NATO appears to have stopped attacking Gaddaffi ground forces

[woolldog]

per reports on the ground in Libya. This is allowing Qs troops to reinforce and mass for attacks, as well as emboldening Q. Sources are reporting that Q's troops are currently massing outside the city of Az Zintan and a massacre is imminent. NATO is doing nothing.

I was against getting involved in Libya. But if we're going to get involved then shouldn't we do it right? A complete lack of leadership by all the coalition countries, caving in to Turkey like this.

[FrenchieCat]

1. Yes Sir, General Woolldog!

Supreme Allied Commander of ? :patriot:

[AtomicKitten]

9. .

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-42zqPVFu1Vo/TXDTUZdD-3I/AAAAAAAABZE/v_qPYmCaVfw/s1600/smiley+gif.gif

[Cali_Democrat]

10. There's nothing wrong with being an armchair general

I've seen internet forum posters with a lot of expertise in military tactics and strategies. Hell, I bet some of them could command their own fricken armies.

[woolldog]

11. I'm definitely not a general,

and don't imagine myself to be one.

I was merely passing on information. And I thought some on the board might appreciate it.

I understood before I posted that there's a large contingent on DU who simply want the board to be an echo chamber of administration talking points, rather than a place to intelligently and critcally discuss or comment on the issues of the day. The OP was not directed to them.

[Cali_Democrat]

12. I know. I'm just having little fun

I think you're right in that NATO is changing it's strategy to accommodate Turkey. Is that the right thing? I have no idea. But it's just another example of why complicated military alliances like NATO should only be used when a member country is under attack.

[sad sally]

14. Could be because the torch hasn't officially been passed yet.

As chimpy used to say, in other words, it's still a US led air invasion. NATO and us haven't worked out all the details yet - still arguing over little details (like weapons, who's gets to use them and what to shoot at and what not to shoot at - stuff like that).

[Exilednight]

2. The ground is now prepped for the ground forces that Obama promised we weren't sending in and

now we are told might be a necessity.

[woolldog]

3. we can bomb Q's tanks and troops from the air

and it will be effective. The only thing missing is the political will.

[Exilednight]

4. It still doesn't change the fact that we were told today that the Marines might have to put boots on

the ground.

[woolldog]

5. we were?

I missed that.

[Exilednight]

6. Yep, here you go

Speaking to members of Congress today, Adm. James Stavridis admitted that, while allied forces were not yet considering the deployment of troops on the ground in Libya, it was a possibility.

This could run counter to President Barack Obama's pledge that no U.S. soldiers would set foot on the ground in the embattled country, where the decades-long leadership of Col. Muammar Gaddafi has come under an intense challenge from civilian protesters.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/29/nato-may-order-ground-forces-into-libya-u-s-admiral-admits/

[woolldog]

7. oh geez,

I was hoping you were just making that up. :banghead:

[Exilednight]

8. Sorry, but I wasn't. The Marines have an Expeditionary force waiting offshore off roughly 1200. n/...

[sad sally]

15. Yeah, but once all the good targets are gone, it gets a little tricky.

Libya only has about 6.3 million people - it's going to take some boots on the ground to identify the remaining live targets. Might have to put red x's on them in case they get wounded and try to hide in hospitals or go to their grandma's house or try to escape to Egypt.

[amandabeech]

16. As per the Washington Post article yesterday,

we have been using air to ground attack aircraft, the AC-130 and the A-10 Warthog.

The British have been using Tornadoes which I gather do the same job as the Warthogs. I don't know what the French are doing.

On edit: I have vehemently opposed this war from the beginning because I thought that we would end up doing much, much more than was originally discussed.

Now that we're in this thing to keep people from being massacred, we may actually have to do what we have said that we'd do. If massacre is imminent, then NATO or the alternative coalition needs to do something effective immediately. Sometimes you just have to follow through on your promises, or no one will believe you.

This is just the kind of problem that I thought we should avoid by staying out of it and let the other usual suspects take care of it.

[jefferson_dem]

13. Thanks for another update, Debbie Downer!

Preeeeesh.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.