U.S. and British warships have reportedly launched the opening salvo of the intervention in Libya — called Operation Odyssey Dawn — firing some 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles at Qaddafi anti-air defenses, mostly on the coast of Western Libya and extending between Tripoli and Benghazi. Word is that U.S. AFRICOM will run the first few days of the operation in an effort to “shape the battlefield” before turning over command to another member of the coalition.
The initial launch also included the launching of American electronic warfare aircraft.
The Post suggest that the administration has been has been “reluctant to lead the operation,” and “would quickly turn over control to its international partners after the opening salvos.”
CNN’s Ed Henry reports from an administration official that the Pentagon is planning for “heavy, kinetic action” on the part of U.S. forces, lasting “days, not weeks.”
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seemed to underscore that point:
“We did not lead this. We did not engage in unilateral actions in any way, but we strongly support the international community taking action against governments and leaders who behave as Gaddafi is unfortunately doing,” Clinton said.
In addition to the missile attacks, at least 20 French jets have begun enforcing the no-fly zone over Benghazi, already destroying at least one suspected pro-Qaddafi vehicle. More here.
In a statement from Brazil, President Obama said of the intervention:
“I am deeply aware of the risks of any military action, no matter what limits we place on it . . . I want the American people to know that the use of force is not our first choice, and it’s not a choice that I make lightly. But we can’t stand idly by when a tyrant tells his people that there will be no mercy.”
Full remarks from the president after the jump:
THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon, everybody. Today I authorized the Armed Forces of the United States to begin a limited military action in Libya in support of an international effort to protect Libyan civilians. That action has now begun.
In this effort, the United States is acting with a broad coalition that is committed to enforcing United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, which calls for the protection of the Libyan people. That coalition met in Paris today to send a unified message, and it brings together many of our European and Arab partners.
This is not an outcome that the United States or any of our partners sought. Even yesterday, the international community offered Muammar Qaddafi the opportunity to pursue an immediate cease-fire, one that stopped the violence against civilians and the advances of Qaddafi’s forces. But despite the hollow words of his government, he has ignored that opportunity. His attacks on his own people have continued. His forces have been on the move. And the danger faced by the people of Libya has grown.
I am deeply aware of the risks of any military action, no matter what limits we place on it. I want the American people to know that the use of force is not our first choice and it’s not a choice that I make lightly. But we cannot stand idly by when a tyrant tells his people that there will be no mercy, and his forces step up their assaults on cities like Benghazi and Misurata, where innocent men and women face brutality and death at the hands of their own government.
So we must be clear: Actions have consequences, and the writ of the international community must be enforced. That is the cause of this coalition.
As a part of this effort, the United States will contribute our unique capabilities at the front end of the mission to protect Libyan civilians, and enable the enforcement of a no-fly zone that will be led by our international partners. And as I said yesterday, we will not — I repeat — we will not deploy any U.S. troops on the ground.
As Commander-in-Chief, I have great confidence in the men and women of our military who will carry out this mission. They carry with them the respect of a grateful nation.
I’m also proud that we are acting as part of a coalition that includes close allies and partners who are prepared to meet their responsibility to protect the people of Libya and uphold the mandate of the international community.
I’ve acted after consulting with my national security team, and Republican and Democratic leaders of Congress. And in the coming hours and days, my administration will keep the American people fully informed. But make no mistake: Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world.
Thank you very much.
I'm sure we'll see lots of coverage of all the Code Pink protests at the White House on the MSM real soon now. I'm surprised we haven't seen Cindy Sheehan on yet, but I'm sure she'll be on all the broadcasts tomorrow, right?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLove how the Hillary emphasizes how "we did not lead this".
Got news for ya, sweetie. We're gonna take the brunt of the blame anyway. Sorry.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGreat, the US does not want to lead anymore. If you don't want to lead, get out of the White House.....
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat an ill-fated name for a military operation. The Odyssey went on for a looooong time, and if this is just the dawn of it...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI must have missed it, but I'm sure there was a vote in Congress that approved this operation, right? Right?
Hello, hello, is anybody there?
(crickets chirping)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOdyssey Dawn? As in od? Sums up the general "state of mind" among heads of govt. and chancery.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFoooooour (swing and a miss).
"Hey chill out Brazil, I'm down with Che, we're all Socialists here, relax."
~~~I hope nobody figures out that QuackDaffy really is my father and I was born in Libya and not Kenya~~~ (I'm going to bust a cap in good old dad for that one)
"Quick, somebody send flowers to Sheehan and an invite to the Lincoln bedroom. Oh, and tell Code Pink to stand down before they hit all the news, this one is between family, it's different."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNever thought I'd see the day when France was leading a military offensive on a middle eastern country with the US falling in line.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseActually, and surprisingly, Sheehan has been protesting Obama's wars just as strongly as she protested the same wars when they had the Bush brand.
Most commentators and activists on both sides are purely brand-based. Everything done by MY TEAM is good because it's done by MY TEAM, and everything done by the OTHER TEAM is bad because it's done by the OTHER TEAM. They don't notice or don't care that both teams are objectively identical. Sheehan is a refreshing exception to this rule.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Odyssey Dawn"? Sounds like the name of a stripper in a Chicago night club. As I recall, a generation back we called this the "Moral Equivalent of War" or MEOW. Has a nice ring to it, right?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHow comically awkward is Obama's attempt to lend as little support as he can to the Libyan intervention while constantly reassuring his base that he's not leading it, US involvement will be brief, and he won't put US boots on the ground. So scared is he of further angering his political base, he actually announced in advance that Qaddafy needn't worry about US Marines in Tripoli or anywhere else. That's a huge help to Qaddafy's military planners, as well as to Al Qaeda infiltrators who are without doubt looking for any opportunity to become, in some way, part of a putative rebel government should they prevail.
Good job, Obie. At least you've protected your political left flank and, after all, isn't that the most important thing? What is good for God must be good for the universe, and in the same way, in his own mind, what is good for Obama must be good for the world.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWasn't the President's speech today almost the exact same one that George "Cowboy Mentality" Bush gave before going into Iraq?
A dictator who is slaughtering his people ... A coalition of allies ... Under the auspices of UN resolution #whatever ... etc.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"We did not lead this."
That in a nutshell is the Obama Doctrine
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh no, not another military engagement, we cannot afford, nor probably cannot win, (How do decide when we've won?) unless we stay there for decades. As a Vietnem vet, I clearly remember the "light at the End of the Tunnel". I was in the "Tunnel" in 1970 and frankly, couldn't see any light, just a bunch of bad guys shooting at us.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThanks for nothing. No gratitude will be shown towards the US and the West for this. On the contrary, what will follow Ghedaffi will be far worse and more belligerent. We will actually regret his passing, since in the Arab world , the pattern is from bad to worse--where there is no end to worse.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFor once, it seems that Obama is playing this thing properly.
It will be an understatement to say that I don't like Obama, but as a veteran of the Israeli Defense Forces I respect his cautious approach to military action. He is not rushing into armed conflicts - a good habit for a man that holds the trigger of the most powerful military in history.
Furthermore, he sought and received a legal international framework for the action required, apparently limited the US role in the actual operations and allowed for other nations to take key roles in the campaign. Most importantly, he is putting pressure on Arab states to get involved in this as well (we'll see how well this works).
Of course, the only thing that truly matter is the result "on the ground", but for now - well done.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhere's the legal authority for Obama to do this? Daniel Foster and the rest of the NR "conservatives" (excepting Andy McCarthy) don't seem too interested in preserving our Constitutional tradition.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Bx in TX wrote exactly what I was thinking: where will the fervent anti-war, anti U.S. imperialism/militarism protests be held and what kind of coverage should I expect? Will the usual, "Stop the Western War on Muslims and Arabs," crowd also go to the streets to voice their concerns about the West's bombing of another Muslim Arab nation?
Those protests and marches were usually organized in a flash prior to January 2009. Somehow, I get a feeling this will be spun a little differently for and by this administration.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI am utterly confused by this. Out right criminal actions by Libya are responded to with little action. His monetary and logistical support for insurgency worldwide is tut-tutted. He defends his sovereign state against rebellion and the UN overrides him? He is not attacking an ethnic group internally, he is not oppressing a people. I think the EU, UK leading the way, is scared witless that their oil supply will be interrupted. By the way, the Muslim states are also scared that revolution will force the rest of the world to seek energy elsewhere, so they support this lunacy, too.
If this is not blood for oil I can't tell what is.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseChuck Todd just hinted on the news that the emerging 'Obama Doctrine' of limited engagement, attending to international legalities, multilateral engagement, and preapproval of pertinent international orgs (UN, NATO, Arab League) is how an Obama administration would have resolved Rwanda, Sudan, etc.
I swear, I think I heard angels singing as Todd spoke.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse