The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44971257/ns ... ?GT1=43001

First Saddam, then Osama.... now Gadhafi....... does this indicate a shift of powers in that region...???

How much did the USA help in this effort? Are we still carry the "Big Stick" from the Roosevelt era...???

tribeofjudah wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44971257/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/?GT1=43001

First Saddam, then Osama.... now Gadhafi....... does this indicate a shift of powers in that region...???

Yes.

tribeofjudah wrote:How much did the USA help in this effort?

A LOT. Some of the capabilities not available to others were contributed by the US. But the EU, mainly France and the UK helped a lot too. Other countries had very important military/logistic/intelligence/ and financial (freezing accounts and funding NTC) roles too but their visibility was kept away from the public eye.

tribeofjudah wrote:Are we still carry the "Big Stick" from the Roosevelt era...???

Definitely NOT. If there had not been a carefully crafted and widespread international support for this rebellion -AND- ground support from its people, it would not have been possible to succeed.

The credit for this success goes to many in and outside Libya.

The U.S. had a role, but not as much as usual. Had we had a bigger role this would have been a headline 5 months ago.

ATX_Skins wrote:The U.S. had a role, but not as much as usual. Had we had a bigger role this would have been a headline 5 months ago.

This post shows quite a lack of understanding of the situation on the ground and it definitely underestimates the US role.

This would be true -IF- all that was intended was a conventional military destruction of the loyal Libyan armed forces BUT then ... you would have been stuck with the leftover problems we all know too well.

Instead, the strategy was different and the job was accomplished without the loss of other countries military and Libya takes pride and ownership of its revolution.

Yes, the destruction could have been done sooner but the job would have been longer (including post-conflict intervention), costlier in financial effort and lives, and without a significant investment from the Libyan people themselves.

This is a 21st century and much smarter change in policy to remove despots and dictators. The same circumstances may not apply elsewhere so there will have to be changes but I am convinced that this is the way to go in the future when the conditions are right.

I guess my buddies who have been working over there have a misunderstanding of the situation too...

Keep in mind, we DID have people on the ground. If you are not aware of that, then it's obvious YOU have a lack of understanding.

Ok boys....no fighting now.

You're both ex-military I think... RIC is probably ex-CIA or something like that.

Obama's now got a platform to run for a 2nd term....

Who want's change??????

I am not trying to start an argument, however, I have friends that work in Lybia.

ATX_Skins wrote:I guess my buddies who have been working over there have a misunderstanding of the situation too...

Keep in mind, we DID have people on the ground. If you are not aware of that, then it's obvious YOU have a lack of understanding.

We know what we know. My argument stands as stated above. Read it again.

tribeofjudah wrote:You're both ex-military I think... RIC is probably ex-CIA or something like that.

You flatter me. No brother, I only repeat here the analyses that I read in newspapers and magazines, and hear in university lectures.

ATX is the real stuff, I only make believe.

My point was if we had a bigger role in closing in on Gadhafi. It's pretty apparent, or should be that we have people in every country. I do think we went about it the right way, took pretty much a backseat in the aggression.

We do not always need to lead NATO into toppling a regime. He was there for 40 years so its not like Gadhafi all of a sudden became an issue. We are not liberators; we are opportunists. IMO, we let other people do the dirty work for a change. I am sure we still played a role in helping Libyan rebels, but the images you see on tv are of Arabs toting around Gadhafi's dead body instead of American tanks rolling into Libyan cities.

In this part of the world the people will NEVER be stable, content or happy unless they are ruled by an iron fist. It's like their entire existence is dependent upon fighting.

tribeofjudah wrote:Ok boys....no fighting now.

You're both ex-military I think... RIC is probably ex-CIA or something like that.

Pretty sure RiC is NOT, and never has been... CIA... though I would accept him as a credible source...

Obama's now got a platform to run for a 2nd term....

Who want's change??????

Obama is still not competent to dabble in international affairs... but I do find watching a winner of the Nobel Peace prize spiking the ball over someone else's military victory, as he did, a bit amusing. Was there a touchdown dance, as well?

Countertrey wrote:Obama is still not competent to dabble in international affairs... -snip-

True. "Shock and Awe" followed by 150,000 troops would have made a lot more sense - you know - more competent dabbling.

Countertrey wrote: -snip- but I do find watching a winner of the Nobel Peace prize spiking the ball over someone else's military victory, as he did, a bit amusing. Was there a touchdown dance, as well?

Missed that one. Very amusing.

Mission Accomplished?

DarthMonk

Countertrey wrote:Obama is still not competent to dabble in international affairs... -snip-

True. "Shock and Awe" followed by 150,000 troops would have made a lot more sense - you know - more competent dabbling.

Countertrey wrote: -snip- but I do find watching a winner of the Nobel Peace prize spiking the ball over someone else's military victory, as he did, a bit amusing. Was there a touchdown dance, as well?

Missed that one. Very amusing.

Mission Accomplished?

DarthMonk

DarthMonk wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Obama is still not competent to dabble in international affairs... -snip-

True. "Shock and Awe" followed by 150,000 troops would have made a lot more sense - you know - more competent dabbling.

Countertrey wrote: -snip- but I do find watching a winner of the Nobel Peace prize spiking the ball over someone else's military victory, as he did, a bit amusing. Was there a touchdown dance, as well?

Missed that one. Very amusing.

Mission Accomplished?

DarthMonk