Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

War in Libya (Supporting Rebels Including Special Forces (Illegality of…

- - - - It's Not Too Late to Save Libya-Max Boot It may also be necessary to send arms and Special Forces trainers to support the rebels. Without committing
        any combat troops of our own, we could deliver the same kind of potent combinedarms
        punch that drove
        the Serbs out of Kosovo when NATO aircraft supported ground operations by the Kosovo Liberation Army. :check:
  - - - Intervention in Libya-Options for the Obama Administration- speakers were Matthew C. Waxman (CFR) and Micah Zenko This is Micah. I just want to jump in. If you read Paragraph 9 of the resolution, it's very explicit
        that it prohibits it
        calls on all member states to prohibit the sales of arms or any related materials or types
        to the territory of Libya...So if the U.S. decides explicitly or covertly to arm its rebels with
        somebody with no legal training, it looks to
        me like we'd be in violation of this resolution. :check:
    - - *By Overreaching in Libya, NATO has Left Syria to Fend Alone- Micah Zenko (CFR) 10/11/11 Furthermore, although Nato repeatedly claimed to be an impartial actor in the conflict, its actions allowing
        the rebel forces to smuggle weapons into the country and fly aircraft in the nofly
        zone and coordinating its
        air strikes with their military operations, for instance proved
        otherwise. :check:
        
        The Arab League, another big player in accept intervention in Libya also broke their own rules However, only 11 countries reportedly endorsed the resolution, in violation of the league's charter, which
        requires a unanimous decision on the use of force. In addition, while the members of the Arab League
        maintain vast fleets of combat aircraft, only Qatar, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates helped to enforce
        the nofly
        zone, and none conducted close air support strikes. :check:
        
        US Special Forces in Libya To Fight the ISIS Problem They Created-James Corbett 5/18/16 "It’s not even the
        obligatory “regional powers” conference going on in Vienna, which is likely to see thousands more troops sent to re-invade the country. Nor is it the fact
        that the US is now planning to break the UN’s own embargo against sending arms to Libya — as long as the Libyans double-dog swear the arms will
        only be used for fighting ISIS." check the link in the actual article. see if they did break the embargo :check:
        
        America's Secret Plan to Arm Libya's Rebels-Robert Fisk 3/7/11 Desperate to avoid US military involvement in Libya in the event
        of a prolonged struggle between the Gaddafi regime and its
        opponents, the Americans have asked Saudi Arabia if it can
        supply weapons to the rebels in Benghazi. The Saudi Kingdom,
        already facing a "day of rage" from its 10 per cent Shia Muslim
        community on Friday, with a ban on all demonstrations, has so
        far failed to respond to Washington's highly classified request,
        although King Abdullah personally loathes the Libyan leader,
        who tried to assassinate him just over a year ago.
        Washington's request is in line with other US military cooperation
        with the Saudis. The royal family in Jeddah, which was
        deeply involved in the Contra scandal during the Reagan
        administration, gave immediate support to American efforts to
        arm guerrillas fighting the Soviet army in Afghanistan in 1980
        and later – to America's chagrin – also funded and armed the
        Taliban :check:
    - - "Just this week, the UK Independent provided its readership with a watered down headline that reads,
        "Rebel military chief says he was tortured by CIA." The article indicates that the current rebel leader,
        Abdulhakim Belhaj (aka Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi) is in fact an LIFG founding member, with combat
        experience in Afghanistan against the Russians, omits that he was also involved in fighting US troops
        there in 2001, but does mention that he was held by the CIA, then the Libyan government before taking
        command of NATO-backed rebels in Libya. The Daily Beast reports in an article titled, "Libya’s Powerful
        Islamist Leader," that Belhaj was in fact, face-to-face with Osama Bin Laden back in the 1980's, and that
        the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) is listed by both the U.S. State Department and the British Home
        Office as an international terrorist organization." direct connection to the mujahideen activities, al qaeda, and libyan rebels :check:
        
        A screenshot taken directly from the US State Department website showing the Libyan Islamic
        Fighting Group (LIFG) clearly listed as a foreign terrorist organization. This is important, as US Code
        prohibits providing material support to listed terrorist organizations. With revelations of Al Qaeda and LIFG
        fighters leading the Libyan rebellion with NATO-members' full military, financial, and diplomatic support,
        attempts are being made to plea ignorance as to the true nature of the rebels. Listed below LIFG, is MEK,
        an Iraqi/Iranian group also being armed and supported by the US. (click on image to enlarge) this means we broke the law twice. :check:
        
        According to US Code Section 2339A & 2339B, the leaders of NATO, along with the US, UK, and French
        governments, are clearly guilty of providing a listed terrorist organization with material support in the most
        egregious, overt case since the code was written.
  - - - BOOT: Well, I've written about this quite a bit in the last few days, and I am not suggesting that we land
        ground troops. What I am suggesting is that we essentially follow the model that we used in Afghanistan in
        the fall of 2001 and in Kosovo in 1999, in both cases where we used NATO airpower to help rebels on the
        ground achieve their military objectives.
        All we really need to do that we
        already have the airpower in place. All we really need to do is to send some
        Special Forces teams to work with the rebels, to act as forward air controllers to coordinate their actions with
        those of the NATO air forces flying overhead. And I think that would be a very potent onetwo
        punch. :check:
- - - - "the Obama
        [end] administration is kidding itself if it believes that it can hand
        Libya over to coalition allies or victorious protesters after a few
        days, without any involvement in the endgame. As the only
        power with the strength to respond to these various contingencies,
        the United States will need to see this through to the end."
        :check:
  - - - U.S. Military Intervention for Libya?-Elliot Abrams and Micah Zenko If we do not intervene, we see the prospect of Qaddafi's victory pretty near (and predicted by
        the director of National Intelligence), and we must contemplate what that will bring. In my view, it may
        bring sufficient bloodshed to lead to American intervention later, and it may lead to Qaddafi returning to his
        nuclear program and to support for terrorism. Certainly it will, as I suggested in the first post, teach a dire
        lesson to autocrats: The more they kill the safer they will be. :check:
        
        What Next in Libya?-Richard Haass I did not support the U.S. decision to intervene with military force in Libya. The evidence was not persuasive
        that a largescale
        massacre or genocide was either likely or imminent. Policies other than military
        intervention were never given a full chance. It was anything but apparent that military intervention would
        succeed at a level of costs warranted by limited American interests. This is certainly a concession point :check:
- - - - Wikileaks article showing that France put their backing into this because of their fear of the gold backed currency. "According to sensitive information available to this
        these individuals, Qaddafi's government holds 143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver. During late March, 2011
        these stocks were moved to SABHA (south west in the direction of the Libyan border with Niger and Chad); taken from
        the vaults of the Libyan Central Bank in Tripoli.
        This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency
        based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an
        alternative to the French.franc (CFA)...French intelligence officers discovered this plan shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the
        factors that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy's decision to commit France to the attack on Libya. According to these
        individuals Sarkozy's plans are driven by the following issues:" :check:
        
        On the Line with Libya-Nicholas Kristof 2/23/11 "Impose financial and trade sanctions on Libya, as President Nicolas Sarkozy of France has suggested, and freeze
        assets of the Qaddafi family. In particular, military exchanges and weapons transfers should be canceled. Sanctions
        take time to bite (aside from a cutoff from the global banking system), but they would signal to those around Colonel
        Qaddafi that he is going down and they should not obey his orders...Encourage the Arab League and African Union to continue to pressure Libya in connection with the killing of its
        people. Such efforts undermine Colonel Qaddafi’s nationalist warnings that this is about foreign powers trying to recolonize
        Libya and encourage his aides to appreciate that he is losing all his allies." They wanted to take Sarkozy's line even though we now know why he took that position. In addition, it gives credence to Qaddafi's postulation :check:
        
        "Libyan Rebels" Create Central Bank, Oil Company-Alex Newman 3/30/11 In a statement released last week, the rebels reported on the results of a meeting held on March 19. Among other
        things, the supposed rag-tag revolutionaries announced the “[d]esignation of the Central Bank of Benghazi as a
        monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and appointment of a Governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a
        temporary headquarters in Benghazi.”
        The Gadhafi regime’s central bank — unlike the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is owned by private shareholders — was among the
        few central banks in the world that was entirely state-owned. At the moment, it is unclear exactly who owns the rebel’s central bank or
        how it will be governed...But the creation of a new central bank, even more so than the new national oil regime, left analysts scratching their heads. “I have
        never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising,” noted Robert Wenzel in an
        analysis for the Economic Policy Journal. “This suggests we have a bit more than a rag tag bunch of rebels running around and that
        there are some pretty sophisticated influences.” :check:
- - - - Intervention in Libya-Options for the Obama Administration- speakers were Matthew C. Waxman (CFR) and Micah Zenko I'll say this. You know, I'd like, in general, to see Gadhafi gone too, as
        many people supporting intervention would. I would like to see Gadhafi gone. waxman wants Gadhafi gone :check:
        
        U.S. Military Intervention for Libya?-Elliot Abrams and Micah Zenko So how do we achieve that goal of getting Qaddafi out? We use a combination of means, which may include
        UN resolutions, Arab League and other Arab and Muslim actions, sanctions, freezes of his oil income,
        recognition of an alternative government, meetings with opposition leaders, broadcasting against the regime,
        and on to more forceful actions. These could include arming the opposition and/or preventing Qaddafi from
        using the military strength he retains to win this civil war. Preventing him from using air power is a possible
        part of the mix, and that might be achieved from NATO air bases in Italy or ships in the Mediterranean. :check:
        
        Strategy and the Ramifications of Military Intervention in Libya by Coalition Forces- March 23, 2011, speakers, Max Boot (CFR), Jeane Kirkpatrick (CFR), Ray Takeyh (CFR) I think at this point we need to oust Gadhafi. I
        mean, I think we can't live with this indefinite crisis going on with a nofly
        zone of airstrikes and rebels
        controlling eastern Libya and Gadhafi controlling western Libya. That's not a tenable longterm
        status quo. I
        mean, this is not like the former Yugoslavia where you could break off Bosnia or Kosovo and Milosevic could
        remain in power in Belgrade. The battle here is for power in Tripoli. And as long as Gadhafi remains in
        power, you're going to have a crisis, you're going to have human rights violations, you're going to have a
        largescale
        military commitment by the U.S. and our allies. And so I think we need to bring that to an end by
        toppling him. :check:
        
        It's Not Too Late to Save Libya-Max Boot When the president of the United States publicly proclaims that the head of another state needs to "step
        down," his words carry considerable weight—or at least they should. Yet what has Mr. Obama done to back
        up his rhetoric? Not much beyond saying that "no option" is "off the table" and that he is actively
        "consulting" with American allies about how to act. At the rate those consultations are going, Gadhafi will
        have snuffed out the rebellion by the time that Mr. Obama decides on a course of action...Already the Saudis have sent an armored column to quell protests in Bahrain. Expect more of the
        same if Gadhafi clings to power. :check:
        
        Congress and War-Stephen Weisman (CFR) During the Senate committee's hearings, some Republicans evinced concern about mission creep. But no one pursued Gates' little-noticed testimony during a March 31 hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, that the operation might "degrade" the Libyan military to the point where Qaddafi might be overthrown. Nor did any member follow up on press reports in which Western officials acknowledged that the mission was designed to compel Qaddafi to step down. The Senate committee did not explore the implications of NATO'S strategy of targeting all of the regime's military assets or question its concentration of firepower on the Tripoli area—including Qaddafi's offices and residence—which the regime controlled and where civilians faced little threat. [DON'T USE]
        
        Intervention in Libya-Options for the Obama Administration- speakers were Matthew C. Waxman (CFR) and Micah Zenko that when proposals were first being floated for a nofly
        zone or perhaps for some
        sort of intervention, the issue seemed to be primarily one of Gadhafi massacring protesters, civilian
        protesters. And the question was: Should outside powers take some steps to protect those protesters from
        being massacred?
        In just a very short amount of time, that context has shifted to something closer to a fullblown
        civil war. So
        now we'd be talking about military intervention less as an action to protect a group of civilian protesters than
        to take sides in a situation of open belligerency. And not only do I think that presents some very complex
        operational issues, which Micah has already referred to in part, but also raises a different set of legal issues. narrative change just like in Iraq. First WMDs then Saddam Himself. This was genocide then civil war. [do not use]
        
        1 more item...
- - - - Stewart Patrick-The New Arab Revolt page 274. " The United States and its coalition partners’ decision to launch
        Operation Odyssey Dawn to enforce a no-fly zone in Libya on
        March 19 was a vindication of the fragile “responsibility to protect”
        (RtoP) norm." A New Lease on Life for Humanitarianism-March 24, 2011 Important because this was called for by the CFR and then it just happened 3 days after the proposal. Rapid was the key word there. :check:
        
        The Case for a No-Fly Zone-Nicholas Kristof (CFR) There was not really anything to cite, but Kristof wrote half a dozen articles on the lead up to the war, propagandizing from his pulpit in the New York Times
        Here's What we can do to Tackle Libya-Nicholas Kristof 3/2/11 calls for no fly zone again. :check:
- - - - US Special Forces in Libya To Fight the ISIS Problem They Created-James Corbett 5/18/16 So of course the US has responded to this mess in the only way it knows how: sending more troops. Well, to be more accurate, the troops have been
        there for half a year, but the government is just now getting around to announcing their presence…via an anonymous leak in the Washington Post, that is.
        That’s right, since late last year a team of US Special Operations commandos have been stationed in Libya in an attempt to “sort through the various
        factions and identify the potential recipients of American support in the future.” In other words, the same US government that knowingly backed the
        crazy jihadis in the first place is now there to vet which groups to back in its fight against the crazy jihadis.
- - - - March: 9 days after no fly zone approval. "This is why its first order of business now should be to settle
        on an actual goal for Libya’s future order. It must decide, for
        example, whether Gaddafi will be allowed to stay in power
        under any circumstances—and if not, what local political and
        security arrangements will follow his departure, and who will
        maintain them and how. The president’s address to the nation
        on Monday night would be an ideal opportunity to lay out
        such a policy publicly. But regardless of whether he does so
        then, the challenge will remain. Only once he establishes a target
        will Obama be able to aim properly and hope to finish well
        what he started so badly." In Libya, How Obama Can End a Mission That Started Badly-Gideon Rose (CFR)- The New Arab Revolt page 279 Obama took him up on the offer and delivered his policy on that Monday. Robert Gates (CFR) was his Secretary of Defense.
        http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/libya-president-obama-makes-case-intervention/story?id=13244178 :check:
        
        Strategy and the Ramifications of Military Intervention in Libya by Coalition Forces- March 23, 2011, speakers, Max Boot (CFR), Jeane Kirkpatrick (CFR), Ray Takeyh (CFR) You know, Obama has made a big show out of trying to put the U.S. into
        the background and
        saying, oh, we're not going to be doing that much, our allies will be doing most of it. So far, that has not been
        the case. In fact, so far, we've done almost all of it. I mean, I think, you know, on the first night of operations,
        there were something like 120 Tomahawks launched from U.S. ships and like two from a British submarine.
        So, you know, certainly in the early days of the operation, it's been very much an American show. :check:
        
        How Not to Run A Foreign policy-Elliot Abrams In March 2011, President Obama committed the United States to action in Libya that involved roughly 100
        cruise missile firings, 12 U.S. Navy ships in the Mediterranean, and 75 U.S. Air Force and Navy aircraft
        including B2
        bombers. And the Libyan case involved no use of chemical warfare by Muammar Qadhafi :check:
        
        Not only did Qaddafi endanger the momentum of the nascent Arab Spring, which had recently swept away authoritarian regimes in Tunisia and Egypt, but he also was poised to commit a bloodbath in the Libyan city where the uprising had started, said the president. “We knew that if we waited one more day, Benghazi—a city nearly the size of Charlotte—could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world,” Obama declared. Two days after the UN authorization, the United States and other NATO countries established a no-fly zone throughout Libya and started bombing Qaddafi’s forces. Seven months later, in October 2011, after an extended military campaign with sustained Western support, rebel forces conquered the country and shot Qaddafi dead.
        From https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/libya/obamas-libya-debacle
        :check:
        
        Humanitarian Intervention Comes of Age-Jon Western and Joshua Goldstein Although the final chapter of the Libya mission has yet to be written and serious challenges remain, it has enjoyed several of the same advantages. The international response began in February when, as Qaddafi's security forces intensified their efforts to crush the protests, the UN Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1970, which condemned the violence, imposed sanctions on the regime, and referred the case to the International Criminal Court. Three weeks later, Qaddafi's forces moved toward the rebel capital of Benghazi, a city of more than 700,000, and all signs pointed to an imminent slaughter. The Arab League demanded quick UN action to halt the impending bloodshed, as did major human rights organizations, such as the International Crisis Group and Human Rights Watch. In response, the Security Council passed Resolution 1973, which demanded a suspension of hostilities and authorized NATO to enforce a no-fly zone to protect civilians. Although five members of the Security Council--Brazil, China, Germany, India, and Russia--expressed reservations, none of them ultimately opposed the resolution. The subsequent intervention has been a genuinely multinational operation in which the United States at first played a central combat role and then stepped back, providing mostly support and logistics. succint summary of the whole issue prior to the no fly zone :check: