With two weeks in the books, we are at a stalemate in Libya. First, let's agree on this - there is a Civil War taking place there. The Rebel "army" in unorganized, has no command and control, does not fight as coherent units, is out manned 10-1, and does not have the weapons to defeat the Libyan Army who they are up against. I have read all the feel good reasons we got involved in Libya, and even despite the multiple and layered criticisms - we haven't done this before, why Libya and not Darfur, the President acting unilaterally - the conclusion we saved at least one life (someone) then no one; It's better to save someone then no one. I disagree. We can't personalize it to that level - it's not the way to run neither a country nor its foreign policy.
Where I struggle with this intervention is how we got involved so late in the game, how our policy towards Libya changed virtually overnight, the clear divisions within the administration about what to do, a President who acted unilaterally without Congressional support, and what our military was used for, which was to completely destroy the Libyan air force and other military targets. Rest assured, we killed people on the ground, but we seem to think it's ok to kill them because they are soldiers and not civilians. You don't launch 150 cruise missiles and not hit a person. We launched a Humanitarian mission to save Libyan civilians, but it started out with us killing people.
We brought a type of warfare to the battlefield of which the enemy had no defense against. I grew up in the US Army during the Cold War, commanded a unit in Germany before and after the Berlin Wall fell. I always thought we would be involved with the Super Wars, not the regional skirmishes, and especially where our national interests were not at stake. I never thought I would see our military used as the proxy to fight the war of another country - neither the French or the British were capable of targeting and launching the Blitzkrieg type of attack required to implement the no fly zone. The US was the complete and absolute "hammer" of this operation. Sec Gates knew all to well it would take a massive air attack to set the environment for the no fly zone (150+ Tomahawk missiles is a massive attack in my book). In previous no fly zones, we already controlled the ground. We tipped the balance in favor of the Rebels, and after two weeks, all it brought was a stalemate.
It's pure conjecture to say we saved the lives of thousands of civilians. We have intervened in another country's civil war and we can't even project what Libya looks like 6 months from now. We did a classic "ready-fire-aim" operation here, and I am afraid we weakened American interests by having our military used to advance the interests of other countries which is a dangerous precedent to have set.
Where I struggle with this intervention is how we got involved so late in the game, how our policy towards Libya changed virtually overnight, the clear divisions within the administration about what to do, a President who acted unilaterally without Congressional support, and what our military was used for, which was to completely destroy the Libyan air force and other military targets. Rest assured, we killed people on the ground, but we seem to think it's ok to kill them because they are soldiers and not civilians. You don't launch 150 cruise missiles and not hit a person. We launched a Humanitarian mission to save Libyan civilians, but it started out with us killing people.
We brought a type of warfare to the battlefield of which the enemy had no defense against. I grew up in the US Army during the Cold War, commanded a unit in Germany before and after the Berlin Wall fell. I always thought we would be involved with the Super Wars, not the regional skirmishes, and especially where our national interests were not at stake. I never thought I would see our military used as the proxy to fight the war of another country - neither the French or the British were capable of targeting and launching the Blitzkrieg type of attack required to implement the no fly zone. The US was the complete and absolute "hammer" of this operation. Sec Gates knew all to well it would take a massive air attack to set the environment for the no fly zone (150+ Tomahawk missiles is a massive attack in my book). In previous no fly zones, we already controlled the ground. We tipped the balance in favor of the Rebels, and after two weeks, all it brought was a stalemate.
It's pure conjecture to say we saved the lives of thousands of civilians. We have intervened in another country's civil war and we can't even project what Libya looks like 6 months from now. We did a classic "ready-fire-aim" operation here, and I am afraid we weakened American interests by having our military used to advance the interests of other countries which is a dangerous precedent to have set.
No comments:
Post a Comment