The Cellar - Latest Arab Spring thread

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Current Events (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - Latest Arab Spring thread (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=25225)

Nothing to see here, Syria is not as important as Libya! :lol:

Quote:

Air Force and Navy aircraft are still flying hundreds of strike missions over Libya despite the Obama administration’s claim that American forces are playing only a limited support role in the NATO operation.

An Africa Command (AFRICOM) spokeswoman confirmed Wednesday that since NATO’s Operation Unified Protector (OUP) took over from the American-led Operation Odyssey Dawn on March 31, the U.S. military has flown hundreds of strike sorties. Previously, Washington had claimed that it was mostly providing intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) and tanker support to NATO forces operating over Libya.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/20...ssions-063011/

"despite the Obama administration’s lies"

FTFY

The White House report to Congress last month stated that since turning over the lead to NATO, the US has "assisted in the suppression and destruction of air defenses in support of the no fly zone; and, since April 23, conducted precision strikes by unmanned aerial vehicles against a limited set of clearly defined targets."

So where's the lie?

As the article noted and the White House report stated, the US role since April has been mostly intelligence, logistical support, and search and rescue assistance, while also assisting in the suppression of air defenses.

I can understand disagreeing with the White House interpretation of the War Powers Act, but I dont see anything in this article that wasnt common knowledge.

Quote:

Syrian government supporters smashed windows at the U.S. Embassy in Damascus on Monday, raised a Syrian flag and scrawled graffiti calling the American ambassador a "dog" in anger over the envoy's visit last week to an opposition stronghold, witnesses said.

Photos posted on Facebook show demonstrators climbing a fence at the compound and raising a Syrian flag.

American officials said the residence of U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford was also attacked by a mob shortly afterwards. The officials said no one was injured on the attack on Ford's home, which is not part of the embassy compound, but that there was some damage to the residence. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.

Protesters also took part in demonstrations outside the French Embassy in the Syrian capital, just days after the U.S. and French ambassadors visited the opposition stronghold of Hama in central Syria.

One witness, Hiam al-Hassan, said about 300 people had gathered outside the French Embassy, where protesters smashed embassy windows and shattered the windshield of a diplomatic SUV outside the compound. The French flag was removed and replaced with a Syrian one.

Link

Looks like the Syrian lives just went up a bit.

Has the tide turned in Libya?

Quote:

Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi is sending fresh signals through emissaries that he is ready to discuss stepping down, Western diplomats said Tuesday, as new intelligence assessments pointed to worsening conditions among his troops.

The overtures by aides close to Gaddafi appeared to reflect a deepening pessimism inside a government that is under assault on two fronts and faces shortages of critical supplies, according to U.S. and European analysts and government officials.

New U.S. intelligence assessments conclude that government forces, already beset with morale problems and a steady stream of defections, are now hard-pressed to find fuel for military vehicles after rebel troops shut down a key pipeline. If current trends continue, loyalists troops will run out of fuel by summer’s end, and the Gaddafi government will face a worsening cash and credit shortage because of international sanctions, the reports say.

While the momentum has generally favored the rebels for weeks, Western analysts are seeing troubles escalate on the loyalist side, possibly explaining the surge of interest in finding a negotiated end to the fighting, according to two senior U.S. officials who have seen the assessments.

“There has been a shift,” said one of the officials, who insisted on anonymity in discussing the classified reports. “The situation is looking much better [for the rebels] than it was just a month ago.”

This official, who said he had been generally pessimistic about rebel prospects since the start of the fighting in February, said he was “starting to be slightly optimistic” about the chances for either a political solution or a complete collapse of the Gaddafi government in the coming weeks.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...QBI_story.html

Not one US life lost, not one NATO life lost.

No push back against the US by Libyans.

No worries about Iran intervention or Hamas or Hezbollah retaliation.

Little or no risk to the US with potential for significant rewards for the Libyan people.

But some obviously still dont see or refuse to acknowledge the difference between Libya and Syria.

NYTimes has it too. If this goes off it will be a great success.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 744495)

NYTimes has it too. If this goes off it will be a great success.

There is reason to be optimistic, but a tempered optimism with the expectation that what will follow is not likely to be a smooth transition to a more democratic and representative government.

Much like Egypt where the people appear to be getting impatient with the military controlled transition.

In both cases, US (and NATO) financial/economic support will be necessary or extremely helpful at a time when many here are suggesting that we cut all foreign aid.

One other US policy that I think makes sense is reaching out to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Islamic Movement for Change in Libya, each of which will expect to have some role in a transition and new government in the respective countries. We can and should talk to these groups, despite the rhetoric from the right about these groups.

[un-UG]This was much smarter and better focused than previous interventions but it is still an intervention and as such should be opposed on principle.[/un-UG] Why is it we always have money for this kind of militaristic nonsense even with a debt limit? I understand that this is Obama finding a middle way, but it is a big strike against him in my book... not that the GOP will put forward a less blood-stained alternative.

Politically, I am as far from the Guerrilla guy as anyone here and on this issue, I would disagree with you.

IMO, opposing all intervention on principle is too sweeping. There are levels of intervention, the least reactionary or aggressive of which should be considered (or at least on the table) as part of our broad foreign policy options, even if only as a potential deterrent.

If the intervention is to protect civilians from the real possibility of massacre by a govt responding to a populist movement AND has a UN mandate, AND is not unilateral, AND has the support of the civilians of the country as well as the leaders of other countries in the region, AND does not include US boots on the ground, AND if the cost in US lives and dollars is low (by DoD standards), AND if there is little risk of a response that could cause greater harm to the country and the region, then I think it is appropriate, given the risk/rewards to both the civilians and the US.

I support this action or this limited intervention. My disagreement with Obama is in the manner in which he is trying to fudge the War Powers Act to continue the action w/o Congressional approval.

We also need to be able to afford it. I'd rather have my mother's SS and MC untouched than improve the quality of life for Libyans. On the other hand, raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans would allow us to accomplish both.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet (Post 744521)

I agree that needs at home should come first.

But we dont have to raise taxes on the wealthiest to pay for a limited foreign policy action. Keeping it defense related, not awarding defense contracts to companies that move offshore to avoid paying taxes (eg Halliburton et al) would easily cover the cost of this one.

Or take a knife to wasteful, outdated or unnecessary DoD programs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 738396)

I don't know. My only answer is to have the editors at Vogue provide sanctuary for Assad and his wife.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbyi...al-photo-shoot

Quote:

The Syrian government hired an international public-relations firm to help coordinate a Vogue magazine profile for Asma al-Assad, Syria’s first lady.

Brown Lloyd James agreed to a $5,000-per-month contract with the presidency of the Syrian Arab Republic in November 2010 to help with the interview and photo shoot for a glowing profile of al-Assad by the high-profile fashion magazine.

The piece has been criticized heavily due to its publication in Vogue’s March issue, which coincided with the Syrian government’s crackdown on anti-regime protesters.

Here we go, application of "soft power" on Assad, as the US, UK, France, Germany, Canada, the EU foreign policy head all demand in unity that he step down.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14577333

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 751209)

Here we go, application of "soft power" on Assad, as the US, UK, France, Germany, Canada, the EU foreign policy head all demand in unity that he step down.

That ignores something far more important. Turkey demanded Assad step down and to stop attacking civilians. Turkey also threatened consequences if ignored.