It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Officials: No-fly zone may have limited impact

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Article


WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's top national security aides emerged from private talks Wednesday with a growing sense that imposing a no-fly zone over Libya would have a "limited impact" on halting the kind of violence raging in the North African nation, senior administration officials said.



Yet for now, the no-fly zone option is not seen as having high impact in ending the violence, said the officials, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the private strategy discussions.



But other officials have noted that the no-fly zone tactic may be ineffective in part because Gadhafi appears to be using his planes sparingly in his crackdown on rebels. Military experts say the use of jets by Gadhafi loyalists poses less of a threat than the deployment of attack helicopters, which can get around flight prohibitions because they are harder to detect.


I wanted to post this because the article kind of makes me think that since the no-fly zone may have limited impact, are they going to something more instead?

A little further into the article, it says this.


Even before Wednesday's talks, the Obama administration has had little enthusiasm for military intervention in Libya or for the no-fly zone in particular. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said that beginning the flights would require an assault on Libyan air defenses, a step tantamount to war. And Obama officials have consistently warned of the costs and the risks.



In order to ground the Libyan air force — thereby providing air cover for the rebels — U.S. and partner aircraft would first attack Libya's anti-aircraft defenses. Freed of the threat of being shot down, U.S. and partner planes could then patrol Libya's air space and down any planes that got airborne.


If im reading this correctly, Obama does not want the military to intervene in Libya, but if they do, the US and allies would first attack Libya, and then start the no-fly zone.

The article says that action is not "imminent" and there has been no decision yet.




posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by buni11687
 


Do you think the average human even knows the population or area of Libya? Well there are just over 6 million
people there. The size of the country is larger than Iran. That is larger than Iraq by far. Almost 3 times the size of Texas. Have you taken the neighbors(Chad,Sudan,Nigeria) into consideration? The next thing you know ,The
United States of America is bogged down into World War 3. All because the oil companies don't want to release
control of new energy tech. Just remember that. To topic, if it will save lives to have a no fly zone, who else in the
neighborhood is willing to step up to the plate? Why does The United States have to? They are playing us like
a card. Slowly bankrupting and destroying our nation from the inside out like a cancer. I may be off, but I am
pretty certain that Libya provides less than 2 Percent of the oil to The United States. So WHO do they provide
most of their oil to? Google it. That is who should be enforcing the "No Fly Zone" not us. We can make up for the 2
percent with alternative fuels once congress actually does the right thing and votes to provide an incentive.
Thanks but no thanks, I'll fly where I like. Regards



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wildmanimal
reply to post by buni11687
 


Do you think the average human even knows the population or area of Libya? Well there are just over 6 million
people there. The size of the country is larger than Iran. That is larger than Iraq by far. Almost 3 times the size of Texas. Have you taken the neighbors(Chad,Sudan,Nigeria) into consideration? The next thing you know ,The
United States of America is bogged down into World War 3. All because the oil companies don't want to release
control of new energy tech. Just remember that. To topic, if it will save lives to have a no fly zone, who else in the
neighborhood is willing to step up to the plate? Why does The United States have to? They are playing us like
a card. Slowly bankrupting and destroying our nation from the inside out like a cancer. I may be off, but I am
pretty certain that Libya provides less than 2 Percent of the oil to The United States. So WHO do they provide
most of their oil to? Google it. That is who should be enforcing the "No Fly Zone" not us. We can make up for the 2
percent with alternative fuels once congress actually does the right thing and votes to provide an incentive.
Thanks but no thanks, I'll fly where I like. Regards




It's best if say, the Italian Air Force did the no-fly zone combat air patrols.

They have squadrons of Eurofighter Typhoons and Panavia Tornados.





It would take tremendous political will and globalist elite backing to enforce a no-fly zone.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:26 AM
link   
I think we need to stay out of it. No one advocated a no fly zone over Palestine in operation "cast lead" . So it just another example of the Wests double standards. The people in the ME know we already have blood on our hands propping up these Dictators in the first place. If we start bombing ground targets (Anti aircraft weapons) in Libya, then we just look like we are their to protect our interests rather than any humanitarian aid. It will support Gadafi's claim that we are there for the oil.

Britain was selling tear gas to Libya that was used to quell the protests, now we want to get in there and offer humanitarian aid in the form of bombing their country.




 
1

log in

join