What with all the budget talk, I was just wondering whether that third war — or kinetic scope-limited whachamacallit — was still going. You remember, it was in all the papers for a couple of days. So I guess things have gone quiet because it’s all wrapped up now? Apparently not:
Nato has said it strongly regrets the loss of life after a “friendly fire” attack on rebel tanks in eastern Libya which left at least four dead.
Earlier, a Nato commander had refused to apologise, saying that until Thursday’s strike, the alliance had not been aware the rebels had tanks.
Ah.
Well, these things happen between allies, especially when allies in the air aren’t aware their allies on the ground have tanks. But how about the general outlook?
The battle for Libya is heading for deadlock, a top general said Thursday.
U.S. Gen. Carter Ham, who led the coalition air campaign in Libya before NATO took over last week, said it was unlikely the Libyan rebels could beat Col. Moammar Khadafy.
Asked at a Senate hearing about the chances that the rebels could reach Tripoli and oust Khadafy, Ham said, “I would assess that as a low likelihood.”
He said the situation was becoming a stalemate.
As I wrote a week ago:
The Tunisians got rid of Ben Ali in nothing flat, Mubarak took a couple of weeks longer to hit the road, and an exciting new ‘Islamic Emirate’ has just been proclaimed in South Yemen. But, with his usual unerring instinct, Barack Obama has chosen to back the one Arab liberation movement who can’t get rid of the local strongman even when you lend them every functioning NATO air force.
That’s a bit unfair on the poor old rebels. But, if you wanted to devise a forlorn emblem of the impotence of the hyperpower, this non-war for non-victory is hard to beat.
Our country is turning into a Stanley Kubrick war flick.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Our country is turning into a Stanley Kubrick war flick."
Yes, but the Kubrick flick is "Barry Lyndon": our leader is vain, in over his head, incompetent and in terminal debt.
Great lighting, however!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLet's hope the American people will have sense in 2012 to turn out of office this President, whose only use for military power is to squander it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is what no war planning gets us. I'm not sad to see Khadafi under attack, but to have gone in as stupidly as we did is just insane.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI must say, I do enjoy me some kinetic action sometimes. Does that make me a neo-kinetic?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDictators only lose power when they are weak (either unwilling or unable to use their military to put down the riots). Qaddafi isn't weak.
And your argument is a bit flawed, the only reason Obama (or Hillary rather, I really doubt Obama knows what's going on, so he's deferring to her) got involved was that the rebels were losing and needed help.
As much as I am a fan, I am more than a little annoyed by all the people who supported Bush against Iraq and Afghanistan now bashing Obama for the same thing...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe only people who possibly believed that the Libyan opposition movement could overthrow Qadafi , even with tactical air support, either reside in the White House, or have their hearts firmly planted there. It comes as no surprise that the opposition is getting their collective butts waxed.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat kind of incompetents are running this show? Anyone who has been on LiveLeak since this stuff in Libya started, prior to our/NATO involvement, knew they had tanks. How do I know this information, but our/the European government and militaries did not?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe key to ending this bloody Libyan dictatorship is to chop off the head of the snake - not to stomp on its tail. Go directly at Qaddafi. Get rid of him.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe lack of war protests is the clue.
Libs like war only when we're not defending ourselves. In this case, we're fighting a third world hasbeen for some undefined reason, and that's a good use of military power.
This makes it a success.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe whole thing will probably disappear down the "news" media's memory hole. In fact, we may already have heard the last of it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseObama Tried, NATO Flied, Clinton in 2012 Died.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI dont' think the word for it is stalemate. It's... QUAGMIRE!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI finally figured it. Obama needs a reason to throw NATO, especially Canada, under the bus.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGet NATO into a no win war (we cannot make an effort, we cannot leave) and out them in charge.
The Canadian general in charge is being hung out to dry.
Johnniebgood may be on to something on liberal war doctrine. War is never in our interest unless it is not in our interest. It is only justified if it feeds the ego of the liberal elite - most often by attacking a powerless third world type. Hmm, that sounds about right.
Love the Kubrick references, guys. How about Khadaffi as "your humble narrator" and Obama as the bureaucrat who uses him based on how it makes him look in "A Clockwork Orange?" Also a pretty good representation of a liberal elite in that film, to boot.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseA Kubrick film? How about, "Gentlemen, you can't conduct kinetic contra-personal action in here! This is the Kinetic Military Action room!"
Just isn't the same, is it?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMark, all questions regarding the Libyan whatever should be directed to those at NRO who were most eagerly for it: Supreme Commander Lowry, Grand Admiral Dan, and Generalissimo Jonah.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNote: They may have experienced memory loss in the meantime and will certainly take their time in getting back to you.
It is tough enough to keep friendly fire casualties to a minimum when it is your own forces in close contact with the enemy and you have good communications. It is impossible in this Libyan mess! As always though, Mark Steyn has the right take on the entire kinetic overseas entanglement with foreign tribes, sects, jihadist's, and rabble.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Nato has said it strongly regrets the loss of life after a “friendly fire” attack on rebel tanks in eastern Libya which left at least four dead."
Is it official now that NATO considers the "rebels" to be allied with it? Last I heard everyone was still trying to maintain the fiction that NATO is acting as a peacekeeper and enforcing a no-fly zone rather than being an active participant in a war.
"No dice", to quote my Captcha question.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe whole point of this is to maintain uncertainty in the oil markets and keep gas prices high without people realizing Obama is to blame. Without the latest KMA, Quadafi would have made short work of the Keystone rebels and oil would have dropped back below 90 by now. Can't have that.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse