Video- Libya air attack video on Fox News Crew

I have no idea if a “no fly zone” is a good idea to help the revolutionaries in Libya, but it certainly is the kind of bold move you might expect from a President. But if the young President needed a reason to step in and ground the Libyan Air Force, such as it is, this video might be it.

The President apparently has finally decided something. He did announce this afternoon that the military operation is still on the table … but to what end?

President Barack Obama says a wide range of potential options in Libya are under consideration, including a military response to the fighting there.

As the fighting in Libya increasingly resembles a civil war, the U.S. administration is coming under increased pressure to take action. Over the weekend, several lawmakers, including former presidential candidates John McCain and John Kerry, argued that the U.S. and its allies should impose a no-fly zone over Libya.

In the video below, I have also included the convesation Shep Smith had with Wall Street Journal reporter John Bussey who does a great job of xplaining the ramifications of setting up a no fly zone. But at this point … do we have another choice? If we do, does the middle east see us as colonialists, and what if Ghadafi wins? If we don’t and the rebels win, do we run the risk of being resented by the new leaders?

Some dramatic video.


UPDATE: I’m not the only one who wonders if a no fly zone is the best option. I’m not saying know, I’m saying I don’t know.

The question isn’t whether we can do it, it’s whether we should do it, and whether we can find enough support to make it work.  Russia opposes the idea, and China will almost certainly balk at it as well.  That will put us back in the same boat as we were in the Balkans conflicts in the 1990s, or Iraq in 1991 for that matter.  Also, the Libyans will almost certainly shoot back.  Will Europeans continue to support a no-fly zone if Western pilots end up getting killed enforcing it?  Will Americans support it under those circumstances?  I’d call that doubtful, although Europeans may like that option better than the refugee crisis that’s coming their way if Gaddafi manages to hang on in this civil war.

Ahh … great minds.

2 replies
  1. winnie888
    winnie888 says:

    I don't think we should touch this with a 10' pole.  If we had a Reagan in office, I'd be all for getting involved because there would be actual goals for our military being sent to Libya.  With a democrat in the oval office….well, you know how it goes.  Look at Pres. Jimmy Carter and how well he did in the middle east.  As far as European support, it will only be self-serving.  Maybe it's time for a little isolationism in our international policy.  Let these middle east countries figure it out for themselves with their own rebellions.  On the other hand, if Israel were to request our support, I'd be 100% for that.  I don't know…I could be 100% incorrect in my thoughts, but history doesn't smile kindly on democrat presidents in military situations.

  2. Plainvillian
    Plainvillian says:

    As long as we are more concerned about the good graces of an organization dominated by nations that hate us, we will be paralyzed by indecision.  If we kicked the UN into the East River and had an administration focused on our national interest, would there be any question what we could and should do?

Comments are closed.