Video: US launches stealth bombers, more than 100 cruise missiles against Libya; Update: Arab League criticizes Western military strikes

posted at 10:30 am on March 20, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

NBC has a fairly comprehensive report on the American attack on Libyan forces this morning, complete with totals thus far on cruise missiles (114 of them) and attacks by stealth bombers on air-defense systems, with 20 of those targeted. Military airstrips around the country have been bombed as well, up to 40 of them. Libya claims that 48 people have died as a result of those attacks, and Moammar Gaddafi gave the usual warning to the Muslim world that this was the start of a “crusader war” against an Arab nation. One piece of news might raise eyebrows — the US has sent fighter jets from Sicily to attack Gaddafi’s ground forces around Benghazi:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

That would seem to go beyond the UN mandate for a no-fly zone. The Pentagon tells NBC that their interpretation of the mandate is that they need to protect civilians, an interpretation that would leave practically no option off the table. Even without considering a ground invasion, it could mean that the US could attack Tripoli or practically any target they wish from the air or through off-shore cruise missiles. As Jim Miklaszewski reports, it looks as though the intent now is to utterly destroy Gaddafi’s army in an attempt to force him into retreat.

Not for nothing, but wasn’t that more or less our strategy in Iraq in 1990? We had a lot more firepower on target in that case, and it still took a ground invasion to eject Saddam Hussein from Kuwait — and that wasn’t his own territory, either. Had we done this four weeks ago, we could have protected a status quo, de facto liberation of Benghazi and other areas of Libya. Now, the Libyan position is so advanced that Gaddafi can likely abandon his armor in the city and reduce the rebels to destruction. It will just take a little longer. The time to stop Gaddafi from seizing Benghazi and stomping out the rebellion was when Gaddafi was bottled up in Tripoli.

Update: One e-mailer claimed that the UN resolution never mentions a no-fly zone, and that it’s basically a blank check for unlimited military intervention.  He’s wrong on the first point — there is a section of UN 1973 that is titled “No Fly Zone,” and the resolution bans all non-UN-approved flights originating in Libya.  On the second point, it’s less clear:

“4.   Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory, and requests the Member States concerned to inform the Secretary-General immediately of the measures they take pursuant to the authorization conferred by this paragraph which shall be immediately reported to the Security Council;

“5.   Recognizes the important role of the League of Arab States in matters relating to the maintenance of international peace and security in the region, and bearing in mind Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations, requests the Member States of the League of Arab States to cooperate with other Member States in the implementation of paragraph 4; …

So this does authorize the bombing and strafing of forces besieging Benghazi, but that doesn’t mean it will be effective.  For the most part, though, the resolution ties paragraph 4 to paragraphs 6, 7, and 8:

“6.   Decides to establish a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in order to help protect civilians;

“7.   Decides further that the ban imposed by paragraph 6 shall not apply to flights whose sole purpose is humanitarian, such as delivering or facilitating the delivery of assistance, including medical supplies, food, humanitarian workers and related assistance, or evacuating foreign nationals from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, nor shall it apply to flights authorised by paragraphs 4 or 8, nor other flights which are deemed necessary by States acting under the authorization conferred in paragraph 8 to be for the benefit of the Libyan people, and that these flights shall be coordinated with any mechanism established under paragraph 8;

“8.   Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to enforce compliance with the ban on flights imposed by paragraph 6 above, as necessary, and requests the States concerned in cooperation with the League of Arab States to coordinate closely with the Secretary General on the measures they are taking to implement this ban, including by establishing an appropriate mechanism for implementing the provisions of paragraphs 6 and 7 above …

Any nation can interpret that any way they want, which is why it’s written the way it is.  The UN did specifically preclude ground forces being used, and even in paragraph 4, at least strongly suggests that the military effort was supposed to be confined to Benghazi and other areas where civilians were threatened by imminent military action on the part of Gaddafi.

Update II: This didn’t take long, did it?  Via commenter Weight of Glory, the Arab League’s demand for action from the West has now turned into criticism of overstepping the mandate:

A coordinated attack by Western forces targeting Libyan air capabilities and armor appears to have succeeded in damaging Libyan military installations and armor, but Arab support for the no-fly zone may be waning.

Arab League head Amr Moussa told reporters Sunday that the Arab league thought the use of force was excessive following an overnight bombing campaign that Libya claims killed at least 48 people.

“What we want is civilians’ protection, not shelling more civilians,” he was quoted saying by the Associated Press.

What exactly did they expect, after waiting until Gaddafi was already in Benghazi to ask the UN to act?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

He picked Pitt to go to the final 4. They gone!

VegasRick on March 20, 2011 at 3:40 PM

Already, dufus jinxed the final four faves and Urkel just lost Ohio 2012 if he jinxes them!

“Cousin Eddie” screws up all that he touches, should have kept his mouth shut or picked all the teams from a deep blue state like CA.

Just jinxed all CA teams or the ones from states with few electoral votes.
Utah or I DA HOE!

dhunter on March 20, 2011 at 3:57 PM

The playbook, and who is on which side, is getting more and more confusing.

bayview on March 20, 2011 at 4:04 PM

What is funny, I’ve yet to see an actual “Obama” sticker on a car, from the get go. Here, in Las Vegas. It is weird. About a month or so ago, I saw a black, extremely overweight man standing in line at Costco with the very hip Obama T-Shirt. And he was smug, as all get out. Over, what the heck? But he was proud.

betsyz on March 20, 2011 at 4:05 PM

kingsjester on March 20, 2011 at 3:32 PM

That is spectacular and says a lot. It only gives me hope that more people are paying attention than not. Bless you.

betsyz on March 20, 2011 at 4:15 PM

I don’t still don’t get this. What the hell are we doing in the middle of a civil war. There is a civil war in the Congo, and many countries in central Africa. Why are we picking one side in a civil war?

Chudi on March 20, 2011 at 4:15 PM

I can’t believe that it has taken over 25 years to avenge the attempted assassination of Dr. Emmett L. Brown.

YYZ on March 20, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Now, she is completely silent. Not a peep.

Shiny_Tiara on March 20, 2011 at 11:02 AM

Hound her a$$ for an answer. Press her til she gives you one.
Disgusting.

Badger40 on March 20, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Fred Astaire just danced with firecrackers. Obama’s doing the salsa with Tomahawks.

kingsjester on March 20, 2011 at 3:46 PM

heh….salsa with Tomahawks.. that’s a good one.

ted c on March 20, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Why are we picking one side in a civil war?

Chudi on March 20, 2011 at 4:15 PM

We’re not doing it. The U.N. now makes all decisions on how U.S. military assets are to be deployed. The soverign U.S. no longer does that. Darfur and the Congo are probably next in line. Oh, and we need to cut defense spending.

a capella on March 20, 2011 at 4:25 PM

BTW, Nolan Smith just took over the game for Duke against Michigan.

a capella on March 20, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Seven Percent Solution on March 20, 2011 at 3:11 PM

I swear, the only time I’ve actually seen an Obama stupid sticker on the bumper of a car, was this wild, and gold-tone- Corvette, and zummmmming, California Corvette, swerving in and out of traffic, like a god special. Then I saw a black youngster with an Obama T-shirt at Costco.. Obese, to be kind..

betsyz on March 20, 2011 at 4:32 PM

http://audioboo.fm/boos/307814-usaf-ec-130j-steel-74-transmitting-on-6877-0-khz-libya-20-march-2011

USAF aircrew enjoying mojitos by the pool flying combat sorties in/around Gulf of Sidra and warning Libyan naval vessels to remain in port or be destroyed.

ted c on March 20, 2011 at 4:33 PM

I can’t believe that it has taken over 25 years to avenge the attempted assassination of Dr. Emmett L. Brown.

YYZ on March 20, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Heh!
No McFly Zone over Libya.

darwin-t on March 20, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Anyone remember this?

“We are content and happy if Obama can stay forever as the president of America.”

That was during Gaddafi’s rambling speech to the UN.

Wonder if he still feels that way? LOL

ButterflyDragon on March 20, 2011 at 4:41 PM

So, is Obama “for” or “against” NO BLOOD FOR OIL?

The left made such a big stink out of this meme not that long ago. The thought that liberals may be on “my side” in this war is giving me a creepy, somewhat sullied sensation…

I need a wash…

Roy Rogers on March 20, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Hate to say it but I think Duke can take Kansas.

a capella on March 20, 2011 at 4:43 PM

Looks like it times we ge the chants going, no blood for oil.

Obabay the hypocrite.

tarpon on March 20, 2011 at 4:44 PM

“To our son, his excellency, Mr Barack Hussein Obama. I have said to you before, that even if Libya and the United States of America enter into a war, god forbid, you will always remain a son. Your picture will not be changed.”

Turns out Obama is a Libyan… Didn’t see that coming.

Papa must have been a rolling stone.

Roy Rogers on March 20, 2011 at 4:46 PM

Arab support for the no-fly zone may be waning.

Otherwise known as Lucy picking up the football just as Charlie Brown is kicking it. Again.

pedestrian on March 20, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Well, Geez, now Althouse is piling on. How unfair.
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/03/president-does-not-have-power-under.html

a capella on March 20, 2011 at 4:53 PM

Heh!
No McFly Zone over Libya.

We would be wise to strategically place Fotomats all over Benghazi.

YYZ on March 20, 2011 at 4:55 PM

The Arab League was only kidding ……

Is that the NBA branch of the Arab League? What league is it? Certainly not one to be taken seriously. Unfortunately Odumbo is way to busy in Rio to get all this straightened out. Hillary, do something.

highninside on March 20, 2011 at 4:56 PM

Michigan might win this thing. Hell!

a capella on March 20, 2011 at 4:56 PM

dang it duke…i hate it when coach k does the ‘drag the time out’ and then fails to make a basket….

UGHHHHHHHH

cmsinaz on March 20, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Hope he’s getting enough golf in. Being President Present AND learning how to RUMBAHHHH with Michelle can be exhausting!!!

Roy Rogers on March 20, 2011 at 5:00 PM

ok duke…don’t scare me like that again…

geez louise

cmsinaz on March 20, 2011 at 5:03 PM

124 Tomahawks fired so far.

122 – U.S.

2 – U.K.

BallisticBob on March 20, 2011 at 3:18 PM

You know Obowma is not going to replace those missiles…

… don’t you?

Seven Percent Solution on March 20, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Seven Percent Solution on March 20, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Not after gutting the defense budget.

This “expletive” is disarming the United States

Roy Rogers on March 20, 2011 at 5:09 PM

From Ace and the NYT:
A little war porn, if I may dare.(wink)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/world/africa/21benghazi.html?_r=1&src=twrhp

a capella on March 20, 2011 at 5:20 PM

Civilians vs. Civilians

Qaddafi to arm 1,000,000 Libyan women and men by tomorrow, according to al-Reuters.

Gotta protect ’em all, right, Barry?

Christien on March 20, 2011 at 5:26 PM

FEEEEEL the anger Mr. President? Probably not, he can’t get by his own ego long enough.

jeanie on March 20, 2011 at 5:30 PM

If this is to be fair let it be fair. Arm everyone with a pistol and a saber. Last Muslim standing gets to dictate who can buy teh Precious.

[email protected] on March 20, 2011 at 5:36 PM

I still haven’t figured out when Kaddafi gets his apology for the US acting this way. Apparently, the new and hotness is that we bomb first-apologize later??? just trying to catch up, round here….

ted c on March 20, 2011 at 5:36 PM

I still haven’t figured out when Kaddafi gets his apology for the US acting this way. Apparently, the new and hotness is that we bomb first-apologize later??? just trying to catch up, round here….

ted c on March 20, 2011 at 5:36 PM

The new and hotness is occupied learning to RUMBAHHHH with the fat and feckless wife.

Roy Rogers on March 20, 2011 at 5:44 PM

Loud blasts have been heard in the Libyan capital Tripoli, witnesses say, as allied forces resume operations to enforce a no-fly zone.

A plume of smoke was seen rising from the area near the compound of Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi.

Limerick on March 20, 2011 at 5:44 PM

$10 it was ‘most-trusted Major Allahpandit’ and not the U.N

Hey, Mo-Mo, Major Allahpandit has disclaimed all knowledge. Leave his family alone!

Limerick on March 20, 2011 at 5:47 PM

A plume of smoke was seen rising from the area near the compound of Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi.

Limerick on March 20, 2011 at 5:44 PM

No way will we get that lucky!

sharrukin on March 20, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Limerick on March 20, 2011 at 5:44 PM

That was Qaddafi gets for flying his compound in defiance of the NFZ.

Christien on March 20, 2011 at 5:53 PM

s/b That’s what

Christien on March 20, 2011 at 5:56 PM

Here’s what we get for our money:

Saving the Libyan Islamists
While in Darnah, New York Times reporter Anthony Shadid even spoke with Abdul-Hakim al-Hasadi: the man who, according to Libyan government sources, had declared the Islamic emirate. Shadid found al-Hasadi “running Darnah’s defenses.” According to Shadid’s would-be reassuring account of their conversation, al-Hasadi “praises Osama bin Laden’s ‘good points,’ but denounces the 9/11 attacks on the United States.” (One must read backwards from the introduction of al-Hasadi’s name into Shadid’s narrative to realize that these quotes come from him.)

A report from Benghazi in the French daily Le Figaro identifies the same al-Hasadi as the “voice of Libya’s Islamists” and claims that a transitional government could only be formed with his approval. The New York Times — or the Obama administration — might remember that the Osama bin Laden whom al-Hasadi “praises” has declared war on America.

elfman on March 20, 2011 at 6:04 PM

Military hat back on.

I suspect any emitter associated with ADA is dead, dead, dead.

Now coalition air forces are probably facing mechanized ZSU-23-4 and ZSU-57-2(?) SPAAGs. Dunno if Libyans have the 57s and I’m too lazy to look it up. I’m positive they have the 23s because, well, every Soviet client on the face of the earth had 23 SPAAGs. Most 23 SPAAGs, in my experience, are as mechanically reliable as a baseball bat with only a few more moving parts.

Now, the good news; they are optically aimed weapons. Now the bad news: they are optically aimed weapons.

No flier is ever going to tell you they are not afraid of the 23s SPAAGs and EVERY flier will tell you they are scared s**tless of the 57 SPAAGs.

Have we deployed any A-10s? Probably not, they are too much “in the mud” for the current U.S. regime and are probably the best platform to take out SPAAGs.

Maybe the French/Brits have slow moving tank killers?

Regardless, if they use the mud fighters the chances of one of them getting shot down is….interesting.

E9RET on March 20, 2011 at 6:11 PM

Wow, I stand corrected. I claimed he’d NEVER lift a finger against his pastor’s buddy. This seems like a big finger.

runawayyyy on March 20, 2011 at 6:34 PM

E9RET on March 20, 2011 at 6:11 PM

Or the pilot sitting in Nevada takes the shot in Carthage. Gotta love low and slow and hard to see robots.

Limerick on March 20, 2011 at 6:37 PM

…the Arab League’s demand for action from the West has now turned into criticism of overstepping the mandate…

I say pull the plug and tell the Arab League to F*** Off. From here on out, no help for Arabs (note that I didn’t say Muslims, I’m talkin’ ANY Arab). Bunch o’ freakin’ ingrates…

Big John on March 20, 2011 at 6:40 PM

First they say okay, now they are unhappy? We should take our toys and go home. Let the Arab League handle it. Screw them!

GFW on March 20, 2011 at 7:40 PM

CWforFreedom on March 20, 2011 at 11:13 AM

Channeling Olberidiot

Ha! nice try! Those to statements are not even close!
President Obama’s statement has 31 words, and that ingnoramus Nazi Bush statement only has 27 words!

Obama has a broad coalition and Bush only had coalition forces!

/s

BTW Olberidiot Worst Persons For March 20 2011
is O’Keefe for his, now 2 week old, NPR tapes!

DSchoen on March 20, 2011 at 7:45 PM

This is a covert operation launched from our Base in Tunisia. The rebels are manipulated by our intelligence community and supported by the US President. If Obama didn’t use the military to support the US backed rebels, this would go down as his version of the Bay of Pigs.
I would have rather have Obama attack Cuba and remove the Castro’s, but then again Cuba does have oil, only the oil in the Gulf of Mexico.
This brings back memories of how we acquired Hawaii.
I am waiting to see who the “puppet” is that the US puts in power.
We will not loose this one.

Szabla on March 20, 2011 at 7:59 PM

Or the pilot sitting in Nevada takes the shot in Carthage. Gotta love low and slow and hard to see robots.

Limerick

VERY good idea and point. Clearly I’m an old warhorse who discounts/overlooks current tactics. Yeah, a couple Mavericks fired from Predators would give Job the whillies.

Hmmmm, haven’t they dumb some of them (MAVS) down from tank grade killers to car killers? wonder if that impedes their effectiveness (Jeez, you dummy, they’re packing the “good stuff”!!!) Sheesh!

I’m getting too old.

E9RET on March 20, 2011 at 8:42 PM

E9RET on March 20, 2011 at 6:11 PM

Now, the good news; they are optically aimed weapons. Now the bad news: they are optically aimed weapons.

Now the good news, It’s very hard to see a drone flying at 25000ft.
If they can see it the ZSU-57-2 max range is 4 km/ 13,123ft.

The pilot (in an air conditioned office somewhere in Nevada USA) flying the drone might be impressed by the fireworks show while waiting for his Hellfire missile or 500lb GBU bomb to return that fireworks show at ground level, front row seats for the ZSU-57-2, within 3 m for the 500lb GBU, within 30cm for the Hellfire missile.

The ZSU-57-2 was built to be very deadly to WW2 planes, we don’t fly WW2 planes anymore.
It is deadly against Helicopters, we don’t use Helicopters to enforce a NFZ.

The ZSU-23-4M4 uses radar, if they hot up their radar they will be destroyed by more different types of weapons than I can list.

Maybe the French/Brits have slow moving tank killers?

Yes there called Drones! Well the Brits have the same drones we have, the French attack birds use The GIAT 30.
The GIAT 30
Shell 30x150mm
Action Seven-chamber revolver
Rate of fire 2500 rounds/min (41rounds per second/per barrel.)
Muzzle velocity 1025 m/s

Not as good as the A-10, but good enough.

DSchoen on March 20, 2011 at 9:19 PM

First they say okay, now they are unhappy? We should take our toys and go home. Let the Arab League handle it. Screw them!

GFW on March 20, 2011 at 7:40 PM

Nope, another failure to understand the western way of war. We, even the French , play for keeps. Arabs are much into the big words no deeds war. Hey, it kind off remind me of someone. :)

El Coqui on March 20, 2011 at 9:44 PM

USA – tapped out and militarily stretched. If the Arab League wants us to knock it off, then we should knock it off and simply fly away. Let the religon of peace figure it out for themselves.

exdeadhead on March 21, 2011 at 12:44 AM

I just hope we get the Lockerbie bomber.

There is no good ending to this as far as the US is concerned.

The dictator stays or the Islamists take over.

Probably best to let them have at themselves without our intervention.

Sherman1864 on March 21, 2011 at 1:06 AM

We should have left this to the Arab world. In the end the radical Islamists will get Libya. Same with the rest of the middle-east.

In a somewhat related vein, I wish the moderate Muslims would at least take a stand against their evil brothers. But I am not really sure there are that many moderate Muslims.

When push comes to shove, I hope passive moderate Muslims will realize that passivity in the face of evil in Islam makes them quite responsible for what is going on . . . uh . . . for example, Jihad??

They do share the blame.

Sherman1864 on March 21, 2011 at 1:13 AM

Well, let’s see the pictures of the “Baby Milk Plant” that the missiles destroyed.

kens on March 21, 2011 at 8:29 AM

Boy, have I been out of the loop.

Count to 10 on March 21, 2011 at 8:45 AM

Probably best to let them have at themselves without our intervention.

Sherman1864 on March 21, 2011 at 1:06 AM

Agreed.

maverick muse on March 21, 2011 at 8:50 AM

Cruise missiles seem excessive, though. Don’t we have any cheaper, shorter range ordinance?
Those Destroyer gunships would have been very cost-effective in these circumstances.

Count to 10 on March 21, 2011 at 8:54 AM

When the Brokaw media determined to hail WWII vets as “The Greatest Generation” –knowingly or not– the subliminal message reaching today’s generally ignorant populace is not to defend the US Constitution or to defend against the invasion of the USA proper interior as America fought to protect prior to 1945. Rather, the ideals that WWII vets fought to protect have been dispensed with and discarded decades ago; and the point promoted by globalists has been the glorification of warfare itself, to stimulate the public willingness to hop from one moral outrage to another, thrusting our Military interventions into engagements as if to protect another nation’s civilians, without properly naming the enemy and the plan to achieve and withdraw, amounting to never ending wars growing now into ever increasing regions and nations.

The most heinously uncivilized and egregious outrage from our own leaders, and from the UN, is formally announcing their target of nation leaders for permanent removal. That is organized global terrorism. Going against our own American Constitution to this degree leaves our own leaders openly vulnerable from attack by foreign interests, and without moral recourse given that we wound and released the terroristic tit for tat at play.

“War on Terror”? No. War of Terror. It’s a moronic deception to claim that you must destroy all international stability and civility in order to preserve civilization, that black ops is the new civility, that the US and any nation can invade another without having been first invaded by that other nation; such convolutions destroy whatever civility exists between opposing nations, as well as dividing alliances.

Compared to the evil behind the curtain using American tax funds, Qadhafi is not the enemy so much as are the world leaders who force new “revolutionary” wars for unnamed causes touting “for the children” or “for the foreign nation civilians” as if truthful. The media and governments are not in the business of reporting reliable and scientific facts, but rather, their propaganda that often is entirely whole cloth, sheer fabrications.

Beating all the war drums all the time will not fool all the people all the time.

No better way to kill the Tea Party movement than to instigate, arm and actually participate in the demise of global stability. Distract, distract, distract. Bankrupt, borrow, print, and BAIL-OUT. No, force the governing pirates to walk the plank of electoral defeat.

Secure American Borders and the Dollar:

’12 Clean Our Own House

maverick muse on March 21, 2011 at 8:54 AM

Is see the isolationists are out in force.

Count to 10 on March 21, 2011 at 8:58 AM

What is especially disappointing is that if this had been Bush instead of Obama, we could probably have avoided doing most of this. Obama failed through his indecision on this (and nearly everything else) to cash in on “the threat” of the use of force. He has taken the threat of the use of force off the table as a first move more than once, so now that the threat was gone.
Bush got Libya to drop their nuclear program based entirely on the thread that Bush was crazy enough to use force. Our clone of Tuvok has no military Arab “street cred.”

J_Crater on March 21, 2011 at 11:09 AM

But I am not really sure there are that many moderate Muslims.

When push comes to shove, I hope passive moderate Muslims will realize that passivity in the face of evil in Islam makes them quite responsible for what is going on . . . uh . . . for example, Jihad??

They do share the blame.

Sherman1864 on March 21, 2011 at 1:13 AM

When millions of your brethren are waiting to kill you for blasphemy & apostasy ect., it’s not easy to have courage as a muslim.
And it’s real hard to work around the fact that the koran mandates these things.
So unless there is a big movement to trash large parts of the koran, you’ll never really have a ‘moderate’ muslim.

Badger40 on March 21, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Sherman1864: “I’m just hope we get the Lockerbie bomber.”

I see. Then you’re satisfied we got KSM? Let OBL escape justice?

Because Libyan officials now confirm what everyone suspected; Kaddafi masterminded the Lockerbie bombing. Megrahi was Lockerbie’s KSM.

Remind Lockerbie orphans and widows again: What’s the statute of limitations on mass murdering American civilians?

Nemo me impune lacessit

Terp Mole on March 21, 2011 at 2:22 PM

Sherman1864: We should have left this to the Arab world.

I see. Then we should have left Afghanistan to Pakistan? Because (in the end) the radical Islamists will get Afghanistan? Same with anywhere else OBL bases his operations?

What kind of defeatist logic is that?

Sherman1864: I wish the moderate Muslims would at least take a stand

You wish? Wish in one hand, crap in the other, and see which one fills up first.

Please try harder to think clearly about this global war on terrorism. The left is infecting the right with their Quisling pox of appeasement.

Terp Mole on March 21, 2011 at 2:30 PM

MJBrutus whined: you are a child. The fact is that you have no knowledge of any intent of Momo to support or conduct a violent act against us or our allies prior to the UN resolution. That is a very significant difference and not just a rhetorical difference.

Wow. Step away for the NCAA Tourney and you have a tantrum. This shall not stand.

The fact that MJBrutus argues for Kucinich-Buchanan appeasement by lying about the Reagan/Lockerbie timeline tells folks all they need to know about his “knowledge” of Momo.

The cited facts stand and your argument fails.

Grade: F- (miserable failure)

/dismissed

Terp Mole on March 21, 2011 at 2:46 PM

The ZSU-57-2 was built to be very deadly to WW2 planes, we don’t fly WW2 planes anymore.

The ZSU-23-4M4 uses radar, if they hot up their radar they will be destroyed by more different types of weapons than I can list.

Maybe the French/Brits have slow moving tank killers?

…Yes there called Drones! Well the Brits have the same drones we have, the French attack birds use The GIAT 30.

…Not as good as the A-10, but good enough.

DSchoen on March 20, 2011

Very good, sir. I’ll look up the GIAT. I’ve been negligent in my research on new European weapons. Back in my NATO day the “French, new innovations” page of the NATO book was pretty dusty.

As for the 57 SPAAG. It might have been designed for WWII but it was used in great effect in Vietnam. The average kill on a B-57 and/or F-4 was 1.7 hits per aircraft.

57s were emplaced on every rook in Baghdad during the first Gulf War and at least one of our cruise missiles was knocked down by either a 57 or 23. Magic “BB” meets aero-machine.
\23s were initially designed to fire optically, they still retain that capability.

Just because you can’t see something doesn’t mean you can’t kill it. Our 117 brought down in Bosnia was probably done in by SA-3s fired indiscriminately in likely airspace. Iraqis relied on the same theory.

“Wild Weasel” drivers wanted to know about iron ADAs as much as ADA emitters during the 1st Gulf War, I can’t believe they are not still as concerned; remember, 1.7 hit with a 57 is all it takes.

Please don’t equate old with useless. I still carry a mdl. 1911 Colt .45 made in 1913 for the simple reason that 1. it fires when I pull the trigger and 2. it’s as deadly now as it was when a young cavalryman (my grandfather) was learning to shoot it from horseback in 1917. I just “re-purposed” it. ;-)

E9RET on March 22, 2011 at 11:33 AM