If the Libyan rebels cannot defeat Gadhaffi's forces on their own, should we get more involved?

[Hugabear]

And if so, how much more involved?

This is going beyond merely providing protection for the rebels. We're talking about getting ourselves involved in a civil war. How much more involved do we get? The no-fly-zone hasn't really stopped Gadhaffi's forces. Of course, many of us predicted it wouldn't. So do we now shift into providing close air support? Doing so means entering a much more dangerous phase, one in which the likelihood of casualties (on both sides) goes up quite a bit. Are we willing and ready to watch our sons and daughters dying in the Libyan desert? And what if close air support isn't enough? Then what? Do we continue with the escalation, sending in ground forces? Or do we cut and run, and risk an even bigger slaughter than might have originally occurred?

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. They certainly don't appear up to the task to do anything but

beg & market themselves to the CIA & BBC. What makes them so special?

[shraby]

2. We don't know yet if they can or can't defeat Kaddafy on

their own. A day or two of fighting is not enough time to determine anything.

[Hugabear]

7. We were told all the rebels needed was a no-fly-zone

That's how this was sold to us. We were told that all we needed to do was provide a no-fly-zone, that the rebels could take care of everything else.

Turns out that Gadhaffi's forces are a little tougher than they anticipated. Sure it's possible that the rebels could still succeed without further intervention, except for the fact that they're already crying for close air support.

[dkf]

10. If this were a defensive shield around Benghazi and that is it maybe I could have come around.

But participating in an active take over of the country? Are you kidding me? We were soooo lied to.

[snappyturtle]

3. I have no idea. Wish there had been more deliberation and input

before any involvement on our part. Hindsight is such a gift. Anxious to read what others think.

[defendandprotect]

4. How far did UK, France, Russia go in arming Gaddafi ....

we should stop when we've restored balance for the Liyan citizens --

that would mean that we've taken back all the weapons!!

Redeem ourselves!!

USA in the end had a contract for weapons!

[dkf]

5. It is one thing to know some ahole is killing his own people...another to know I am contributing to

killing civilians in a civil war.

I am not cut out for this guilt of actively participating in the deaths of people.

[David__77]

6. What they have done is not "on their own."

And were they do seize state power, it would also not be "on their own." No, we should not get more involved. We should be less involved.

[Davis_X_Machina]

8. They're doing this wrong.

They should take to the streets in protest.

Guns aren't the answer, people power is the answer! Fill the streets! Against it, mere weapons are powerless.

Imagine -- if the Libyans rose up in their tens, or even hundreds of thousands, Qadaffi would be gone in a week.

Or not, as the case may be.

[Hugabear]

9. I seem to recall that working in Romania

There was a pretty brutal dictatorship, complete with a nasty secret police system, and yet the people rose up and overthrew the government.

[David__77]

14. That was a military coup.

Yes, there were protests of course. But the faction of the Communist Party that seized power as the "National Salvation Front" did have its plans in store and executed them. The army had the full backing and intelligence support of the KGB. It's a pretty uncontroversial position in Romania today.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

11. The USA is protecting it's oil interests - it's not worried about the rebels really

[laconicsax]

12. Yes! Yes! A thousand times, yes!

War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strength.

[AKDavy]

13. I think that decision point has come and gone.

And the answer was: Get more involved.

Although they probably didn't put it in those exact words.

[Catherina]

15. No. We should never have gotten involved in the first place. We need to pull out now

If we're that concerned about the lives of the rebels, offer them refuge in France, Italy, the UK and the US.

[The Magistrate]

16. Most Of The European Impetus For Intervention, Ma'am, Is Wanting To Avoid A Flow Of Refugees....

[Alamuti Lotus]

17. That was also their impetus for backing the Colonel for years

Mr Burlesque-oni in particular.

[The Magistrate]

19. Of Course The Fascist Would Try And Make Nice With The Old Colony, Sir

[David__77]

18. I absolutely agree. That would express genuine concern,

Open the gates to the oppressed of the world if there is humanitarian concern.

[Distant Observer]

20. It's now a question of US Prestige on the line. Usually we kill as many as needed to protect

our precious reputation.

[KurtNYC]

21. What if what the US wants is a stalemate?

Gaddafi was about to win and we stopped him with airstrikes. Now the rebels had momentum but seem stalled.

We wanted a stalemate in the Iran/Iraq war and we sold weapons to both sides for 8 years. Cha-Ching!
What was Vietnam - stalemate. And Korea to this day.

[Baclava]

22. Egypt has 1000 M1 Abrams tanks we sold them, Why not let their Arab neighbors step up?

"Built by Egypt under license during 4 phases (Phase I, 550 Vehicles, Phase II, 200 Vehicles, Phase III, 125 Vehicles, and Phase IV, 125 vehicles). All vehicles were produced at M1A1 standard and later upgraded many times and in 2010 to M1A2"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_equipment_of_the_Egyptian_Army#Armored_fighting_vehicles


"The Armed Forces of Egypt are the largest on the African continent, The Egyptian Air Force has 216 F-16s making it the 4th largest operator of the F-16 in the World. It has about 579 combat aircraft and 149 armed helicopters as it continues to fly extensively upgraded MiG-21s, F-7 Skybolts, F-4 Phantoms, Dassault Mirage Vs, and the C-130 Hercules among other planes."