quickly or not. We shouldn't be there anyway. Really, he didn't act so slow either way, this has just came to light in the last few weeks. Hoot, you would never give Obama credit, even if he acted in the first week. You would have then said he acted to quick. It takes time to make critical decisions.

[Hoot Gibson]

We wouldn't be putting American lives at risk at this point, unless you mean American lives that are inside Libya. These strike are coming from far out in the ocean. I think you and I agree, except for the Obama stance. I don't think it really matters on his belated reaction. I don't think it matters or not whether he acted quickly or not. We shouldn't be there anyway. Really, he didn't act so slow either way, this has just came to light in the last few weeks. Hoot, you would never give Obama credit, even if he acted in the first week. You would have then said he acted to quick. It takes time to make critical decisions.

You're wrong. I would have disagreed with the US intervening in Libya if Obama had made the decision in a timely manner but I would have respected his decision. Making tough decisions in a timely manner is one of the main reasons for having an executive branch of government. If one airplane flies over Libya, American lives will be placed at risk. This is going to be a "multi-phase" operation, so I assume that American fly-overs to support our allies are a possibility.

It is not possible to justify this operation and not condemn Obama for not intervening in Darfur or to condemn Bush for intervening in Iraq. But, as i said, the worst thing about this action is the indecisiveness displayed by our president.

Obama never attempted to build a coalition for a no-fly zone in the UN. Instead, the US sat on the sidelines and waited for France and our other allies to make a decision and now we are following their lead. Under Obama, our armed forces truly are becoming the UN's police force.

[vundy33]

Americans will be flying over Libya soon. Just wanted to clear that up.

I agree with what we're doing. We're obviously not the country spear-heading this, so that makes me agree with it anymore. I don't care if Libya doesn't pose a threat to us right now, they are killing their own people, and we can't let that happen, especially when a host of other nations also want to intervene. Also, we were asked to help.

And the U.S. military is not stretched thin. Especially not the Air Force or Navy. The only part of the military that's stretched a bit is the SOF community, but supposedly they're not going into Libya, but I doubt that highly.

[TheRealVille]

Americans will be flying over Libya soon. Just wanted to clear that up.

I agree with what we're doing. We're obviously not the country spear-heading this, so that makes me agree with it anymore. I don't care if Libya doesn't pose a threat to us right now, they are killing their own people, and we can't let that happen, especially when a host of other nations also want to intervene. Also, we were asked to help.

And the U.S. military is not stretched thin. Especially not the Air Force or Navy. The only part of the military that's stretched a bit is the SOF community, but supposedly they're not going into Libya, but I doubt that highly.

If you are cool with being the world's police, volunteer to go over there.

[TheRealVille]

If you are cool with being the world's police, volunteer to go over there.

That didn't sound right. I know from your posts that you would be the first in line for something you believe in. I just think the US is too broke to be getting involved right now. There are tons of countries that have the air power to help the Libyans unseat their leader. Like you said, I would be cool with sending a few special ops in there and killing him and getting it over with, but I just don't think we should be getting involved if it means sending ground troops in there to police the area. I'm tired of getting our kids killed over in that area, protecting a bunch of idiots that hate us anyway.

[Westside]

If you are cool with being the world's police, volunteer to go over there.

That's a low blow if you are directing that at Vundy. He has gone to Iraq and Afghanistan if I'm not mistaken and paid a very heavy personal price for doing so. I think he has more than done his fair share and deserves respect for doing so.

[Bob Seger]

That's a low blow if you are directing that at Vundy. He has gone to Iraq and Afghanistan if I'm not mistaken and paid a very heavy personal price for doing so. I think he has more than done his fair share and deserves respect for doing so.

Did you not even bother to read RV's very next post?:eyeroll:

[Westside]

Did you not even bother to read RV's very next post?:eyeroll:

Yes I did. It should have never been said to begin with.

[TheRealVille]

Yes I did. It should have never been said to begin with.

It was meant in the context of, people are quick to have an opinion on taking a chance of getting more troops killed when they are over here. I'm sick of getting our kids killed over there, protecting those crazy *** people that hate us anyway. Vundy knows the respect I have for his service over there. The post wasn't directed at him personally, it was directed at anybody that thinks we need to be the Libyan police. I quoted Vundy's post, when I should have just typed out my words without his post quoted in there.

[TheRealVille]

Americans will be flying over Libya soon. Just wanted to clear that up.

I agree with what we're doing. We're obviously not the country spear-heading this, so that makes me agree with it anymore. I don't care if Libya doesn't pose a threat to us right now, they are killing their own people, and we can't let that happen, especially when a host of other nations also want to intervene. Also, we were asked to help.

And the U.S. military is not stretched thin. Especially not the Air Force or Navy. The only part of the military that's stretched a bit is the SOF community, but supposedly they're not going into Libya, but I doubt that highly.

I meant, is the US stretching ourselves too thin money wise, fighting on 3 fronts.

[Westside]

It was meant in the context of, people are quick to have an opinion on taking a chance of getting more troops killed when they are over here. I'm sick of getting our kids killed over there, protecting those crazy *** people that hate us anyway. Vundy knows the respect I have for his service over there. The post wasn't directed at him personally, it was directed at anybody that thinks we need to be the Libyan police. I quoted Vundy's post, when I should have just typed out my words without his post quoted in there.

I apologize to you The RealVille, and I'll leave it at that.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

On a side note, does anyone else think Gadhafi, in recent pictures, strongly resembles Nancy Pelosi and Albert Gore?

[vundy33]

That didn't sound right. I know from your posts that you would be the first in line for something you believe in. I just think the US is too broke to be getting involved right now. There are tons of countries that have the air power to help the Libyans unseat their leader. Like you said, I would be cool with sending a few special ops in there and killing him and getting it over with, but I just don't think we should be getting involved if it means sending ground troops in there to police the area. I'm tired of getting our kids killed over in that area, protecting a bunch of idiots that hate us anyway.

I agree with you there. But, a short air campaign isn't going to hurt our pocket or military strength. Let's just hope it stays at that. I really don't think U.S. troops will be in Libya at all, I also don't think Americans would put up with it unless something crazy happened, like Gadhafi using chemical weapons on his people.

That'd be the only way I'd be even close to agreeing with it. Probably not then. The French and British are more than capable.

[vundy33]

Just remember guys, we do these kind of exercises all the time, usually with more ordinance and aircraft. It's not really hurting anything money-wise from what I can tell.

If any U.S. regular forces go into Libya besides to rescue a downed pilot or something of that nature, that's when we have something to worry about in my opinion.

[tvtimeout]

I am agreeing with Hoot on this one! We should not be there, we should be out of Iraq, we should be out of Germany, Japan, Britian, and the list could continue (up to 90 countries). We can not nor should we be the world's police. Also, I do not wish for our government to hand out tax dollars to any country, other than to pay off our debt. I also think we should leave Isreal alone and Iran and the so called Palestian People, who were not a people until after Isreal was reformed in 1945. Let them all deal with each other. It would work itself out. If we get attacked, we show no mercy, period the end, forget rebuilding things, it is not our place. If someone attacked us twice after the first beating, drop the bomb...

[Hoot Gibson]

Duplicate post.

[Hoot Gibson]

I am agreeing with Hoot on this one! We should not be there, we should be out of Iraq, we should be out of Germany, Japan, Britian, and the list could continue (up to 90 countries). We can not nor should we be the world's police. Also, I do not wish for our government to hand out tax dollars to any country, other than to pay off our debt. I also think we should leave Isreal alone and Iran and the so called Palestian People, who were not a people until after Isreal was reformed in 1945. Let them all deal with each other. It would work itself out. If we get attacked, we show no mercy, period the end, forget rebuilding things, it is not our place. If someone attacked us twice after the first beating, drop the bomb...

You should know, I fully support our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. My objection to American involvement in Libya is based on the fact that I cannot see where our national interests will be served. This just seems like a political calculation on Obama's part. A war that he can call his own and a war that we can easily win. Since we deposed Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi has not posed much of a threat compared to several other world leaders.

If Obama is doing this for purely humanitarian reasons, then why has he not intervened in Darfur, where thousands have died and/or became rape victims?

If helping the rebels overthrow Gaddafi, then why did Obama not make that decision a few weeks ago when rebels seemed to have the upper hand? Why did Obama sit on his hands and wait for the UN to act while Gaddafi regrouped and went on a killing spree?

If we are able to turn the tide in what is a Libyan civil war, what makes us think that those who take over will be any improvement over Gaddafi? The most organized among the rebels are likely to be affiliated with Al Qaeda, so chances are the next Libyan leader would be as bad or even worse than Gaddafi.]

Finally, why is Obama on yet another vacation with his family, playing soccer in Brazil, instead of acting presidential during time of war?

[vundy33]

You should know, I fully support our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. My objection to American involvement in Libya is based on the fact that I cannot see where our national interests will be served. This just seems like a political calculation on Obama's part. A war that he can call his own and a war that we can easily win. Since we deposed Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi has not posed much of a threat compared to several other world leaders.

If Obama is doing this for purely humanitarian reasons, then why has he not intervened in Darfur, where thousands have died and/or became rape victims?

If helping the rebels overthrow Gaddafi, then why did Obama not make that decision a few weeks ago when rebels seemed to have the upper hand? Why did Obama sit on his hands and wait for the UN to act while Gaddafi regrouped and went on a killing spree?

If we are able to turn the tide in what is a Libyan civil war, what makes us think that those who take over will be any improvement over Gaddafi? The most organized among the rebels are likely to be affiliated with Al Qaeda, so chances are the next Libyan leader would be as bad or even worse than Gaddafi.]


Finally, why is Obama on yet another vacation with his family, playing soccer in Brazil, instead of acting presidential during time of war?

I don't know why you say that. What do not understand about the coalition? The U.S. isn't even leading it. We sent so many Tomahawks because our ships had them to send, Britain's didn't at the time. This won't be "Obama's war", it's not even a war.

We're also not "helping the rebels overthrow Gadhafi, we're taking out air defense and eliminating anything that he has been using to attack rebels/civilians. That's it.

And sadly, the reason no one is doing anything in Darfur is because frankly, no one cares.

And with the Obama vacation comment, are you referring to the war in Afghanistan, because that's the only one I can think of...the U.S. is barely even doing anything in Libya compared to Afghan, he doesn't need to be in the White House for anything! He's not making the decisions on what targets to hit!

Hoot, I thought you wouldn't resort to that kind of low blow on the President. That's just dumb and on par with people acting like him filling out a bracket is in any way, shape, or form a bad thing. You know that I'm usually one of the last guys to support President Obama but come on.

You know what I think is ridiculous? All this coverage of Libya 24/7, but not one word was mentioned on CNN or even on their website about my friend who's the father of two dying in Afghanistan, or any of the other 4 or 5 troops that I've died. Pathetic. I could care less whether anyone appreciates me, but these guys that have died deserve to at least be mentioned on national news. This country has forgotten us.

[Hoot Gibson]

I don't know why you say that. What do not understand about the coalition? The U.S. isn't even leading it. We sent so many Tomahawks because our ships had them to send, Britain's didn't at the time. This won't be "Obama's war", it's not even a war.

I say that because the US should be acting in its own best interests and not waiting for a green light from the UN to do so. If it is in our national interest to depose Gaddafi, then Obama should have acted at least a couple of weeks ago and explained the need for urgent action to Congress and then held a news conference to explain his decision to the rest of us.

I recognize Obama's authority to make this decision and I hope that the action is successful now that it has been taken. I just don't like to see an American president postponing decisions until the UN tells him the time is right to act. It will be great if the next Libyan government is pro-American but I cannot help feeling that we are just rolling the dice and hoping that the new government will not be the same as the old government.

You may not want to look at our actions as helping the rebels overthrow Gaddafi, but if that is not the goal, then what is the point? Many more people will die if we help create a stalemate or prolong the conflict by providing aid to the rebels than would have died without our intervention.

I am sorry that you believe that I have taken a low blow against Obama but I cannot recall any president spending as much time golfing, partying, and vacationing as this one.

[Bob Seger]

I am agreeing with Hoot on this one! We should not be there, we should be out of Iraq, we should be out of Germany, Japan, Britian, and the list could continue (up to 90 countries). We can not nor should we be the world's police. Also, I do not wish for our government to hand out tax dollars to any country, other than to pay off our debt. I also think we should leave Isreal alone and Iran and the so called Palestian People, who were not a people until after Isreal was reformed in 1945. Let them all deal with each other. It would work itself out. If we get attacked, we show no mercy, period the end, forget rebuilding things, it is not our place. If someone attacked us twice after the first beating, drop the bomb...

Not meaning to be picky or smart-alecky but Israel was not officially reformed until 1948. Just wanted to mention that, as you have stated that twice.

[vundy33]

We're helping our allies out and stopping him from killing people. That's it. Simple as that.

It's in everyone's interest that Gadhafi gets shut down. We're giving the rebels the advantage of air power.

[vundy33]

I am agreeing with Hoot on this one! We should not be there, we should be out of Iraq, we should be out of Germany, Japan, Britian, and the list could continue (up to 90 countries). We can not nor should we be the world's police. Also, I do not wish for our government to hand out tax dollars to any country, other than to pay off our debt. I also think we should leave Isreal alone and Iran and the so called Palestian People, who were not a people until after Isreal was reformed in 1945. Let them all deal with each other. It would work itself out. If we get attacked, we show no mercy, period the end, forget rebuilding things, it is not our place. If someone attacked us twice after the first beating, drop the bomb...

Most of those are our allies. That's what allies do. There is plenty of them here as well.

[Bob Seger]

Just remember guys, we do these kind of exercises all the time, usually with more ordinance and aircraft. It's not really hurting anything money-wise from what I can tell. If any U.S. regular forces go into Libya besides to rescue a downed pilot or something of that nature, that's when we have something to worry about in my opinion.

Just yesterday alone we shot what 112 tomahawk cruise missles at almost a million dollars a pop, with more been launched today? Sorry, but I dont have that total. You must personally have a pretty deep pocket to consider over a hundred million dollars just in cruise missles alone as insignificant.....lol. I would estimate just yesterday's and todays total bottom line was in the billions when you consider everyything. Personally, I say let the French take care of this one for once. They'll be the ones that reap the benefits from whatever comes out of it anyways.


Or for the sake of just ending this once and for all and to do it relatively cheaply, just send special ops in and take out Gaddafi and his sons and be done with it.

Just think how many useful and needed things those couple of billion dollars could be applied to back here in the states?

[vundy33]

Just yesterday alone we shot what 112 tomahawk cruise missles at almost a million dollars a pop, with more been launched today? Sorry, but I dont have that total. You must personally have a pretty deep pocket to consider over a hundred million dollars just in cruise missles alone as insignificant.....lol. I would estimate just yesterday's and todays total bottom line was in the billions when you consider everyything. Personally, I say let the French take care of this one for once. They'll be the ones that reap the benefits from whatever comes out of it anyways.


Or for the sake of just ending this once and for all and to do it relatively cheaply, just send special ops in and take out Gaddafi and his sons and be done with it.

Just think how many useful and needed things those couple of billion dollars could be applied to back here in the states?

Like I said, in their exercises the Navy usually fires more than that. The missiles had been already purchased, it's not like that money could've been spent on anything else.

The point I was trying to make is that overall, this isn't hurting our pockets at the very least.

I agree that SOF should just get in there and kill him and then let the French police what happens next. Much, much cheaper and probably safer.

[Bob Seger]

We're helping our allies out and stopping him from killing people. That's it. Simple as that.

It's in everyone's interest that Gadhafi gets shut down. We're giving the rebels the advantage of air power.

How are we helping our allies out? What are we helping them do? If we are helping them, then they must potentially have something to gain. Correct?

Funny why we're not going into N. Korea, Iran and China to do that same thing then , if that's the case then aint it? Those that oppose their governments get the same treatment, dont they?

[Bob Seger]

Like I said, in their exercises the Navy usually fires more than that. The missiles had been already purchased, it's not like that money could've been spent on anything else.
The point I was trying to make is that overall, this isn't hurting our pockets at the very least.

I agree that SOF should just get in there and kill him and then let the French police what happens next. Much, much cheaper and probably safer.

Do what??? That's assinine to say something like that.

1. If they were already purchased and have been spent, then that means we will have purchase them again to replace what we just shot off. Correct? What on earth is going through your mind?


2. Isn't hurting???? Wow, what a statement!!!! Perhaps not your pockets there moneybags , but I am tired of seeing what comes out of my check every week get wasted.


Vundy, I am like everyone else. I appreciate your service to our country, but you are making yourself look absolutely foolish.

[vundy33]

Do what??? That's assinine to say something like that.

1. If the were already in possession and have been spent, then that means we will have to replace those at over a cost of a hundered million dollars.


2. Isn't hurting???? Wow!! Perhaps not your pockets there moneybags , but I am tired of seeing what comes out of my check every week get wasted.

My God, you're really going to get butthurt over a some missiles when we have spent billions and billions over the last 10 years? Come on man..

And we are helping our allies with our "unique" capabilities, I guess. They have nothing to gain in my opinion, just keeping Libya from killing their own people. To tell you the truth, I don't know why they decided to help Libyans and not those other countries. You're acting like it's just the U.S.'s decisions to intervene. It wasn't. Those other countries have the ability to kill our troops, Libya really doesn't.

[Bob Seger]

My God, you're really going to get butthurt over a some missiles when we have spent billions and billions over the last 10 years? Come one man..

And we are helping our allies with our "unique" capabilities, I guess. They have nothing to gain in my opinion, just keeping Libya from killing their own people. To tell you the truth, I don't know why they decided to help Libyans and not those other countries. You're acting like it's just the U.S.'s decisions to intervene. It wasn't. Those other countries have the ability to kill our troops, Libya really doesn't.

If there is nothing to it, then I re-emphasize, LET THE FRENCH TAKE CARE OF IT. You are too young to even remember in 1986 when Reagan went after Gaddafi after he was responsible for killing 50 American troops with a terrorist bombing at a night club in Germany, and this great Ally of ours known as FRANCE wouldn't even let us fly over their airspace enroute to Libya to retailiate. We had to send warbirds from United States soil to accomplish the mission. Where was this great ally at then? Come on, where were they? As a matter of fact you were not even born then, were you? I suggest you brush up on your history a little bit before you start referring to someone as "Allies". France has never been anything but a thorn in the side of the United States that has tried to belittle us any way they possibly could. They have been about as Anti-American as they come. Now you claim they need our help? Sheesh!!! Allies? Yeah boy!!!:eyeroll::eyeroll::eyeroll:


There is nobody more pro-military than I am, but it is becoming more and more obvious with every post you make concerning military activities in any thread that comes up, that you have a real deep rooted mental problem. You just plain and simply get off on this stuff. Dont you??