Cameron's call to the White House

Vulture

'How a NFZ could work without US involvement'

You mean an Anglo-French intervention in the Middle East?

Been there, done that: Suez 1956.

Not exactly a huge success, James.

You are snorting the same laughing gas as Dave: the NFZ is a non flyer; a dead duck,
a non-starter; a deceased parrot: won't happen.

Colonel Mad will re-take his country.
Better get used to the idea.

yank

What... has the yapping yorkie started up again? Some biscuits for the little pooch, if you please. The small kind... the cute little ones for small little yappers.

.

Oh, and if you have time, there's a small affair in Asia, if you can manage to engage any assets unconnected to BP interests. Much obliged, on behalf of those who are involved.

PayDirt

Nothing wrong with challenges. Obama's not much interested. The Megrahi case still rankles. So over to the French. Where are the EU on this, I'd have thought the Italians may be up for something, or perhaps they're stuck with bungabunga?

Norman Dee

As expected by everyone with a real vision of the "strength" of the EU, and the wimp in the White house, it's now too late for a NFZ that should have happened whilst he was locked down in the Tripoli area. Now he is out and has rolled back the gains made by the rebels it will take boots on the ground to push him back, and aerial bombing as well. All of which is far beyond an NFZ and will never be approved. It would take until June to get Europe to not make another decision.

Norman Dee

Pay Dirt, the Italians have already surrendered, just in case.

RCE

This is surreal. Does our supposed Prime Minister not have someone to tell him how ridiculous he is? He's just delivered huge cuts to an already overstretched military, and now he's whinging and whining because another nation won't stump up to do what he wants!

I've no time for Obama - but he should tell Europe, and Britain in particular, to do it themselves or keep quiet.

Verity

What Vulture said.

Karma Chameleon Cameron has Blairesque dreams of being a world leader, a la his hero. Blair had a bitter, clever wife directing him and he also had the ear of the president.

Cameron's dreams of international glory are going nowhere.

Gadaffi will retake Libya. Dave should have occupied himself with using the element of surprise, a week ago, to annex the oilfields instead of grandstanding and working on the impossible dream of being an international figure of authority.

I think he will have been forcibly ejected from office by the end of the year. God only knows what will replace him, though.

Verity

Norman Dee - Ha ha!

Will Rees

"You cannot have Rwanda again because information would come out far more quickly about what is actually going on and the public opinion would grow to the point where action would need to be taken.

"Foreign policy can no longer be the province of just a few elites."

Gordon Brown 19/6/09

well he got that one wrong

TGF UKIP

Thing is, James, if the rebels do manage to overturn Gaddafi it will give great encouragement to others not least, perhaps, in Saudi and the Gulf States.

That sort of upheaval and its impact on the oil price, is not something to be lightly countenanced even in this White House, given the delicate state of the US and the world economy.

There will be too many very powerful voices in Washington and New York counselling non interference, so I'm afraid your man Dave is just going to be left strutting and posturing which is exactly what, of course, he does best.

Austin Barry

This is Dave, a eunuch, telling Obama, an impotent and weedy man, to do the business. It's quite bizarre.

The Islamists will see this as further evidence of the attenuated West's decline.

We're doomed chums.

quadratus

What would be Mr.Cameron's reaction if -more by luck than judgement -one of those untrained chaps with an anti-aircraft device shoots down an RAF fighter: (or better still a French one)?

TrevorsDen

quad - Camerons reaction would probably be the same as mine ... whats your point.

As ever an endless tsunami of crass bigotry from the usual suspects. There is no evidence of Blairite meglamania in the governments position. The issue is quite clear and sensible and deliverable.

A left wing American president is the stumbling block.

As a previous post said, Gadaffi has let the genie of oppression out of the bottle and we will have to deal with him accordingly. Even without a no fly zone Libya will end up being blockaded like Iraq was. There will have to be a no ship zone and a no artillery zone. Wait for the sob stories about the poor children being denied medicine

John Montague

Suez was a comprehensive success until our American allies intervened against us. From that point on, the French decided that they would never again be dependent on US approval for military intervention, whilst we decided ... err ... the exact opposite.

Hence, De Gaulle turned down the freely offered Polaris missile that MacMillan had had to beg for at Nassau.

Jeremy

Cameron is speaking up for the Libyan people. That ought not to be forgotten. He is doing the right thing.

I have taken on board what other contributors have written and I agree with the view that we should already have moved to scotch Gaddafi.

Assuming that there is enough resistance left for it to do any good, I still feel that we should send in the Royal Air Force to neutralise Gaddafi's air power and make trouble for him on the ground.

Regarding Vulture's comment - it was the Americans who pulled the plug on Suez. Don't forget, back then we were in hock to them for Lend-Lease. But that is not the situation now.

At the current time, and in relation to Libya, a joint Anglo-French military initiative might work well.

Fatbloke on tour

JF

What good is a NFZ?

Purely symbolic, shutting the stable door after the horse has ran away with the farmer's wife.

I keep having nightmares about Dave the Rave and the NFZ, he just wants to be seen doing something, anything.

MG / Family are now back in the game and calling the shots. They were and still are the recognised government of Libya so we have to work around all those little legal niceties.

The best that can be hoped for is a stalemate surrounding the cities and a UN sponsored ceasefire.

However it will probably be peacemaking and not peacekeeping. Add in the grubby disection of Serbia and a "East Libya" may be a long term option.

We can do a NFZ that will pass the News at Ten test but it will not affect the ground game.

We can attack from the air but it will not stop MG it will just make it more messy.

We can put forces on the ground but cannot answer the question why.

When I say we I mean the EU / East Nato.

Libya is good tank country and the air force is very limited.

However the question is why and why Libya?
What would be the mission and how long would it last?

Libya at the moment is a big question and issue for the world but then what about Bahrain?

Given the events of today are we heading for a Budapest style clampdown with "forces" invited in to provide muscle for an elite minority?

Compare and contrast the response of the west to Libya and Bahrain? Is it too much to ask for some consistency? Very tough I grant you but until we can look at these two revolts in a fair and balanced manner we are kidding ourselves regarding any thoughts of a freedom agenda. We may not like it bust the west still looks at the world as children - goodies and baddies depending on our self interest at any particular moment in time.

Finally, I take it that if the FRU team had not been shown the door the usual unexplained explosions in market places and clinics would be daily news.

yank

Yes, the frog military juggernaut is free to rampage around the globe. The world trembles.

Except all the dozens and dozens of times over the decades the frog military juggernaut has begged for US transport, to go put the beatdown on some poor Africans somewhere. But other than that, the world trembles. ;-)

Verity

TGF UKIP "Dave is just going to be left strutting and posturing which is exactly what, of course, he does best."

No he doesn't. His posturing and strutting is the posturing and strutting of a hen in the hen run, posturing, strutting and clucking.

Dave has no authority to posture and strut with. Even the Arabs know he didn't win the position of Prime Minister and the natural conclusion would be - "If his own people don't trust him enough to vote him in as chief executive, why should we?"

Verity

Jeremy - "Cameron is speaking up for the Libyan people. That ought not to be forgotten. He is doing the right thing."

No, he isn't. Interfering in the affairs of state of another country is not "the right thing". It is the stupid thing.

Why didn't he get up on his soapbox when the same type of "students" had violent and dangerous demonstrations in London?

Alasdair Roy

It would be disastrous for the country if young Cameron's premiership were to crash and burn. But with regard to the No fly Zone he is sounding more and more like Anthony Eden. Instead of Colonel Nasser we have Colonel (Mad Dog) Gaddafi. Someone should take the young fellow aside and remind him of the fate of a talented predecessor who also pursued his Middle East obsession.

Verity

Jeremy writes - "I still feel that we should send in the Royal Air Force to neutralise Gaddafi's air power and make trouble for him on the ground."

You would trust Cameron to make a decision about deploying the RAF? Are you mad? He has probably despised our military all his life.

Derek Barrow

Bush Doctrine justifies new air strikes against Gadaffi

Cameron should inform the USA President the UK will carry out with immediate effect a pre-emptive air strike against Gadaffi’s airforce. To not do so would by inaction harm the interests of the UK and the safety of the international community.

Cameron should offer the grounds under the Bush doctrine, any or all of the world’s nuclear powers are compelled to act, unilaterally or multilaterally, to prevent the possible use of WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) by any state breaking or seeking to break the non-proliferation treaty.

The UK security forces should say they are convinced Gadaffi’s security agents, already judged in a Dutch court guilty of the Lockerbie terrorist atrocity, are likely to seek further UK targets in revenge following the current civil war in Libya if victorious.

So Gadaffi’s refusal to step aside in the current circumstances must be unambiguously interpreted as a revocation of his earlier commitment to renounce the pursuit of building or pursuit to acquire WMDs. He is unlikely to give any further warnings of new intentions. So the UK must act unilaterally and immediately under the Bush doctrine to prevent the potential pursuit to acquire WMDs by Gadaffi.

Archie

Er, haven't we been here before? 1956 wasn't it? Suez or somewhere? I seem to remember we decided to have a pop at Nasser with the Frogs and the Israelis. Only this time we don't seem to have the Israelis on our side. The French? Who knows? Is this the opening gambit of Rusty Dave's much vaunted European Defence Force? By the way, he really shouldn't rely on the Yanks to come to the rescue if everything goes pear-shaped, I mean, it really could be 1956 all over again!

TomTom

"A left wing American president is the stumbling block."

Really ? He still has 100,000 troops in Afghanistan rather than the small force Britain puts up and still has US Navy helping Japan. maybe the US is too busy to fight another British war started by some tinpot leader

cuffleyburgers

I'm afraid they have missed the boat, Gadaffi has made th emost of the opportunity gifted to him by the utter incompetence of Western governments collectively to decide what would leave them least a hostage to the judgement of posterity.

The essence of such an issue is time. Not wasting it and buying it wherever possible. Gaddafi, reeling initially, bought a little with some belligerent speeches and hastily recruited mercenaries. The west, fluttered their hands like rather sad elderly dowagers in the face of someone farting in public.

A NFZ might have been the right thing to do at the start of Gaddafi's counter offensive if it was clear that his use of airpower was going to lead to widespread slaughter of civilians (as was briefly threatened).

What seems to be heppening now is that a relatively well equipped force has raised its morale and momentum and is rolling up a tragically badly armed untrained militia.

The only point that is not too clear is to what extent now Gaddafi still is relying on his mercenaries, if there were some way to get at them that might take some of the wind out his sails.

The other point is that the final siege of Benghazi is likely to be a prolonged and bloody affair, and a NFZ combined with sea-bourne aid in the form of food and medicine might help to alleviate some of the agony or possibly merely prolong it further.

However, the tide would seem to have turned without waiting for the western governments to make a decision.

I hope Cameron will learn from this (but I doubt he will, he has gone down enormously in most people's estimation despite anything Trevorsden might say) that Britain cannot rely on the Eu for anything least of all military or diplomatic outcomes and that an ability to project force at 360° is indispensible, and therefore to redirect the DFID budget to creating a credible joint services strike force with American weaponry. The days of a separate Navy army and RAF are over, and joint operations are the future, stuff which can in theory be deployed independently but in practice is designed for close cooperation with US forces.

Any cooperation with EU forces should be limited to that which is compatible with US operativity.

Keith D

Come off it Dave,you backed the wrong horse and now need to settle with the bookie.Obama isn't going to underwrite your betting slip.

Dont worry though,oil and money will repair the damage you've done and I'm sure your hero and his pal Mandy can help out.

Terry C

I believe the Obama administrations dragging of heels is known as the 'Megrahi' effect.

Olaf

Seriously, even if they agree do we actually have the capacity within the military to send anything?

arnoldo87

@Verity

"He has probably despised our military all his life."

"Our military?"

Have you moved back to Blighty, then, V?

RCE

Olaf @ 9:36
No. That's what makes Cameron look such a fool. He's posturing like a big-shot world player and everybody knows he can't do a single thing because of his emasculation of the British military.

Archie

The Arab League have called for a "no-fly zone", so let them put their money where their collective mouth is and enforce it. After all they must have spent all that dosh on up-to-date weaponry for a reason, or do they really mean "we'll call for it; now you - the West - enforce it?

Fatbloke on tour

RCE @ 1.13

The issue we have is that Dave the Rave didn't want to do things military, until something happens and then he bumps his gums to keep his spirits up.

What price the Ark sitting off Benghazi a few Harriers lounging on the deck?

At least we would have looked credible.

Now our best hope is for Libya to turn into another A'stan so that they will still be fighting in 2020 when the aircraft arrive for the QE.

Mistakes were made getting rid of the Sea Harriers.
Mistakes were made not putting a decent radar on the GR9.
Mistakes were made not looking at a Harrier 3 instead of putting all our eggs in the JSF basket.

Those were mistakes but at least we still had something to fall back on.

Dave the Rave bought the fast jet argument hook line a sinker, what use is a Tornado now?

Chocolate teapot.

He bought the carrier at any price argument.

The MOD / Forces need a root and branch reform not salami slicing into absurdity.

No Harriers to fly in the Med but plenty of desk warriors to explain why we can't do anything. They are worse than social workers.

MOD / Forces = Middle class jobs for the boys racket.

George Laird

Dear All

I have no problem with Cameron shouting the odds on a no fly zone.

It is the right thing to do but he has gone about it in a cack handed manner.

Get everyone signed up then go public.

The window of opportunity is closing on Libya, again because of bad planning; everyone says we are all adjusting to the new situation.

Think faster.

Having backed the rebels, we are now in the silly position that they could lose because no help is coming.

They need a no fly zone, they need airstrikes and they need arms.

If they don’t get this in a rather rapid fashion, they will lose and the West will look rather weak.

In Iraq we got it wrong and now in Libya, we are at the other extreme and still getting it wrong.

We could be in a situation that the ‘United States of Europe’ goes ahead and the United States of America either doesn’t turn up or trials behind.

The time for the United Nations has come.

We need them to take the lead and that means China and Russia have to face up to their obligations as well.

China, Russia and the US have dropped the ball.

There could be a case for the removal of Security Council Members as they don’t provide security, after the dust settles on this debacle.

We can’t wait on the Americans much longer; the time is coming when we have to say ‘in or out’?

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

yank

No, Mr. Laird, the time has come for the yapping yorkie and the yapping french poodle to muzzle themselves. They are weak and inconsequential. And the rest of the world currently has big problems it's facing, while the yappers have only their selfish interests in mind.

And in the near future, the Russians, Chicoms and Indians are going to move right into those Khadaffi contracts, which the limeys and frogs and Italians will now surrender, thanks to their big mouths bellowing empty words.

Now, the Italians may hang on, as might the frogs. But the yapping yorkie? Not a chance.

Fatbloke's calling it right. You all can't even defend that Falklands possession, let alone project power in Libya. Call Me Dave is nothing but a yapper.

However, Fatbloke, while you're correct above that Libya is good tank country, it's only good tank country for good tanks, those made in Germany or the US... none of that Vickers garbage, thank you! ;-)

RCE

Keep taking the pills, George.

John Montague

Hey Yank, you willing to offer odds that Gadafi will have lost a jet by next Monday? Say 2 "Yankee blowhards are prats" to 1 "Euroweenies are useless" ?

George Laird

Dear Yank

I feel I have no alternative but to reply to your post.

“the time has come for the yapping yorkie and the yapping french poodle to muzzle themselves”.

Step back a second and get off the horse, people are getting killed on the ground, help is required.

“They are weak and inconsequential”.

Sorry, I can go with that one, it lacks credibility.

“And the rest of the world currently has big problems it's facing, while the yappers have only their selfish interests in mind”.

And what are the Americans doing in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Help me out there please!

“And in the near future, the Russians, Chicoms and Indians are going to move right into those Khadaffi contracts, which the limeys and frogs and Italians will now surrender, thanks to their big mouths bellowing empty words”.

Remarkable subjective opinion, any facts to pad this out!?

“Now, the Italians may hang on, as might the frogs. But the yapping yorkie? Not a chance. Fatbloke's calling it right. You all can't even defend that Falklands possession, let alone project power in Libya”.

I believe the British Flag still flies over the Falkland Islands.

“Call Me Dave is nothing but a yapper”.

Ever thought about joining the Diplomatic Service? What you lack in tact and understanding, you would probably make up for as a bullet magnet!

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

yank

Mr. Montague,

Those rebels have already shot down one of Khadaffi's jets, which is one more than the feckless frog and limey yappers will ever manage.

You and the glasgow humans guy make a good pair.

yank

...and by the way, a minute ago you were in here claiming that the frogs and limeys could and should "easily" crush Khadaffi with their magnificent air power. Seems you've backed off that one now... and now one plane is the goal, is it?

John Montague

Those rebels have already shot down one of Khadaffi's jets

Curses! Foiled! I'd hoped you'ld walk straight into that one, like a bear with a honeypot on its head barging into a tree. Judging by your posts I thought you had only very poor access to accurate information.

I have never claimed anything at all about what our gutless politicians WILL do, only what they could and should do.

yank

So your reckless claims of frog and limey revolutionary breakthroughs in the use of air power are just reckless claims, and you're unable to support them?

The rest of us already knew that, fyi.

You're right about one thing though, your politicians are yapping fools, who think and act like you do.

John Montague

Actually, Yank, do you have a date for that jet shot down you knew about? Just seeing how uptodate your info is. Our journos on this side are useless, their breaking news is what happenned this morning.

See, it's not a question of 'magnificent' air power and grand historical waffle. That's just you being reduced to irrelevant trolling.

Nope, it's about taking out a few artillery positions, as in Bosnia - Bosnia, never mind Allied Force in Kosovo.

Operation Deliberate Force, that broke the Serb offensive and led to Dayton. Oh wait - you were asleep during the 90's, I forgot.

yank

So you're still posting, and not providing anything to support your point.

So, the historical truism holds, air power cannot "easily break" military power, as you claimed.

And the toothless frogs and limeys certainly can't do so, as you claimed.

We've already discussed the Srebrenica massacre that occurred underneath your sainted "no fly zone".

Seriously, do you have anything to offer to support your point? Anything?

John Montague

Srebrenica? In Bosnia? Where you seemed to believe that NATO broke the Serb artillery and ended the attacks by sending in *ground troops* ? That Bosnia?

yank

So, in the matter of a certain gaseous internet ranter claiming that the frogs and limeys could "easily break" Khadaffi's military through their vaunted air power, we can finally say: "Claim unproven".

And in that other discussion, your wildly uninformed claim about US politics is a bit embarrassing for you. You best stop now. I think I will be, as you appear a bit false and unproductive.

John Montague

yank
March 15th, 2011 10:14pm

On the effectiveness of air power in Operation Determined Force

" I guess those murderers didn't realize they were "broken".
Or perhaps, it was that somebody had to go **in on the ground** and break them. That's generally how it's always happened, as we know historically "

That's your signature tune, sleepy. Next time, check the facts.

Ike pushed the Catholics in the south to set up the Republic of Vietnam under Diem and promised them support. At the other end of that particular cloaca, the Democrats scuttled from most of Indochi na, then cut the defence budget in the 70s, tolerated the Sandinistas in the 80s, and voted against the Gulf War in 1991. In contrast you have Reagan's Latin America policy, Bush Snr and Bush Jnr's Iraq wars and the attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Stuff happens on a President's watch, and he has to respond whatever his party. As per usual, you're just parroting a hackneyed old line that's past it's sell-by date. The reality is that Democrats need to spend the cash on welfare, and that Americans elect a Democrat when they want a warm fuzzy feeling about themselves and the world. The present incumbent epitomizes that - and if you think the Afghan surge was his idea, you're mistaken again.