Adios to a "Military Man"

Well the Colonel is no longer with us. No one is going to mourn this scumbag but one certainly has to wonder what will come next. Will there be another radical Mohammedan regime just across the small pond from Europe? If I was a betting man.............

On a side note; did you notice the savages dancing around Khaddafy's (my favorite spelling) body? Yep that good old "Arab Spring" will likely prove to be more dangerous to the West than the good Colonel ever was.

Libya Again

I just had a conversation with a friend of mine who has some interesting thoughts on the subject of Libya. This whole Libya thing is a bit of a political issue now, with many in congress wishing to hold President Obama accountable for continued military action against that pathetic nation state. Anyway, my friend  believes that the continued action against Qaddafy (or however it is spelled) and Co. is OK and things should be left well enough alone. Not sure I agreed there but I wanted to hear him out on the subject and he, being a very opinionated (and often misinformed)  sort, was happy to oblige.
He tends to believe that the folk that are being bombed are (were?)  terrorists and terrorist sympathizers in the past. He further believes that these folk deserve to be bombed for the "sins of the past." I asked him about the possibility that the opposing "freedom fighters" may be of a jihadist sort and perhaps we would be just trading one known evil for an unknown evil. His ready answer was that all of them should be bombed indiscriminately if for no other reason than to keep NATO forces training up to par.
 I don't have a lot of sympathy with Mohammedans in the region. I, rightly or wrongly, hold them  at least somewhat accountable for Sept 11, 2001. The world would certainly be a better place without Qaddafiy, but I am just not sure continued action there is warranted at this time.

Let them fight it out amongst themselves. We can, after all, reserve the right to resume military action in the future should it be deemed necessary. The place is not really worth the life of one Western service member.

Who to Root For?

Who to root for? Nope not talking about the Final Four although I must admit that I am going for whoever wins the Butler/VCU contest to take the whole banana. Hoping one of them take it at any rate. It is nice to see a small school upend the big boys. Wish D1 college football had as good a system. That won't happen anytime soon. Not talking about that here though. I am referring to the Libya vs Libya contest that is playing out for our viewing pleasure almost nonstop on various "news" outlets.

 Who to root for? Who to root for? That is a tough one. Kinda like trying to decide who to pull for in the old Iran/Iraq contest a good may years back. They both sucked and you kind of hoped they both could lose but one had to, sort of, prevail. Just like in Libya right now. Do I pull for the Colonel or the Rebs? We know who the Colonel is but just who are these rebels? It has been reported that some are the very same jihadists that have fought our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Is that true? At this time government policy does seem to favor these rebels, but I don't want my fellow Americans or our allies being put in harms way helping a bunch of Mohammedan terrorists. Do you? I don't want to support Khadaffi (my favorite spelling) either. He is a known terrorist and just because he has been somewhat "inactive" in recent years does not discount that fact. I guess you could say he is a bit like Bill Ayers on steroids. Now as long as we are on the subject of the Colonel; did you not have kind of a WTF moment when it was reported that one of his sons was working in the United States? Who are these people who allowed such to happen? Crazy. Anyway who should I root for? I guess I will just decide to root for none of them. Since NATO is bombing anyway why not just bomb both sides and be done with it? That seems like good policy to me. A policy to stand behind.

Time to Weigh In (I Guess)

It is customary for those of us who are patriots to support the troops when they are in the field whether or not we agree with the political motives that put them there in the first place. I hope that the action in Libya is short, swift, and deadly. Frankly I am a bit leery of our country bailing out any more Mohammedans who find themselves at odds with their respective governments. While I certainly feel for those who truly want to live their lives in freedom and enjoy democracy; I remember well the images of Muslims from this part of the world rejoicing after the attacks on Sept 11. It does seem that we put our forces in harms way to help defend those who likely hate us. Oh, sure they are friends when we are doing something to help out, but give it a few months, and those we "saved" from repressive regimes begin to turn. Nothing surprising there. I don't have reservations about the use of military force in the region per se, but prefer there be some benefit. Unhindered access to the oil fields comes to mind. Saving Mohammedans for just the sake of "saving" them is a losing prospect long term.  We are liable to find that the status quo may be better for the West than some sort of chaos. Chaos in the region has been unleashed though. We will see where it begins to lead. Directly.

Libya

There is a good deal of talk bandied about lately about the possibility of a "no fly zone" being implemented to keep the "Good Colonel's" air assetts grounded. A lot of support actually seems to be coming from the "no blood for oil" folks. Remember them? That is a tad odd (and typical) I think. Personally I don't think we should be involved in any sort of adventure unless it is simply to lend some logistical support for the Europeans. They have much more at stake in the Libyan mess than we do. Let the French, Brits and Italians handle this little problem. In reality a "no fly zone" is probably fairly useless anyway. Most of the fighting seems to be of the ground variety with really very little damage coming from the air. A "no fly zone" would likely not really do that much. It has been pointed out also that with the exception of fixed air defense sites, it would be hard to distinguish between the "rebels" and "government" forces. When the mobile radar is lighted off there is little time to waste in destroying the site. There is certainly no time to determine if "friend or foe" is operating the equipment.

 This one looks like it would be best for the Libyans themselves to sort out. After all, it is likely that the big winner here (assuming the rebs prevail) will be some sort of Islamist group(s) that will be every bit as dangerous to the West as the Colonel. Perhaps more so. At any rate if the Libyans truly want freedom they must bleed for it like everyone else who has thrown off the yoke of tyranny.
There may well come a time when Western forces are needed to seize the Libyan oil fields, but that is a different matter entirely. Does not appear to be a necessity at this time. I think President Obama should shun those who are crying for "a humanitarian military response" and in this case at least, play the "wait and see" game.