US Role take 2

[discreetgent]

The UN Security Council approved a resolution that effectively allows for air strikes against Quadaffi forces and a no-fly zone.

The resolution was preceded by a request from the Arab League for UN action.

I think we can all assume the US will have a major role in this action.

So, now that there is backing from pretty much every quarter for this move how do you feel about the role the US will now take?

[Marcus Aurelius]

Will French pilots fly French airplanes?
NOT!

[discreetgent]

MA I think you are wrong on this one; France a number of years back put their NATO forces back under central NATO command.

This resolution was strongly backed by Britain and France before the US decided to back it.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Oui,
Things are unfolding that I thought never would in my lifetime.
Fascinating to see but. No way man.
The young ones have no idea. Wow man.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius

Will French pilots fly French airplanes?
NOT!

What else would they fly? All French AF fighter are French. Primarily Mirage 2000's and Rafels, if memory serves.

As to the US role, as I read it tonight, that is currently under discussion. I wouldn't be surprised to see us limit our role to AWACS, and jamming aircraft early on unless there is a series of major bombing of infrastructure sorties. We would likely lend stealth aircraft and tomahawks to that.

[charlestudor2005]

Again, what business is it of ours? We become inserted into way too many civil wars. And we don't have a dog in the fight.

Who is willing to risk one US serviceman's life for a civil war that doesn't concern us? Any one remember Viet Nam?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius

Will French pilots fly French airplanes?
NOT!

Actually the French make a pretty darn good jet fighter. During the Cold War, the French Mirage was a viable alternative to a Soviet or an American made fighter jet. Today however, France is just not competitive in the international arms market.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...3014940717.htm

The Rafale is a very impressive twin-engine supersonic, deltawing with canards fighter jet, developed by the French company Dassault Aviation for the French Air Force and Navy. The Rafale design characterize by the superior aerodynamics, avionics and engine thrust. The Rafale can be armored with air-to-air weapons and air-to-ground weapons from French and USA origin.

http://www.worldwide-military.com/Mi.../Rafale_EN.htm

OTH -

"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion." —Norman Schwartzkopf

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Again, what business is it of ours? We become inserted into way too many civil wars. And we don't have a dog in the fight.

Who is willing to risk one US serviceman's life for a civil war that doesn't concern us? Any one remember Viet Nam?

I agree and disagree. I think the issue in Libya is clearer than it was in Viet Nam - there is clearly a civil war in Libya. I agree that we should leave it to Libyan's to settle their differences. I disagree with the assertion that the U.S. has nothing at stake in how this washes out. The U.S. is an oil dependent nation, and higher fuel prices can send the economy into a tail spin.

[Marshall]

I first want to know who the rebel forces are.....

Secondly, if you are going to intervene, it is too late...Qaddafi won already....Obama doesn't want to lead and doesn't know how......America is not one of the boys, America is The Man.....intervention should have been done weeks ago when Qaddafi was flying in mercenaries and weapons, now too late to accomplish anything, assuming intervention is a good idea (and I'm not)

[pjorourke]

I guess the French will be sending one of their aircraft carriers.

[pjorourke]

Actually, Kadaffy Duck already called a cease fire. Interesting move.

[Iaintliein]

So, interfering in the purely internal affairs of a sovereign nation is okie dokie if the UN says it is????

And people in the US are called paranoid when they point to the possibility of UN troops disarming American civilians.

The bastard who ordered Lockerbie and the assholes who danced in the streets to celebrate it are in the process of trying to annihilate each other. . . can someone show me the downside of this???

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

I guess the French will be sending one of their aircraft carriers.

Remember in 1986, France, Spain and Italy denied Reagan the use of their airspace; hence, the eighteen F-111 bombers and four support EF-111 electronic countermeasures aircraft were launched from the United Kingdom. They reached Tripoli, via Gibraltar, with no problem. France is closer, so French aircraft can reach the region with no problem. And there is the Charles de Gaulle (R91).

[Rudyard K]

Originally Posted by discreetgent

how do you feel about the role the US will now take?

I think half assed moves are...well, half assed.

The UN is involving itself in a sovereign nation under it own dispute. IMO, doing so in a half assed manner is good for no one...particularly the US. Because the US will be the focus of the ire from Libya's quarters no matter what.

Either get in there and set things up the way you want them set up...or sit on the fence (making sure the fight doesn't spill over the fence of the school yard) and watch what happens. All in all, I prefer the latter.

[Whirlaway]

I thought we had an agreement with Kadaffi that if he handed over his WMA's and promised to stay out of the global terroism business we would leave him alone.

I don't see that we have a dog in this fight.