U.S. warships launch airstrikes on Libya

U.S. warships launch airstrikes on Libya

www.latimes.com

U.S. and British warships launch more than 110 Tomahawk missiles at defense facilities on the Libyan coast, a naval commander at the Pentagon says. The strikes are intended to help an international coalition establish a no-fly zone in Libya.

(visit the link for the full news article)

More war..... Nothing new
Seems like this is a regular occurrence...

Seen a previous post stating how the US was not involved.
I guess its a different story now. Whether you're spiritual or scientific, you cant deny that there are forces at work trying their hardest to twist sh!t for their betterment.
Just gonna sit back and enjoy the show

www.latimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by SirKnightE


B-B-B-ut...I thought it was just a "No-Fly Zone?" Does this mean we were lied to...Again?

Wait... is there oil in Libya?

Money says the US and british are allowed to fly in said "no-fly zone"

reply to post by jude11


they are shooting missiles from a warship, the missiles go in the air from the ship and back to the ground. they do not come from an airplane. that is what i get from this anyways. they better not be flying or they did lie.

When is this sheeet going to end?......I just want to puke right now at what I am seeing going on in the war room.
Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by jude11
reply to post by SirKnightE

 

B-B-B-ut...I thought it was just a "No-Fly Zone?" Does this mean we were lied to...Again?

yes !!!!
when are we EVER told the truth???

also says Missiles hit Libyan Capital

time to pop the popcorn
the fireworks are just starting

reply to post by boondock-saint


wait are warships planes? and does it count if the missiles/airstrike comes from the ground?

It's analogy time:

Your 13 years old. Smaller type kid. You cross paths with the bully in your class. This kid's bigger than you, but still a 13 year old. You start a fight with him and he beats you up. Embarrasses you in front of all your classmates.

You run home crying. Your 16 year old brother asks what happened. He gets pissed, you both go to see this bully. Your brother says "You're going to fight my brother, but I will step in if he starts losing and beat you up."

-The End

C'mon people. let's make sure we let both sides know we don't approve.

I have never ever said this in any of my posts here in the past few years.
I really think we are headed for a World War and it is starting now we just can't see it yet.
Check my posts, I don't do doom and gloom but this time ehhhhh maybe.
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by jude11

To enforce a no fly zone,they gotta blow the sh!t out of stuff on the ground!

Originally posted by molecularstranding
wait are warships planes? and does it count if the missiles/airstrike comes from the ground?

it would seem the US, UK and France are carrying
out orders from the UN Security Council. That might
include surprise attacks against Gadhaffi, not just
in the air.

maybe they intend on wiping out all Gadhaffi's
Military so the rebels can walk right into the
Presidential Palace unabated.

tomohawks normally come from war ships.
at least they did during the gulf war.

I think thats somewhere around 65 million dollars worth of missles right there.

No fly-zone my ass.

The top news here in San Francisco is the French jet fighter which made a strike against the pro-Gadhafi forces today. The fighter jet attacked a military vehicle, which is believed to be a tank and destroyed it.

SF Examiner

Are some of you that dense?

Tomahawk Cruise Missiles are launched from a ship...usually.

Before you start bellyaching about being lied to, you may want to know what you are talking about. They are not flying around in jets launching cruise missiles. Maybe read the article...it says right in the article that they are being launched from ships to the shoreline.

70%+ of Americans saying they dont think we should be involved obviously means AIRSTRIKE to our government. "We the people" and all that.... not that it matters to these people anymore.

Originally posted by jude11
reply to post by SirKnightE

 

B-B-B-ut...I thought it was just a "No-Fly Zone?" Does this mean we were lied to...Again?

Instead of sputtering out one-liners, perhaps if you read the actual resolution text and noticed they said "all necessary measures:"

Key Points of Resolution

I can't believe so many here don't actually read the news. It's not just a no-fly zone. So before you complain, you should probably read and learn about what's happening in the region.

I know I should have expected people here blasting the U.S. for everything in here (we certainly do deserve it), but come on, the one thing that might be right that we do we also get called out on!

Not doing anything in Libya is worse for our own interests as well as humanitarian-wise.

The U.N. and Arab League finally have near unanimity (aside from the usual bollocks or Russia and China, two human rights abusers themselves) and the effort is led more by France and Britain than the United States, yet people are still blasting the U.S. I mean if we had it your way, human rights abuses would be far less important than saving some $$ and resources.

Idk, I'm actually glad to see us finally do the right thing as opposed to the excuse that was Iraq.

I despise many things about the U.S., but I'm impartial when it comes to the facts of the situation. If you paid any attention to Libya (I have monitored this in depth since Tunisia fell) you'd have known there was great hesitation by the U.S. and even now we are very hesitant to provide much more than AA capabilities and logistical support to the E.U.

The world when out of its way to get the blessing of the Arab League and the U.N. before taking action and short of an ideal world, that's as good as it gets.

It avoids the problem of the U.N. looking powerless like they always do as well as the problem of us looking like unilateral jingoists.

tl;dr - Learning is power!

Part of establishing a no fly zone is the defense of the aircraft you are using to enforce it, thus ground assets can be fired on if they somehow pose a threat. Also the wording of the UN gives the countries involved permision to use military force to keep gadahfi's military forces from harming civilians. I am not argueing either side just stating what I have read. Were we lied to? no we knew yesterday that the UN wording of this mission allowed more than just a no fly zone.

This is most distrubing.

I find myself thinking YES this is the right thing to do.

This is survival at a very high level.

I in no way am a friend of the present administration but I have to say we played the game well this past week.