[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
International News Title: Who's On First? NATO wants to know who's going to be left holding the Libyan bag. President Barack Obama, seeking to avoid getting bogged down in a war in another Muslim country, said on Monday Washington would cede control of operations against Muammar Gaddafi's forces within days, handing the reins over to NATO. But Germany and European allies remain unwilling to have NATO take on a military operation that theoretically has nothing to do with the defence of Europe. France, which launched the initial air strikes on Libya on Saturday, has argued against giving the U.S.-led NATO political control over an operation in an Arab country, while Turkey has called for limits to any alliance involvement. Some allies are even questioning whether a no-fly zone is still necessary, given the damage already done by air strikes to Gaddafi's military capabilities. Speaking about the hastily arranged meeting of NATO allies, one diplomat said: 'Yesterday's meeting became a little bit emotional,' before adding that France had argued that the coalition led by Britain, the United States and France should retain political control of the mission, with NATO providing operational support, including command-and-control capabilities. 'Others are saying NATO should have command or no role at all and that it doesn't make sense for NATO to play a subsidiary role,' the diplomat added. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu suggested that air strikes launched after a meeting in Paris hosted by France on Saturday had gone beyond what had been sanctioned by a U.N. Security Council resolution. 'There are U.N. decisions and these decisions clearly have a defined framework. A NATO operation which goes outside this framework cannot be legitimised,' he told news channel CNN Turk. Adding pressure to the already fractured alliance, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini has also reiterated a warning that Italy would take back control of airbases it has authorised for use by allies for operations over Libya unless a NATO coordination structure was agreed. In the U.S. Mr Obama has made it clear he wants no part of any leadership role in Libya. The President has already been criticised for continuing with a tour of Latin America as the military operation over Libya began. And yesterday he insisted again that while Gaddafi must go, the U.S. is not prepared to remove him by force, but merely to enforce the no-fly zone. Even that hesitant stance, which has already earned him the title of the Great Vacillator, left him criticised for not seeking proper approval from Congress before sending the American military in. And after reports emerged that Gaddafi's son had been killed in a kamikaze strike yesterday, fresh questions over what exactly the U.S. intends to achieve in Libya emerged. With Turkey digging its heels in and the Arab League suspicious, Fox News pointed out that Mr Obama has fewer coalition partners in Libya than George Bush did at the start of the Iraq war. He was criticised by both Republicans and Democrats over his decision to commit the U.S. military before going to Congress. Representatives Jerrold Nadler of New York, Barbara Lee of California, Michael Capuano of Massachusetts, Senators Richard Lugar of Indiana and Rand Paul of Kentucky, and Representative Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland all complained that Mr Obama had exceeded his constitutional authority by authorizing the attack without Congressional permission. The President hit back in a two-page letter to Congress and, speaking from Chile today, again reiterated his claim that while Gaddafi must go, the U.S. was only in Libya to enforce the no-fly zone for the protection of civilians. The U.S. had expected Nato to announce yesterday that it was set to take over the military incursion into the North African country. But Germany and other European countries are balking over Nato's role in the conflict - which could see responsibility left up to the UK and France. France has already taken a leading role in the conflict, with President Nicolas Sarkozy hosting a summit in Paris over the weekend and French bombers being the first to enforce the no-fly zone. But last night Britain's top general was embroiled in an extraordinary clash with Downing Street over the legality of a strike to kill Gaddafi. No 10 slapped down...Click for Full Text!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Happy Quanzaa (#0)
In other words, it's a total cluster-f*ck.
The New World Order/Interventionists types tried to play cute and attacked ground forces as part of it's no fly zone - I guess Libya had advance flying tanks and APC's....... That was not in the mandate. But America's Machiavellian State Dept has always been creative in breaking treaties and agreements - just ask the American Indians. I know the GOP loves war for oil and the Dems love wars for peace but maybe the progressives and libertarians on the fringe of these two establishment parties can make an alliance against the American evil empire once and for all.
"Keep Your Goddamn Government Hands Off My Medicare!" - Various Tea Party signs.
Some of us are making every effort to do so.
Why are you worried over NATO decisions?
|
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|