MaggieD
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 43,244
- Reaction score
- 44,664
- Location
- Chicago Area
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
President Barack Obama has signed a secret presidential finding authorizing covert operations in Libya, FOX News Channel reported Wednesday, citing a US official. The news was first reported by Reuters, which said Obama signed the measure within the last "two to three weeks," citing four US government sources familiar with the matter.......
The news comes as The New York Times reported Wednesday that the CIA had clandestine operatives on the ground in Libya. The unknown number of operatives included those from the agency's station in Tripoli as well as operatives who arrived recently, the report said. The operatives were being used to gather intelligence on targets for airstrikes and to make contact with rebel forces and have been in the country for several weeks, according to The Times.
No defence.
America as usual.
**** Obama.
And so it begun. At least 2 weeks ago.
If you can't even keep your plans off the front page, you have no right to be in the covert operations business. Frankly, putting agents on the ground in Libya makes perfect sense, but only if you can keep them hidden. The CIA has pretty much become a laughingstock in the last decade with so many publicly embarrassing failures.
America as usual. Helping oppressed people attain peace and freedom. What fools.
BTW, thanks for ditching Hellen.
Then why aren't we occupying half the world? what about Darfur, North Korea, numerous Middle Eastern countries, and many South East Asian countries? We can't liberal the entire world, and certain conflicts we should not meddle in. We can't just start a war, oust an oppressive leader, and assume that peace and freedom will follow.
in 2 days the rebels have been routed from sirte---not by libyan regulars, but by armed civilians loyal to gadaffi---and pushed back all the way to adjabiya, some 200 miles
Undisciplined Libyan rebels no match for Gaddafi's forces | World news | The Guardian
In some cases it's worth the risk.
North Korea is one of those.
I agree, however North Korea is different. They are an aggressive nation that possesses nuclear weapons. Invading them would be a defensive action to prevent the aggressive North Korea from attacking our allies: South Korea and Japan. North Korea also has the most oppressive government on earth. Each country and issue is different. But if the goal is to spread freedom and liberate people from oppressive leaders, then why aren't we in half the world right now? Can we really expect that ousting leaders will result in peace and freedom? In many cases a new oppressive government takes advantage of the turmoil and may we worse than the first. The other opinion would be for the US to establish foreign governments, which I do not support as this may be seen as US imperialism or colonization. True freedom and liberation would be allowing the citizens of a country to establish their own government, and sometimes they establish one that is contrary to US values and ideals. We can't liberate and establish governments that are satisfactory to our desires as a nation. I don't think America should liberate every country, and I think each military action is an issue of its own and not equitable with another.
Libya's revolutionary leadership has denied that its military campaign is in crisis even as its forces were driven further into retreat after a failed attempt to retake the oil town of Brega [150 miles west of gadaffi hometown and stronghold sirte/surt/sidra].
The rebels launched an assault on Brega in a bid to prevent Muammar Gaddafi's forces from threatening Ajdabiya, the gateway to the revolutionaries' de facto capital of Benghazi and other "liberated" towns along Libya's eastern coast. But the government army swiftly repelled the rebel attack even though Gaddafi's forces were also hit by western air strikes.
The rebels again turned and fled under a barrage of rocket fire as Gaddafi's army adopted some of the revolutionaries' own [flanking] tactics – highly mobile units using weapons mounted on pickup trucks so as to be less vulnerable to the air strikes.
another issue raised---how long it takes to train soldiers in the hi tech use of the weapons, frankly, that hillary is pushing to provide the rebels who look so much like a paris mob
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?