War #4...

[Parkbandit]

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has intensified the American covert war in Yemen, exploiting a growing power vacuum in the country to strike at militant suspects with armed drones and fighter jets, according to American officials.

The acceleration of the American campaign in recent weeks comes amid a violent conflict in Yemen that has left the government in Sana, a United States ally, struggling to cling to power. Yemeni troops that had been battling militants linked to Al Qaeda in the south have been pulled back to the capital, and American officials see the strikes as one of the few options to keep the militants from consolidating power.

On Friday, American jets killed Abu Ali al-Harithi, a midlevel Qaeda operative, and several other militant suspects in a strike in southern Yemen. According to witnesses, four civilians were also killed in the airstrike. Weeks earlier, drone aircraft fired missiles aimed at Anwar al-Awlaki, the radical American-born cleric who the United States government has tried to kill for more than a year. Mr. Awlaki survived.

The recent operations come after a nearly year-long pause in American airstrikes, which were halted amid concerns that poor intelligence had led to bungled missions and civilian deaths that were undercutting the goals of the secret campaign.

Officials in Washington said that the American and Saudi spy services had been receiving more information — from electronic eavesdropping and informants — about the possible locations of militants. But, they added, the outbreak of the wider conflict in Yemen created a new risk: that one faction might feed information to the Americans that could trigger air strikes against a rival group.

A senior Pentagon official, speaking only on condition of anonymity, said on Wednesday that using force against militants in Yemen was further complicated by the fact that Qaeda operatives have mingled with other rebels and antigovernment militants, making it harder for the United States to attack without the appearance of picking sides.

The American campaign in Yemen is led by the Pentagon’s Joint Special Operations Command, and is closely coordinated with the Central Intelligence Agency. Teams of American military and intelligence operatives have a command post in Sana, the Yemeni capital, to track intelligence about militants in Yemen and plot future strikes.

Concerned that support for the campaign could wane if the government of Yemen’s authoritarian president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, were to fall, the United States ambassador in Yemen has met recently with leaders of the opposition, partly to make the case for continuing American operations. Officials in Washington said that opposition leaders have told the ambassador, Gerald M. Feierstein, that operations against Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula should continue regardless of who wins the power struggle in Sana.

The extent of America’s war in Yemen has been among the Obama administration’s most closely guarded secrets, as officials worried that news of unilateral American operations could undermine Mr. Saleh’s tenuous grip on power. Mr. Saleh authorized American missions in Yemen in 2009, but placed limits on their scope and has said publicly that all military operations had been conducted by his own troops.

Mr. Saleh fled the country last week to seek medical treatment in Saudi Arabia after rebel shelling of the presidential compound, and more government troops have been brought back to Sana to bolster the government’s defense.

“We’ve seen the regime move its assets away from counterterrorism and toward its own survival,” said Christopher Boucek, a Yemen expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “But as things get more and more chaotic in Yemen, the space for the Americans to operate in gets bigger,” he said.

But Mr. Boucek and others warned of a backlash from the American airstrikes, which over the past two years have killed civilians and Yemeni government officials. The benefits of killing one or two Qaeda-linked militants, he said, could be entirely eroded if airstrikes kill civilians and lead dozens of others to jihad.

Edmund J. Hull, ambassador to Yemen from 2001 to 2004 and the author of “High-Value Target: Countering Al Qaeda in Yemen,” called airstrikes a “necessary tool” but said that the United States had to “avoid collateral casualties or we will turn the tribes against us.”

Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen is believed by the C.I.A. to pose the greatest immediate threat to the United States, more so than even Qaeda’s senior leadership believed to be hiding in Pakistan. The Yemen group has been linked to the attempt to blow up a transatlantic jetliner on Christmas Day 2009 and last year’s plot to blow up cargo planes with bombs hidden inside printer cartridges.

Mr. Harithi, the militant killed on Friday, was an important operational figure in Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and was believed to be one of those responsible for the group’s ascendance in recent years. According to people in Yemen close to the militant group, Mr. Harithi travelled to Iraq in 2003 and fought alongside Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian operative who led the Qaeda affiliate in Iraq until he was killed in an American strike in 2006. Mr. Harithi returned to Yemen in 2004, those close to the militants said, where he was captured, tried and imprisoned in 2006 but released three years later.

Even as senior administration officials worked behind the scenes with Saudi Arabia for a transitional government to take power in Yemen, a State Department spokesman on Wednesday called on the embattled government in Sana to remain focused on dealing with the rebellion and Qaeda militants.

“With Saleh’s departure for Saudi Arabia, where he continues to receive medical treatment, this isn’t a time for inaction,” said the spokesman, Mark Toner. “There is a government that remains in place there, and they need to seize the moment and move forward.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/09/world/middleeast/09intel.html?_r=1&hp

Aaaaaawesome......

[NocturnalRob]

Aaaaaawesome......
In for a penny, in for a pound?

[Parkbandit]

In for a penny, in for a pound?

Well, the conflict in Libya will only last "a couple of days"... so no need to get Congressional approval. This is just another "kinetic military action" I guess....

[~Rocktar~]

So much for bringing troops home and getting out of wars abroad, huh?

[Rinualdo]

So much for bringing troops home and getting out of wars abroad, huh?

Because airstrikes = bringing troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan.

[NocturnalRob]

Because airstrikes = bringing troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan.
And airstrikes have been super effective in Libya!!

[Warriorbird]

And airstrikes have been super effective in Libya!!

Ours were. Sadly enough NATO seems not to be worth jack.

If Yemen goes completely to Al'Qaeda it would be a bad thing for America. I don't care who's President or not and who's out of power and suddenly deciding that spending and war is bad for America.

[Parkbandit]

Ours were. Sadly enough NATO seems not to be worth jack.

If Yemen goes completely to Al'Qaeda it would be a bad thing for America. I don't care who's President or not and who's out of power and suddenly deciding that spending and war is bad for America.

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH

HAHAHAHAA

HAHA

holy shit, that was awesome. Thanks for the laughs this morning man.

[Warriorbird]

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH

HAHAHAHAA

HAHA

holy shit, that was awesome. Thanks for the laughs this morning man.

Way to contribute.

[Tgo01]

Are we dropping special Nobel Peace bombs now?

[Parkbandit]

Way to contribute.

Sorry, but when you post something like that.. and don't realize how utterly stupid it sounds.. it's difficult to contribute anything but laughter.

Funny part is.. you probably don't realize what a raging hypocrite you are.

[Warriorbird]

Sorry, but when you post something like that.. and don't realize how utterly stupid it sounds.. it's difficult to contribute anything but laughter.

Funny part is.. you probably don't realize what a raging hypocrite you are.

Funny. Sounds like the entire thread from you. "All you do is complain about the Iraq War?" Remember that?

[Parkbandit]

Funny. Sounds like the entire thread from you. "All you do is complain about the Iraq War?" Remember that?

I remember that all you did was complain about the Iraq War and the money we were spending on it. Multiple times. Multiple threads. It was your only "contribution" to most political threads.

Suddenly, a change in the White House and you don't have a problem with this President starting wars that cost money. You even attempted to 'excused your sudden change about government spending because it was being spent in the US and not in other countries.

You can't even take yourself serious at this point.... can you?

[Warriorbird]

I remember that all you did was complain about the Iraq War and the money we were spending on it. Multiple times. Multiple threads. It was your only "contribution" to most political threads.

Suddenly, a change in the White House and you don't have a problem with this President starting wars that cost money. You even attempted to 'excused your sudden change about government spending because it was being spent in the US and not in other countries.

You can't even take yourself serious at this point.... can you?

You're not even trolling well. Remember how much you defended the Iraq War. Obama's in office though, time to be Cindy Sheehan!

DURP, let's axe government revenue wholesale! Let's create a pointless new Cabinet agency! But spending is baaddd!

[Parkbandit]

You're not even trolling well. Remember how much you defended the Iraq War. Obama's in office though, time to be Cindy Sheehan!

DURP, let's axe government revenue wholesale! Let's create a pointless new Cabinet agency! But spending is baaddd!


1) I've always spoken out about out of control spending.
2) Notice how it was you who brought up spending in this thread? No one else did.
3) Notice how I didn't say I disagreed with the concept of the war... I simply mentioned that perhaps Obama should go through Congress (The same criticism I had with Libya.. curiously enough)

You on the other hand, have criticised war and war spending throughout the Bush years.. but suddenly, you are Mr. Warmonger who has no problem spending money on wars now. How do you justify it.. in your head.. or do you even bother?

[Warriorbird]

1) I've always spoken out about out of control spending.
2) Notice how it was you who brought up spending in this thread? No one else did.
3) Notice how I didn't say I disagreed with the concept of the war... I simply mentioned that perhaps Obama should go through Congress (The same criticism I had with Libya.. curiously enough)

You on the other hand, have criticised war and war spending throughout the Bush years.. but suddenly, you are Mr. Warmonger who has no problem spending money on wars now. How do you justify it.. in your head.. or do you even bother?

1. When in your entire life has spending been cut under a Republican President?

2. You tactfully forget what I wanted us to do, post Afghanistan, instead of Iraq. Remember where we actually caught Osama Bin Laden?

3. It's hilarious to see Republican war QQ. Almost as hilarious as it is to look for them actually cutting spending. Would you be super critical of a Republican who didn't go to Congress? You weren't the last time it happened. It's pretty blatantly in the service of a win for the party of no right now. None of these deeply concerned people would be saying anything if this was McCain.

[Rinualdo]

Are we really calling dropping a few bombs on people war?

[Tgo01]

Are we really calling dropping a few bombs on people war?

Of course not, a Democrat is president after all.

[Warriorbird]

Of course not, a Democrat is president after all.

This back and forth = Washington.

[Parkbandit]

1. When in your entire life has spending been cut under a Republican President?

What does this have to do with me being against out of control government spending? Oh, nothing.



2. You tactfully forget what I wanted us to do, post Afghanistan, instead of Iraq. Remember where we actually caught Osama Bin Laden?

Remember when you CONSTANTLY complained about the war in Iraq and how much it was costing us?



3. It's hilarious to see Republican war QQ. Almost as hilarious as it is to look for them actually cutting spending. Would you be super critical of a Republican who didn't go to Congress? You weren't the last time it happened. It's pretty blatantly in the service of a win for the party of no right now. None of these deeply concerned people would be saying anything if this was McCain.


Before Obama, what President conducted military activity in another country for months without informing and getting approval through Congress? Do you also have a quote of me not being critical? Or.. are you just doing what you always do.. making shit up?

PS - How do you know what I would do if McCain were President? You do remember how I was never a McCain fan, right... or did you want to make up that I was a huge supporter of him now?

Stop being retarded.

[Parkbandit]

Are we really calling dropping a few bombs on people war?

Kinetic military action? Does that make it right?

And can you explain "a few"? Less than 10? Less than 100? Less than 1000?

[Warriorbird]

What does this have to do with me being against out of control government spending? Oh, nothing.



Remember when you CONSTANTLY complained about the war in Iraq and how much it was costing us?




Before Obama, what President conducted military activity in another country for months without informing and getting approval through Congress? Do you also have a quote of me not being critical? Or.. are you just doing what you always do.. making shit up?

PS - How do you know what I would do if McCain were President? You do remember how I was never a McCain fan, right... or did you want to make up that I was a huge supporter of him now?

Stop being retarded.

Complaining about spending on the wrong thing is pretty much how you spend your life. You somehow conflate disagreeing with that particular war and all war. Obama becomes President and you Cindy Sheehan it up. I thought capturing OBL was fantastically cost effective. Why could we not have done it when he got there? "But, Pak-ee-stan is ahr AL-eye."

[4a6c1]

Are we dropping special Nobel Peace bombs now?

:lol2:

Also sadface.

[Rinualdo]

Kinetic military action? Does that make it right?

And can you explain "a few"? Less than 10? Less than 100? Less than 1000?

Kinetic military action wouldn't fit into the narrative, however.

I don't think this is a war. Neither do I think Reagan launching missiles into Libya was a war, etc.

[4a6c1]

Why are libs sounding like Bush Republicans right now and Conservatives sounding like barefoot hippies. WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THE WORLD. I hate everyone.

I disagree with everyone.

/contrary mary

[NocturnalRob]

Why are libs sounding like Bush Republicans right now and Conservatives sounding like barefoot hippies. WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THE WORLD. I hate everyone.

I disagree with everyone.

/contrary mary
Careful there, mary. You're mighty close to going against the regime.

[Parkbandit]

Complaining about spending on the wrong thing is pretty much how you spend your life.

Actually, I have a pretty fullfilling life.. this forum is only entertainment to me. It's especially entertaining watching you prove yet again what an utter failure you are.


You somehow conflate disagreeing with that particular war and all war.

Incorrect. Captain Hyperbole cannot rescue you from your own stupidity.


Obama becomes President and you Cindy Sheehan it up.

Sheehan is a pacifist.. clearly I am not. Again, I realize this ruins your narrative on our conversation, but I've already stated that I'm actually not against this war.

And while I oppose everything that is Sheehan and how she used the death of her son to push her own agenda.. at least she didn't suddenly change her convictions and position like you did... based solely on what party is in the White House.



I thought capturing OBL was fantastically cost effective. Why could we not have done it when he got there? "But, Pak-ee-stan is ahr AL-eye."

I think you've proven how utterly ignorant you are on world events.. stop embarrassing yourself even more.

[Parkbandit]

Why are libs sounding like Bush Republicans right now and Conservatives sounding like barefoot hippies. WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THE WORLD. I hate everyone.

I disagree with everyone.

/contrary mary

Which conservatives are sounding like barefoot hippies? Because I would like the President to follow the Constitution in regards to armed conflicts in other countries doesn't make me a pacifist.

[Parkbandit]

Kinetic military action wouldn't fit into the narrative, however.

I don't think this is a war. Neither do I think Reagan launching missiles into Libya was a war, etc.

I didn't believe that what NATO was doing in Libya was a war either... for the first couple of days. But we've been bombing them for a couple of months now... what is your definition of a war?

[CrystalTears]

Fucking world is ending. DMV employee admits to me that they made a mistake and that I was right, and now WB is okay with a war.

Nowhere to run to... nowhere to hide...

[Keller]

Fucking world is ending. DMV employee admits to me that they made a mistake and that I was right, and now WB is okay with a war.

Nowhere to run to... nowhere to hide...

Which team are you on?

Formerly former semi-conservative!

[Warriorbird]

Fucking world is ending. DMV employee admits to me that they made a mistake and that I was right, and now WB is okay with a war.

Nowhere to run to... nowhere to hide...

Way to prove the pointlessness of Internet discussion and carry on with a tired old PB line that's years old.

I'm nowhere near the anti war line. There's people here (Alok and others) who are much more anti war than I am. But of course thinking one particular war is stupid means you're "totally anti war."

[Latrinsorm]

WB was for the war in Afghanistan too. We can only conclude that WB is against wars that occur in Mesopotamia (worth noting that he's never denied being against Mesopotamian wars).

Another completely plausible theory is that the distribution of WB's anti-war sentiment is alphabetical - Afghanistan and Yemen are near the edges of the alphabet. To test this, we should invade Algiers, Morocco, and Zimbabwe... for science.

[Warriorbird]

I didn't believe that what NATO was doing in Libya was a war either... for the first couple of days. But we've been bombing them for a couple of months now... what is your definition of a war?

NATO != solely America. Primary control was handed off and of course they've done terribly.

[Parkbandit]

NATO != solely America. Primary control was handed off and of course they've done terribly.

Are we still using any of our military assets in Libya?

[Warriorbird]

Are we still using any of our military assets in Libya?

One frigate. Some UAVs.

vs.

WALL OF TEXT ALERT

Belgium Belgian Naval Component
BNS Narcis, a Tripartite-class minehunter[10]
Bulgaria Bulgarian Navy
BGS Drazki, a Wielingen-class frigate[11]
Canada Canadian Forces
Canadian Forces Maritime Command
HMCS Charlottetown, a Halifax-class frigate[12] (transferred from Operation MOBILE)
1 × CH-124 Sea King anti-submarine helicopter
France French Navy (transferred from Opération Harmattan[13])
Task Force 473[14]
Aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle (R91)
10 × Rafale M fighters
6 × Super-Etendard strike aircraft
2 × E-2C airborne early warning aircraft
2 × Dauphin multipurpose helicopters
2 × Alouette III utility helicopters
French Air Force detachment of a Puma and 2 × Caracal transport helicopters
Anti-air frigate Jean Bart (D615) (until 2 April 2011[15])
Frigate Dupleix (D641)
Frigate Aconit (F713)
Replenishment tanker Meuse (A607)
Nuclear attack submarine Améthyste (S605)[16][17]
Greece Hellenic Navy
HS Limnos, an Elli-class frigate[18]
Italy Italian Navy[19]
NMM Giuseppe Garibaldi aircraft carrier with[20]
8 × AV-8B Harrier II V/STOL ground-attack aircraft
4 × AW101 Merlin anti-submarine warfare helicopters
Boarding teams from the San Marco Regiment
NMM Andrea Doria, an Horizon Class Destroyer
NMM Libeccio, a Maestrale-class frigate
NMM Etna, an Etna class auxiliary ship
NMM Comandante Bettica, a Comandanti-class offshore patrol vessel
Netherlands Royal Netherlands Navy
HNLMS Haarlem, an Alkmaar-class minehunter[21][22]
Romania Romanian Navy
Regele Ferdinand, a Type 22 frigate[23]
Spain Spanish Armed Forces
Spanish Navy
SPS Méndez Núñez, a Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate[24]
SPS Tramontana, an Agosta-class submarine[25]
Turkey Turkish Navy[26]
TCG Giresun, a G class frigate
TCG Gemlik, a G class frigate
TCG Yıldırım, a Yavuz-class frigate
TCG Yıldıray, a Type 209 submarine
TCG Akar, a fleet support ship
United Kingdom Royal Navy
HMS Brocklesby[27]
HMS Cumberland (F85), a Type 22 frigate[28][29] (transferred from Operation Ellamy) and replaced by HMS Liverpool (D92) on 9 April.[27][30]
HMS Ocean (L12) (as of 27 May 2011).[31][32]
HMS Albion, an Albion-class landing platform dock[33]
HMS Liverpool, a Type 42 destroyer[33]
HMS Sutherland, a Type 23 frigate[33]
RFA Fort Rosalie[33]
RFA Wave Knight[33]
United States United States Navy
One frigate[34]

[edit] Allied Air Command

Belgium Belgian Armed Forces
Belgian Air Component
6 x F-16AM 15MLU Falcon fighter jets operating from Araxos Air Base, Greece
Canada Canadian Forces
Canadian Forces Air Command[35]
6 × CF-188 Hornet multirole fighter jets
2 × CC-177 Globemaster strategic transport aircraft
2 × CC-130J Hercules tactical transport aircraft
2 × CC-150 Polaris air-to-air refueling tankers
2 × CP-140 Aurora maritime patrol aircraft[36]
Canadian Special Operations Forces Command
Joint Task Force 2[37]
Denmark Danish Armed Forces[38]
Royal Danish Air Force
6 x F-16AM 15MLU Falcon fighter jets operating from Sigonella Air Base, Italy
1 x C-130J-30 tactical transport aircraft
France French Armed Forces
French Air Force (transferred from Opération Harmattan[13])
8 × Rafale fighters
6 × Mirage 2000-5 fighters
6 × Mirage 2000D fighter-bombers
2 × Mirage F1CR reconnaissance aircraft
6 × C135 aerial refueling planes
1 x E-3F AWACS plane
1 x C-160G SIGINT electronic surveillance aircraft
Commando Parachutiste de l'Air companies 20 and 30 forward deployed to Solenzara Air Base, Corsica[39]
Greece Greek Armed Forces
Hellenic Air Force
4 x F-16 fighter jets[citation needed]
1 x Embraer R-99 early warning and control aircraft[citation needed]
Italy Italian Armed Forces
Italian Air Force[40]
4 x Tornado ECR SEAD planes operating from Trapani Air Base
4 x Eurofighter Typhoon fighter jets operating from Trapani Air Base
8 x Panavia Tornado IDS started air attacks against military targets in Libya with Storm Shadow Missiles and smart bombs JDAM and Paveway in 28 April, fighter jets operating from Trapani Air Base
NATO
E-3 airborne early warning and control (AWACS) aircraft[41]
Netherlands Netherlands Armed Forces
Royal Netherlands Air Force[citation needed]
6 x F-16AM 15MLU Falcon fighter jets operating from Decimomannu Air Base, Italy
1 x KDC10 Tanker Aircraft
Norway Norwegian Armed Forces
Royal Norwegian Air Force
6 x F-16AM 15MLU Falcon fighter jets operating from Souda Air Base, Crete[42]
2 x C-130J-30 tactical transport aircraft supporting the Norwegian forces.[43]
Qatar: Qatar Armed Forces
Qatar Emiri Air Force[44]
Six Mirage 2000-5EDA fighters jets operating from Souda Air Base, Crete
Two C-17 Globemaster III strategic transport aircraft
Spain Spanish Armed Forces
Spanish Air Force[45]
4 x EF-18AM Hornet fighters jets operating from Decimomannu Air Base, Italy
1 x Boeing 707-331B(KC) tanker aircraft
1 x CN-235 maritime patrol aircraft[46]
Sweden Swedish Armed Forces[47][48]
Royal Swedish Air Force[49]
8 x (2 in reserve) JAS 39C Gripen fighter jets operating from Sigonella Air Base, Italy
1 x Lockheed Tp-84T C-130 Hercules configured as aerial tanker
1 x Saab 340 AEW&C (pledged, but not yet deployed)
United Arab Emirates Union Defence Force (UAE)[50]
United Arab Emirates Air Force
6 x F-16E/F Block 60 Falcon fighter jets operating from Decimomannu Air Base, Italy
6 x Dassault Mirage 2000 fighter jets operating from Decimomannu Air Base, Italy
United Kingdom Royal Air Force
12 Panavia Tornado GR4A
8 (originally 10) Eurofighter Typhoons
2 VC-10 tanker aircraft
4 AgustaWestland Apache attached from the Army Air Corps (United Kingdom)[31]
3 E3D Sentry surveillance aircraft
Jordan Jordanian Armed Forces[51]
Royal Jordanian Air Force
6 x F-16 MLU fighter jets operating from Aviano Air Base, Italy

[Parkbandit]

2 million dollars a day seems kind of steep for a single frigate and a few UAV's:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/11d5624c-920f-11e0-b8c1-00144feab49a.html#axzz1OooG2srn

[Androidpk]

The US has been involved in covert activity inside Yemen for years now, this is nothing new. And as for Libya, there are far more US assets being used than just a frigate and a few UAVS.

Also, if you're defining covert operations in foreign countries as wars then we're up to like war # 30-something.

[Rinualdo]

Which team are you on?


She's on the team with the most cookies.

[Warriorbird]

2 million dollars a day seems kind of steep for a single frigate and a few UAV's:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/11d5624c-920f-11e0-b8c1-00144feab49a.html#axzz1OooG2srn

Dead link. Also wasn't that the claimed total for a foreign Obama visit? Even if it is that high the deployed forces do not seem to be predominately ours. It is hardly (WOT illustrates) the America show.

[Parkbandit]

Pentagon sees Libya military costs soar

US military operations in Libya are on course to cost hundreds of millions of dollars more than the Pentagon estimated, according to figures obtained by the Financial Times.

Robert Gates, the outgoing secretary of defence, said last month that the Pentagon expected to spend “somewhere in the ball park of $750m” in the 2011 fiscal year as part of efforts to protect the Libyan people.

But according to a Pentagon memo which includes a detailed update on the progress and pace of operations, by mid-May US operations in Libya had cost $664m, a figure confirmed by the Department of Defence.

The document, entitled the “United States Contribution to Operation Unified Protector’’, adds that US costs are running at a rate of about $2m a day or $60m a month. The memo has been circulating on Capitol Hill since last week. The DoD declined to comment on the increased costs of the operation.

The pace of spending is higher than reported by the DoD comptroller’s office in late March. In a congressional hearing, Pentagon officials said the US had spent about $550m on Libya, at a rate of about $40m a month.

If spending remains at the increased rate until the end of the recently extended Nato authorisation period, the DoD could face an extra bill of about $274m to pay for a combination of air strikes, refuelling operations and intelligence-gathering missions, putting further strain on its budget.

Any extra spending will further strain the DoD’s budget, which is under pressure from cost overruns on procurement programmes and under threat from significant cuts as part of Congressional efforts to address the federal deficit.

Despite continuing to press the White House for additional funding for Libya operations, in his May comments Secretary Gates suggested that “in the case of Libya, unfortunately, we’re fundamentally having to eat that one.”

Any additional costs could also add to pressure on the US to limit its mission in Libya. Last week, the House of Representatives passed a non-binding resolution demanding that President Obama explain the US involvement in Libya, forestalling a more radical measure seeking an end to US involvement.

Although it is working under Nato, the US is by far the largest contributor to operation Unified Protector. As of mid-May it was conducting 70 per cent of reconnaissance missions, over 75 per cent of refuelling flights and 27 per cent of all air sorties.

The US has about 75 aircraft, including drones, involved in the operations and since the end of March has conducted about 2,600 aircraft sorties and about 600 combat sorties. In addition the US military can call on a number of naval assets in the Mediterranean.

As well as its contribution to the Nato operation, US spending on Libya includes its twelve day operation Odyssey Dawn that took place before Nato took over.

In total the US military has fired about 228 missiles as of mid-May. For comparison the US Navy plans to buy 196 or so missiles this year for about $300m or about $1.5m each, according to US budget documents.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/11d5624c-920f-11e0-b8c1-00144feab49a.html#axzz1OooG2srn

[~Rocktar~]

At least we might be using up the old missiles and so on before their expiration date.

[Atlanteax]

We should had NEVER gotten involved in Libya... the US, nor Europe.

It was an ignorable problem that Western countries did not have the budget for.

[Kithus]

They forgot to ask the important question before going in:

How does this affect me?

If the answer is (in this case) "it doesn't" then it's probably not our problem.

http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/Team-America-World-Police-WP-trey-parker-802851_1024_768.jpg

[Parkbandit]

Are we still using any of our military assets in Libya?


One frigate. Some UAVs.

Really? Sounds inconsistent with what Robert Gates is claiming....


BRUSSELS — US Defence Secretary Robert Gates issued a stinging rebuke to NATO allies Friday, warning their reliance on American military might is putting the Libya mission and the alliance's very future at risk.

Gates painted a bleak picture of the state of the 28-nation transatlantic alliance, saying it risked a "dismal" future after years of shrinking budgets that were leaving them short of munitions in the Libyan air war.

"Frankly, many of those allies sitting on the sidelines (in Libya) do so not because they do not want to participate, but simply because they cannot. The military capabilities simply aren't there," Gates said in a speech to the Security and Defence Agenda think tank in Brussels.

He said the NATO-led ground war in Afghanistan had scored important accomplishments but said the mission, along with the Libya war, had reflected chronic underinvestment and at times a lack of political backbone.

In Afghanistan, Gates said it was worrying that an alliance with two million in uniform has "struggled, at times desperately, to sustain a deployment of 25,000 to 45,000 troops" and faced shortages of helicopters, transport aircraft, maintenance and surveillance planes.

"Turning to the NATO operation over Libya, it has become painfully clear that similar shortcomings -- in capability and will -- have the potential to jeopardise the alliance's ability to conduct an integrated, effective and sustained air-sea campaign," he said.

Gates acknowledged that the Libyan mission has met its initial military goals of grounding Moamer Kadhafi's air force and limiting the regime's ability to launch attacks against civilians.

However, he said many allies lacked intelligence and surveillance aircraft and specialists, which meant the US military had to step in to ensure that allied fighter jets could identify and strike targets.

"Furthermore, the mightiest military alliance in history is only 11 weeks into an operation against a poorly armed regime in a sparsely populated country -- yet many allies are beginning to run short of munitions, requiring the US, once more, to make up the difference," he said.

With only eight of the alliance's 28 members conducting air strikes in Libya, Gates used a two-day meeting of NATO defence ministers this week to prod allies that have taken a backseat to do more in Libya.

With Norway announcing Friday that it will end its air combat role in Libya on August 1, Gates's call may have gained new urgency.

The Pentagon chief seized on his final official trip to Brussels before he retires at the end of the month to complain once more about shrinking military budgets in Europe.

"What I've sketched out is the real possibility for a dim, if not dismal future for the transatlantic alliance," he said.

With the US share of NATO defence spending at 75 percent, Gates said it would become increasingly difficult for the United States to keep its current level of support at a time of financial strain at home.

"The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the US Congress -- and in the American body politic writ large -- to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defence," he said.

NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu acknowledged that there has been a "long-standing concern about the transatlantic gap in defence spending."

"There is a risk that European allies may fall even further behind in terms of technological development because of low levels of defence spending," she said.

Gates said his fears that NATO would turn into a "two-tiered alliance," with some nations pursuing only "soft" humanitarian operations while others carry out "hard" combat missions, had come to pass.

"And it is unacceptable," he said, warning that if they do not act to bolster combat strength alliance members face "the very real possibility of collective military irrelevance."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g9SA6BXvwd-YptzVqYNsK3yHAveg?docId=CNG.4facb82ec8689e5a037eb4 e7286eff0b.141

Sounds like we're shouldering most of the fiscal load for Libya...

[Atlanteax]

Sounds like we're shouldering most of the fiscal load for Libya...

Which is why the Europeans in general did not mind the campaign in Libya.

1) it's close to home and carries to domestic constitutents

2) they only have to pay for a small portion of it (oh wow, they'll let NATO use their bases!!)

[~Rocktar~]

Hasn't one of the major Democrat claims been all along with our (mis) adventures overseas been that we had all these allies and so we should spend less of our money? Haven't Conservatives all along been saying that we increasingly and continually pay for the rest of the western world's defense at the expense of our own budget and trade deficit? Hasn't the cry of Democrats all along been that we should be more like Europe with social programs and how we should be able to do what they do and model them?

Why yes, yes is has been the party line all along. Well, seems clear to me that the reason all those Socialist policies and countries have had some hope of survival all along is because the big, bad, capitalist USA has been paying more and more of their defense bills all along. I suppose it might be true that if we scaled back out military to isolationist and ineffective levels of size, training, equipment and supplies, then we too could afford to subsidize even more of our population's more esoteric pursuits like drinking alcohol and bottled water, watching sports and making more unproductive babies.

Oh, wait, if we did that, then we would not be able to support all of Europe's booze swilling artiste population so they can sit around on the government dole and criticize the US Military on who's coat tails they exist.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Hasn't one of the major Democrat claims been all along with our (mis) adventures overseas been that we had all these allies and so we should spend less of our money? Haven't Conservatives all along been saying that we increasingly and continually pay for the rest of the western world's defense at the expense of our own budget and trade deficit? Hasn't the cry of Democrats all along been that we should be more like Europe with social programs and how we should be able to do what they do and model them?

Why yes, yes is has been the party line all along. Well, seems clear to me that the reason all those Socialist policies and countries have had some hope of survival all along is because the big, bad, capitalist USA has been paying more and more of their defense bills all along. I suppose it might be true that if we scaled back out military to isolationist and ineffective levels of size, training, equipment and supplies, then we too could afford to subsidize even more of our population's more esoteric pursuits like drinking alcohol and bottled water, watching sports and making more unproductive babies.

Oh, wait, if we did that, then we would not be able to support all of Europe's booze swilling artiste population so they can sit around on the government dole and criticize the US Military on who's coat tails they exist.

http://i.imgur.com/MOclr.png

[Parkbandit]

Stepping up a simmering constitutional conflict, House Speaker John A. Boehner warned President Obama on Tuesday that unless he gets authorization from Congress for his military deployment in Libya, he will be in violation of the War Powers Resolution.

In a letter sent Tuesday afternoon, Mr. Boehner, the top Republican in the constitutional chain of succession, said Mr. Obama must provide a clear justification for committing troops to Libya by Friday. Sunday marks the 90th day since the president notified Congress that U.S. troops had been committed to help enforce a no-fly zone over Libya, which is designed to protect the rebels fighting Col. Moammar Gadhafi’s government.

“The Constitution requires the president to ‘take care that the laws be faithfully executed,’ and one of those laws is the War Powers Resolution, which requires an approving action by Congress or withdrawal within 90 days from the notification of a military operation,” Mr. Boehner said in the letter.

The White House has repeatedly said it has complied with the law by alerting Congress to the initial deployment, and by providing follow-up briefings about the pace and extent of U.S. troops’ commitment.

But the administration has never sought approval from Congress.

The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, but makes the president commander-in-chief — and those dueling roles have caused tension throughout the nation’s history.

Two weeks ago the House passed a non-binding resolution that urged Mr. Obama to provide detailed information on the deployment. Mr. Boehner at the time signaled that Congress might cut off funding for the deployment in Libya if the administration didn’t comply.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/14/boehner-gives-obama-friday-deadline-libya/

I think Congress has been overly patient so far.

[Warriorbird]

http://i.imgur.com/MOclr.png

I really like when you drop by.

[~Rocktar~]

I really like when you drop by.

Of course you do, it provides other pointless posts to attempt to distract attention from your useless posting.

[Warriorbird]

Of course you do, it provides other pointless posts to attempt to distract attention from your useless posting.

Projection is so awesome.

[~Rocktar~]

Projection is so awesome.

An attempt at a witty retort, how quaint.

[Warriorbird]

An attempt at a witty retort, how quaint.

I love your continued attempts at redefining having lost before you began to play.

[~Rocktar~]

I love your continued attempts at redefining having lost before you began to play.

I love your continued attempts at thought when you have constantly and repeatedly proven that my cocker spaniel has superior reasoning ability.

[NocturnalRob]

I love your continued attempts at thought when you have constantly and repeatedly proven that my cocker spaniel has superior reasoning ability.
http://www.dcows.com/images/cocker%20spaniel.jpg

[Warriorbird]

I love your continued attempts at thought when you have constantly and repeatedly proven that my cocker spaniel has superior reasoning ability.

Given your constant siege mentality I'm not sure you can judge reasoning in even your cocker spaniel. It's also a hilarious dog for you to have.

[~Rocktar~]

Given your constant siege mentality I'm not sure you can judge reasoning in even your cocker spaniel. It's also a hilarious dog for you to have.

Given your consistent and persistent failure at basic logic, reasoning and answering simple questions, I know for a fact your ability to judge reality in any matter is inadequate. I find it funny that you lack even the basic faculties to grasp the larger picture of just how serious the changes in our society and government are and just how damaging they have been and continue to be.

I suppose that you have a pit bull terrier because you feel the childish need to compensate for something? My dog is a rescue and has lived with me through thick and thin for 14 years now.

To paraphrase another comment:

"Just because you have a siege mentality does not mean that you are not under siege."

[NocturnalRob]

you are not under siege.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_PfeoPMUjPrM/TK1HGBrzX3I/AAAAAAAACVE/8AfA9Og4zE8/s1600/seagal_under_siege.0.0.0x0.640x384.jpg

[Warriorbird]

under siege!!!!

Oh shit. We're moving into DARK TERRITORY.

http://seagalology.com/img/movies/undersiege2.jpg

[NocturnalRob]

Oh shit. We're moving into DARK TERRITORY.

http://www.impawards.com/1995/posters/under_siege_two_dark_territory.jpg
I'd be worried about being MARKED FOR DEATH if I wasn't ABOVE THE LAW and so HARD TO KILL.

[Warriorbird]

I'd be worried about being MARKED FOR DEATH if I wasn't ABOVE THE LAW and so HARD TO KILL.

I'm not worried. Lately "THE PATRIOT" is OUT FOR JUSTICE and he's all TODAY YOU DIE! But I'm OUT OF REACH and eating a CLEMENTINE as I walk INTO THE SUN. I suspect he's too guilty over his past in the BELLY OF THE BEAST in the SKIN TRADE to accomplish much.

[NocturnalRob]

Lately "THE PATRIOT" is OUT FOR JUSTICE and he's all TODAY YOU DIE! But I'm OUT OF REACH and eating a CLEMENTINE as I walk INTO THE SUN. I suspect he's guilty over his past in the SKIN TRADE.
Dude...dude...you sound like A DANGEROUS MAN who has been DRIVEN TO KILL. Your FIRE DOWN BELOW could cause some EXIT WOUNDS if I don't become a SHADOW MAN.

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/4287/seagal4.gif

[Warriorbird]

Dude...dude...you sound like A DANGEROUS MAN who has been DRIVEN TO KILL. Your FIRE DOWN BELOW could cause some EXIT WOUNDS if I don't become a SHADOW MAN.



First I'm like...

http://shotgunkorea.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/seagal.jpg

and then I'm like ...

http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm145/gai83/StevenSeagal1.gif

and it's business time and...

http://dc-cdn.virtacore.com/2011/03/StevenSeagal.jpg

and then it's all...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vSPA0-xtfkw/Tb274RbYKQI/AAAAAAAAAhg/kmELOOD1yY4/s1600/Steven-Seagal.jpg

[4a6c1]

I did a GIS too. There was more malware connected to steven seagal pics than in any other search I have ever done. For anything. Ever.

[Warriorbird]

I did a GIS too. There was more malware connected to steven seagal pics than in any other search I have ever done. For anything. Ever.

I had to swap out. I blame Rocktar... and terrorists.

[Cephalopod]

This thread is so awesome, and I have no idea what it's about.

[NocturnalRob]

This thread is so awesome, and I have no idea what it's about.
Steven Seagal's upcoming film, War #4.

[Jarvan]

Or it's about the fact that our government finds it perfectly legal to bomb, blow up, and otherwise attempt to destroy a Sovereign Nation that has not attacked us, or posed a threat to us.

This issue also isn't a Democrat or Republican issue. If repubs are attacking Obama over this, you can be sure Dems would be attacking a Repub president over this.

Of course none of these conflicts since Obama took office are a war, it's a humanitarian action. Since we all know killing people is the Human thing to do. Kill them before they kill innocents... hey wait, isn't that just like the death penalty? that's a whole other issue.

How you can say that dropping bombs on someone is not an act of war is beyond me. Also, if we are protecting innocents in there, why not elsewhere. Syria, Yemen, hell.. Mexico. Look at all the civilians killed in Mexico, why not invade their and attack the cartels and bomb those cities to rubble.. or more rubble, to protect those people.

I am still trying to figure out why we got involved, France and England have an oil deal, why arn't they doing all the work. If NATO and the UN signed on for this, then why not all the members participate?

Frankly, our Government is Epic Fail.

[~Rocktar~]

Well damnit, you interjected something serious into some funny ass shit.

[Jarvan]

Well damnit, you interjected something serious into some funny ass shit.

That depends if you consider Steven funny.

[NocturnalRob]

Dear Jarvan,

Shut the fuck up.

Warmest regards,

The Steven Seagal Fan Club (i.e., everyone ever except apparently for your lame ass)

[Jarvan]

Dear Jarvan,

Shut the fuck up.

Warmest regards,

The Steven Seagal Fan Club (i.e., everyone ever except apparently for your lame ass)

Actually, I rather like his movies, even Glimmer Man. I just don't find them funny.

Tho he has gotten funnier with age, what with them needing to speed up the fight sequences to make them even remotely interesting.

[pabstblueribbon]

Actually, I rather like his movies, even Glimmer Man. I just don't find them funny.

Tho he has gotten funnier with age, what with them needing to speed up the fight sequences to make them even remotely interesting.

You're doing it wrong.

[Parkbandit]

http://nextround.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/steagal_gif.gif