Lawmakers Angry With Obama Over Libyan Strike, Warn Administration Lacks 'End-Game'

[chucky2]

I wonder what the mechanical failure was? I thought the -E's had their airframes fully cleared, and I can't imagine there's a bunch of busters working on the E models. Be interesting to hear what the crew thinks failed.

 

[werepossum]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/22/jet-reportedly-crash-lands-libya-crew-believed-safe/

It was the first line in the article...

TRIPOLI, Libya -- A U.S. warplane on patrol in Libya crash-landed in Libya Tuesday after a mechanical failure, but the U.S. military says the crew of the F-15E Eagle are safe.

This is troubling, because a Strike Eagle does the kind of missions that supposedly the USA isn't doing in Libya. It was carrying AMRAAMs though, maybe it was flying as part of the no-fly patrol. Certainly it would be more than capable of handling anything Libya could put up.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Based on what? Libya is far more developed and has far more resources than Afghanistan and we are just really crushing that mission aren't we?

You may want to consider geography before drawing close comparisons between Libya and Afghanistan.

 

[ElFenix]

did the wings fall off? F-15s have been having that problem

 

[BladeVenom]

He was waiting for UN and Arab League approval. If we had gone in without international support, it would have been seen as another Iraq invasion style meddling by a lot of people, especially those in the Arab world. Without support from Arabs, we'd have ended up in another quagmire.

He could have asked for congressional approval to enforce a UN mandate before the UN voted.

The sooner he would have committed, the better chance the rebels would have had. It would have been a strong moral booster for the rebels, and incentive for loyal troops to rebel. Best case scenario would be that Gaddafi would have left to avoid facing the US, before the violence escalated further.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

He could have asked for congressional approval to enforce a UN mandate before the UN voted.

The sooner he would have committed, the better chance the rebels would have had. It would have been a strong moral booster for the rebels, and incentive for loyal troops to rebel. Best case scenario would be that Gaddafi would have left to avoid facing the US, before the violence escalated further.

Are we going to then commit to back militarily any popular protest on the planet?

 

[kage69]

How many of these lawmakers were angry when there wasn't an exit strategy for the actual fucking invasion of Iraq? Did they whip themselves into a fury when the Secretary of Defense threatened to fire anyone even trying to discuss an end game scenario? The ones that did are the only ones that can criticize here.

Amazing how concerns of life and money can be switched on and off merely by the political designation of the CiC.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

How many of these lawmakers were angry when there wasn't an exit strategy for the actual fucking invasion of Iraq? Did they whip themselves into a fury when the Secretary of Defense threatened to fire anyone even trying to discuss an end game scenario? The ones that did are the only ones that can criticize here.

Amazing how concerns of life and money can be switched on and off merely by the political designation of the CiC.

yeah but the administration lied to Congress sasying IRAQ was harboring al quaeda and had WMD's .....There isn't even a bad justifcation(based on a lie) for this one

 

[EagleKeeper]

did the wings fall off? F-15s have been having that problem

It was the C/D models that has wing root problems. The E models have a different design. This new design was needed when the bomb ordanance requirement was added in the early 80s

This is troubling, because a Strike Eagle does the kind of missions that supposedly the USA isn't doing in Libya. It was carrying AMRAAMs though, maybe it was flying as part of the no-fly patrol. Certainly it would be more than capable of handling anything Libya could put up.

The Strike Eagle has the capabiity to perform most any mission nowdays.

However, it is not used as a Wild Weasel. That is done mainly by the F16.

Laser bombing and air suppression would be the main purpose.


---------------------------------------------------------------

A question that should be asked, is what type of mechanical failure happened. See what the tapes show.

The Army has lied about friendly fire.
An Eagle going down from ground fire would be a propoganda boost to Libya.

 

[PeshakJang]

yeah but the administration lied to Congress sasying IRAQ was harboring al quaeda and had WMD's .....There isn't even a bad justifcation(based on a lie) for this one

Actually, back then, there was near unanimous agreement among the world powers that Iraq was doing the bad things that were used as justification for invasion. That was one of the biggest points used in going to war... that the whole world for the most part was in agreement.

Funny, how just yesterday, President Obama used that same reasoning in explaining our involvement in Libya:

But the core principle that has to be upheld here is that when the entire international community almost unanimously says that there’s a potential humanitarian crisis about to take place, that a leader who has lost his legitimacy decides to turn his military on his own people, that we can’t simply stand by with empty words; that we have to take some sort of action.

 

[werepossum]

How many of these lawmakers were angry when there wasn't an exit strategy for the actual fucking invasion of Iraq? Did they whip themselves into a fury when the Secretary of Defense threatened to fire anyone even trying to discuss an end game scenario? The ones that did are the only ones that can criticize here.

Amazing how concerns of life and money can be switched on and off merely by the political designation of the CiC.

Actually there was a pretty clear exit strategy for Iraq; win. Get in, topple and bring to justice Hussein and his sons, destroy his WMD stocks and capabilities, set up a representational democratic republic, and leave once it was self-sustaining. Parts of it turned out to be unnecessary and the necessary parts turned out to be much more difficult than previously thought, and as almost always the non-military parts were often badly handled, but the exit strategy concept itself was pretty clear.

 

[werepossum]

SNIP
The Strike Eagle has the capabiity to perform most any mission nowdays.

However, it is not used as a Wild Weasel. That is done mainly by the F16.

Laser bombing and air suppression would be the main purpose.


---------------------------------------------------------------

A question that should be asked, is what type of mechanical failure happened. See what the tapes show.

The Army has lied about friendly fire.
An Eagle going down from ground fire would be a propoganda boost to Libya.

Hopefully it was either CAP or just plain recce; being a well-defended two-man plane with long legs, the Strike Eagle would make a pretty good real-time recce platform in a hazardous environment. Oh well, at least the pilot and WSO are okay. Since one crew went down in a rebel-controlled area and most of Libya's AD capability has supposedly been taken out, I doubt it was Libyan fire, and I don't think the rebels have that kind of firepower. I think that only Western friendly fire or a mechanical failure could bring it down anyway, although I can't tell if an ECM pod was carried.

 

[kage69]

yeah but the administration lied to Congress sasying IRAQ was harboring al quaeda and had WMD's .....There isn't even a bad justifcation(based on a lie) for this one

I'm aware of the manipulation of intel that the Cheney admin used to get into Iraq, but the justification issue isn't the subject - the need for a defined exit strategy is.

If some politicians don't give a shit about the 'end game' for an invasion the size and scope of Iraq, then what is it about a low intensity, limited intervention like Libya that makes them so concerned with the aftermath? Politics.

This assistance to the rebels we're joining in on is even small scale compared to Grenada and Panama!

 

[kage69]

Actually, back then, there was near unanimous agreement among the world powers that Iraq was doing the bad things that were used as justification for invasion. That was one of the biggest points used in going to war... that the whole world for the most part was in agreement.

Funny, how just yesterday, President Obama used that same reasoning in explaining our involvement in Libya:

I'm so sick of hearing this lame excuse, what silly school girl reality do you apologists live in that foreign intelligence services can be trusted to act in our interests?
There are friendly governments, but there is no such thing as friendly intelligence services. No matter the issue, our own legitimate (not made-for-the-occasion intel mills like Office of Special Projects) providers should always be superior to foreign orgs when it comes to forming foreign policy. "Near unanimous" - puhleeez, ever hear of Curveball?

You neocons never get tired of the revisionist history, even after years of being debunked and being proven as opportunistic liars.

 

[kage69]

Actually there was a pretty clear exit strategy for Iraq; win. Get in, topple and bring to justice Hussein and his sons, destroy his WMD stocks and capabilities, set up a representational democratic republic, and leave once it was self-sustaining. Parts of it turned out to be unnecessary and the necessary parts turned out to be much more difficult than previously thought, and as almost always the non-military parts were often badly handled, but the exit strategy concept itself was pretty clear.

I don't think you can say that admin was "pretty clear" about anything concerning Iraq. If it was as cut and dry as you maintain, then why the confusion and doubt at the Pentagon and why would Rumsfeld threaten inquiries with termination?
Remember, we're talking about an admin that had Colin Powell "out of the loop."

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.

As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch." - Obama (2007)

 

[umbrella39]

nomnomnnomnomnom

Ignore the righteous fence sitter. Every looks good from up there.

 

[umbrella39]

I'm so sick of hearing this lame excuse, what silly school girl reality do you apologists live in that foreign intelligence services can be trusted to act in our interests?
There are friendly governments, but there is no such thing as friendly intelligence services. No matter the issue, our own legitimate (not made-for-the-occasion intel mills like Office of Special Projects) providers should always be superior to foreign orgs when it comes to forming foreign policy. "Near unanimous" - puhleeez, ever hear of Curveball?

You neocons never get tired of the revisionist history, even after years of being debunked and being proven as opportunistic liars.

Don't forget their prowess as armchair chickenhawk under the bed hiding tough talkers. Pathetic transparent hacks.

 

[Throckmorton]

I guess Obama really is Jesus. He performed the miracle of getting right wingers to oppose a just UN sanctioned military action to protect civilians from a totalitarian dictator.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Funny, how just yesterday, President Obama used that same reasoning in explaining our involvement in Libya:

Just because its scripted doesn't make this funny.

 

[her209]

I guess Obama really is Jesus. He performed the miracle of getting right wingers to oppose a just UN sanctioned military action to protect civilians from a totalitarian dictator.

Yeah, considering the right-wingers always complain that the UN is a bunch of do-nothings.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I guess Obama really is Jesus. He performed the miracle of getting right wingers to oppose a just UN sanctioned military action to protect civilians from a totalitarian dictator.

Many on both sides of the aisle have had their fill of war, suffering and death. But it looks like some on the left still haven't got their belly full yet.

 

[bfdd]

I guess Obama really is Jesus. He performed the miracle of getting right wingers to oppose a just UN sanctioned military action to protect civilians from a totalitarian dictator.

I fail to see how this is any different than Bush and Iraq. Honestly. I realize that there was "bad intel" on the part of the intelligence groups, but so? Same shit has been going on with Lybia. A little lie here, a smudging of the truth there, boom now everyone thinks it's A-OK to blow the shit out of Ghaddafi.

 

[her209]

Many on both sides of the aisle have had their fill of war, suffering and death. But it looks like some on the left still haven't got their belly full yet.

Wasn't there a bill that was defeated just recently for pulling troops out of Afghanistan at the end of the year?

 

[BoberFett]

Ignore the righteous fence sitter. Every looks good from up there.

Don't forget their prowess as armchair chickenhawk under the bed hiding tough talkers. Pathetic transparent hacks.

And another Democrat warmonger crawls out from under his rock to slurp greedily on Obama's sphincter...