Dude I swear, if you fell into a vat full of tits you would surface sucking your thumb. Do you not realize that Regan bombed his effing house? Killed his daughter in the blast. We aren't talking about a bunker, or an office. Right on top of his casa holmes.
Yes, I do, it was a joke. You know, haha, funny? And I don't need to fall into a vat of tits. They fall into me. :thumb: I wasn't attacking your hero.. well not this time anyway.
Several reasons: 1. There has been talk of money from the UAE in lieu of the jets they initially promised. No doubt other Arab countries are being very low key about funding this, but funds are flowing. The Saudis and the Gulf Sheiks have military forces for show, but most of their international influence is done with money and oil production rates. They will keep production high to offset Libyan losses and then channel the profits to the anti-Qadaffi effort. Qadaffi has no friends in the Arab world but many powerful Arabs would like to curry favor with the Libyans who will inherit the place. 2. The money we save by encouraging the Euro's to take on the expense and the responsibility instead of always us is very significant. Money saved is money earned. 3. Many of the Tomahawks expended were older models that the ship commanders were eager to replace anyway. Regular participation in live action such as this is why our military is the best in the world . . . technology and experience. I was surprised that they didn't test the new F-22 in combat, but I suppose military politics demanded that trained in-theatre assets be used first. They have not said this. In fact, Obama and Hillary have both stated publicly that Qadaffi has got to go. "Leave", Obama said. What they have said since the no-fly zone is that this is a mission in line with the UN mandate to protect civilians from air attack, not an assault to kill Qadaffi. It's not something we want or need to do. We need to hand this over to the Europeans to manage and let the Libyans do their own fighting, which they are willing to do. They must remove Qadaffi, not us or the Euros, or it will be seen as colonialism and imperialism.
Sure they can. I guess now we are taking orders from the UN, the Pres. doesn't need to consult with anyone to wage an act of war, and Libya is now considered a viable threat to our National Security. Pitiful.
How can you talk about saving money when we are spending money.. Money we don't have. If we stayed out of this mess we would have spent ZERO.
Wrong, my ass. Mullen stated exactly the same thing I said above. They are sticking to the UN mandate to conduct a no fly zone and let the libyans sort this out. You are the one who is wrong. No one has said that Qadaffi is "off limits" as you stated. No one. We hit his friggin' compound last night. Not trying to kill him, you understand, just hitting a command facility. If Moamar happens to be there, it's tough for him. But for public consumption, we stick to the facts. We are conducting a no-fly zone and are not targeting Qadaffi. Do you not understand diplomacy at all?
As long as we hand this potato off and let the Euro's handle this, then I'm fine with the initial strike. However, I do not think we need to have any more involvement then what we did this past weekend. $225,000,000 in missles and the cost of the air crafts flying around securing the air space is enough. And like Rex said, we didn't have it to spend it.
