Pentagon Confirms Presence Of (Four) U.S. Troops On The Ground In Libya

[Freddie Stubbs]

Source: Business Insider

The Pentagon confirmed Monday that some U.S. troops are on the ground in Libya, according to Fox News.

That admission contradicts the Obama administration's repeated assertions at the outset of the Libyan military intervention that no U.S. forces would be deployed to the North African nation.

Pentagon spokesman Capt. John Kirby told the news network that four unidentified service members are on the ground and working under the State Department to assist in the rebuilding of the American embassy there. The

U.S. embassy in Tripoli was significantly damaged in the intense fighting that came to a head two weeks ago with Muammar Qaddafi's ouster.



Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/pentagon-confirms-presence-of-us-troops-on-ground-in-libya-2011-9#ixzz1XlWOoZsB

[theoldman]

1. My definition of troops is warriors.

Are these people warriors or workers. There is a difference.

[karynnj]

20. The discussion last spring prohibited even nation builders, but explicitly allowed protection of the

embassy. As you said, there is a difference.

[msongs]

2. aren't embassies guarded by marines? nt

[Javaman]

9. Embassy's are technically US territory.

so any troops guarding the embassy are on US soil.

[InkAddict]

3. All four soldier craftsmen, no doubt - Left Behind?

How much democracy can that build - even supposing the "assistance" amounts to raising the Star-Spangled Banner inspiration up the pole over the significantly damaged building? Those four military-types need much more help...:sarcasm:

[karynnj]

21. Did you even read the first paragraph of the article - they are looking at

protecting the US embassy.

[InkAddict]

25. Yup, the whole thing - did you?

As formatted, Paragraph 1 of article - The Pentagon confirmed Monday that some U.S. troops are on the ground in Libya, according to Fox News.

I see nothing about "protection." I see "assist in the rebuilding."

I guess the actual source, both of the source and of karynnj's inquiry, explains the "misspeaking," LOL.

[razorman]

4. There have been American and allied troops on the ground there from the beginning of this operation.

The type of precision air strikes that we supposedly have been carrying out cannot be done without forward observers on the ground directing the ordnance and providing intelligence. Surprise! The government still lies to us.

[EFerrari]

5. Even before, there were US and Brit intel people there.

Likely French, too, but I don't remember seeing a specific report about the French.

[al bupp]

17. There were Libyans feeding intel to NATO

http://feb17.info/news/exclusive-libyan-woman-guided-nato-bombs-to-gaddafi-targets/">Reuters: Libyan woman guided NATO bombs to Gaddafi targets

Your assertion that it would require NATO personnel on the ground to perform this does a disservice to people such as this brave woman.

[razorman]

18. I have serious doubts about that story. While that may have happened a few times,

the military, in general would not be willing to trust the mission to an outsider. So, I still do not believe that we are only just now putting "boots on the ground".

[karynnj]

23. From hearings on Afghanistan, it is the Afghani who provide a lot of the intelligence

- and sometimes Misinformation. Boots on the ground who do not know the country well would have a hard time. There is more likelihood that they did get information from our embassy staff.

[No Elephants]

24. If that story is even true, supposing NATO relied solely on people like her is unrealistic.

[al bupp]

26. Unrealistic why, sir, because you say so?

You doubt the story on the basis of what rationale? Is it an instinct you have, or perhaps some military expertise? The story seems perfectly believable to me, and baring a reason that doesn't simply boil down to an allegation of propaganda, then I argue that it ought to taken at face value. I have to wonder if you also doubt similar stories told about the French Resistance?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

6. Oh that is funny.

If they are admitting to "some" there are a helluva lot more there.

[frylock]

7. uhhh yes... just the 4 though..

please carry on with your normal business.

[neverforget]

8. Special Ops people. Somebody has to be on the ground to coordinate

those air strikes to tell the good guys from the bad guys.

[vets74]

16. "That admission contradicts the Obama administration's repeated assertions ..."

that these weenies have their dicks stuck in their ears.

Hell, kiddos, Obama has thrown high side of $500-billion toward trashing the Arab dictatorships.

And why ??? Because these holes are addicted to sloth, racist name-calling, cursing Jews with every paragraph, and where they have oil... never working a day of their lives at honest jobs.

CIA has done first-rate work, once Obama set 'em loose.

You betcha, the ordinary senior banking and planning professionals coming in to power now will be great improvements.

[One_Life_To_Give]

10. Working for the Embassy?

4 Soldiers working for the State Dept. to assist in rebuilding the Embassy. Sounds like the routine Marine Guard or people rebuilding the Guard Post portions of the Embassy.

Special Forces observers probably don't answer to the State Department.

[Arctic Dave]

11. Did we say 4, oops, we meant to add a couple of zeros on that. nt

[SoapBox]

12. Oh good grief...we've just GOT to have our storm troopers every place...

Man...can we NOT invade/be in every country in the world?

I'm sick of this "military complex monster" that has taken over.

[Badsam]

13. Wouldn't you say 4 members of the Army Corp of Engineers is assessing

the damage and construction costs.

[riverwalker]

14. and lots of these guys

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-09-08/world/libya.us.trainer_1_libyan-war-moammar-gadhafi-rebel-training-camp?_s=PM:WORLD

An American soldier journeys to the 'good fight' in Libya

September 10, 2011|By Moni Basu, CNN

[AtheistCrusader]

15. Just the tip.

[karynnj]

19. Protecting the US embassy, which this is part of, was not in contradiction to the "no troops" rule

Here is a link to a SFRC hearing where they marked up the resolution on Libya and included the prohibition of any troops on the ground. This was very explicitly excluded from the prohibition. http://foreign.senate.gov/hearings/hearing/?id=3c1b866a-5056-a032-526c-dd6dbe1dd4d7

Would you prefer Blackwater - under its new name? Or would you prefer that the US embassy have no protection other than the Tripoli police?

[No Elephants]

22. Legal or political issues aside, if only 4 are there, I'd be worried about their safety.