One of the questions about U.S.-led war in Libya is the scope of the conflict. Some rebel forces seem to want more U.S. military action. The Washington Post reportstoday (3/29/11) that this is already happening. Under the headline”U.S. Deploys Low-Flying Attack Planes,” Greg Jaffe explains:
The U.S. military dramatically stepped up its assault on Libyan government ground forces over the weekend, launching its first missions with AC-130 flying gunships and A-10 attack aircraft designed to strike enemy ground troops and supply convoys.
The use of the aircraft, during days of heavy fighting in which the momentum seemed to swing in favor of the rebels, demonstrated how allied military forces have been drawn deeper into the chaotic fight in Libya. A mission that initially seemed to revolve around establishing a no-fly zone has become focused on halting advances by government ground forces in and around key coastal cities.
The obvious implication is that the United States is involved more deeply that we’ve been led to believe. And the Post has known this for some time:
The Washington Post learned of their deployment last week but withheld reporting the information until their first missions at the request of U.S. military officials.
Why did the Post keep this information from readers? The Post adds:
Military officials consider AC-130s and A-10s well suited to attacks in built-up areas, although their use has led to civilian deaths. Unlike fighter jets and bombers, which typically carry 500- or 1,000-pound bombs, the AC-130s and A-10s deliver more discriminate but still devastating machine-gun fire.
The article adds that “AC-130s were used to great effect during the two U.S. offensives in Fallujah, a stronghold of the insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq in the early days of the Iraq war.” If this is a preview of what is to come, it is an ominous development.
“Drawn deeper”? Wasn’t this the plan from the beginning, and wasn’t this very scenario a major reason at least some people didn’t jump on the “humanitarian intervention” bandwagon?
Again, what’s the quid pro quo from rebel “leaders”, and is there a schism among the resistance on aligning the revolt with Western interests?
Inquiring, and responsible, minds have to know.
Just read this, which I think bears on my questions above:
A Debate on U.S. Military Intervention in Libya: Juan Cole v. Vijay Prashad
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/3/29/a_debate_on_us_military_intervention
Prashad provides the most detailed intel on the makeup of the rebel “leadership” I’ve seen so far, as well as a logical explanation of just what the West’s – and many of the region’s regime’s – intentions are.
Cole comes across here as something of an apologist for them, and I’m sure his defense of Dear Misleader’s actions are music to liberal hot warriors’ ears, don’t you think?
But this isn’t a simple equation, and it’s incumbent on us to not treat it as such, which I think Prashad avoids. The bottom line for me is what ultimately advances the cause of justice in Libya, and I can’t see this leading to the fulfilling of the goals so many have already suffered and died for.
thank the gods the USA is once again showing its humanity by bombing civilians,wreaking havoc,wasting $ and going to the defense of those poor hapless oil wells.
I wonder how many weapons on both sides of this conflict were made in America. Who is getting rich off the suffering and deaths of the innocent Libyan people? And who decided that this is ok? What percentage of our tax dollars support these armament businesses as vital for promoting America’s “interests?”
And why is our budget debate in Washington centered around cutting funding to public media, labor unions and humanitarian programs instead of ending these foolish, immoral, and enormously costly wars? Who decided that this is ok? Who decided that discussion of our fiscal issues must be kept separate from questions of war?
If this were Bush the attacks on these blogs would be direct,personal,and uniqivicatingly directed at GEORGE BUSH.Where is the outcry against Obama?It reminds me of when I read that a person was hit by an SUV.No it was a person that hit someone.Not the SUV.WEll in most of the articles I read it talks of how the US is attacking LIbya.Bad US…bad bad US(shaking my finger)No… it is Obama who is attacking libya.Obama who is loaning our armed forces to an al quaeda laden rebel force.Obama obama obama