I agree with all that you say Z, but we must not forget that in this instance, and a real change to past policy apart from possibly with Kuwait, we are only in the skies above Libya because Libyans out there who want freedom and protection from Gaddafi have asked the international community for help. The well educated Libyans you correctly mention, but who are also here in the UK, have also pleaded for international assistance.
There is not a Libyan or Arab generally, nor a country within the UN who does not understand that when you ask for international military assistance you are really asking for USA and major European military power help. No one else can or wants to provide it, so they know what they are asking for.
It is right and proper that we are giving them what they want, but it is very interesting to note that all the political leaders of the countries giving that assistance, the USA in particular, are being very cautious and continually discussing the rights and wrongs of what they can do. That includes stating that there could be a point when Gaddafi's forces are no longer in a position to attack "the rebels", and the latter are gaining significant ground, for the Allies to withdraw their air power.
So lessons have been learnt from the Iraqi situation. 
I'm still concerned about this Lizzie - aside from the way we're presently using military power in the region - invited or not.
It appears to me that there hasn't been adequate thought given to a clearly defined command structure for the operation.
Along with the apparent absence of a well planned exit strategy I can foresee things getting unnecessarily complicated as the arguments about just who should assume responsibility for the conduct of the operation continue to develop.
As things stand I think this has been a half-assed attempt to deal with the situation using air power alone when, in reality, ground forces are the only viable resource to apply in the bid to stop one group eradicating the other. There’s no convenient, clean way to do this.
I have a feeling that this whole thing will blow up in the faces of those - who made the case for military intervention - in the UN, the EU and NATO when they suddenly become aware that the US is bowing out due to (amongst other things) the hostile reaction to its involvement of the situation up to the moment.
The longer Western military power is used there the more likely it is that the situation will run out of control - aside from the far from insubstantial cost of running the operation in its present form.
But in the absence of agreement by the Arab nations, and even more importantly the lack of appetite on the part of the Allies, "boots on the gound" is not going to happen, and that must be a good thing. It would be all round totally unacceptable.
No, the current policy must be only to stop Gaddafi threatening and killing his own people, and giving those Libyans wanted democracy a free hand to secure it. I have heard no military head, or political leader, who wants anything but this, and ensure there is no 'mission creep'.
As for the command structure, well that will be sorted, but once more it sounds as though no country, least of all the USA, Britain and France want that millstone, with the dangers it presents, and can only hasten withdrawal of our air forces once the time is right
As for the cost; we already have the weapons, aircraft and back up command. This is, like the Falklands, a great training opportunity for those in the military and I suspect they are using it to the full! System, procedure, testing of hardware, not least the Typhoon aircraft, and putting pilots along with groundcrew through operational experience must all be considered money well spent if Britain, and Western countries, are going to work together. They are continually preparing for a war that we hope never comes, but all this operational tasking and practice is very good indeed for our military health
Author
Topic: ...and now, Sheila with the weather where you are (Read 1933 times)