Excerpt:
Calling the mission Operation Odyssey Dawn, American military forces launched their first missiles against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi on Saturday.
American and British forces fired at least 110 Tomahawk missiles on Saturday, a Pentagon spokesman said at a news conference. Their missiles were aimed at 20 Libyan air and missile defense targets. The operation is intended "to deny the Libyan regime from using force against its own people," the Pentagon said. The five-nation coalition launching the strikes includes the United States, France, Britain, Italy, and Canada, according to Reuters.
Speaking from Brazil, President Obama confirmed the intervention and said that the U.S. is working with a "broad coalition" in its fight against Libya's leader. "We will not deploy any U.S. troops on the ground," the president emphasized, calling the strikes "limited military" intervention. According to a military chief, at least 110 Tomahawk missiles have been launched in Libya.
France struck first, just hours after an international coalition pledged to take military action against Gaddafi. French President Nicolas Sarkozy credited the French strikes for preventing pro-Gaddafi forces from attacking the opposition stronghold of Benghazi.
Speaking on Libya on Saturday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said “we will stand with the people of Libya and we will not waver [in our effort] to protect them.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Odyssey_Dawn
Excerpt:
Operation Odyssey Dawn is the code name for the United States participation in the Libyan no-fly zone.[1] The United Kingdom counterpart to this is Operation Ellamy, the French Opération Harmattan. The no-fly zone was proposed during the 2011 Libyan uprising to prevent government forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi from carrying out air attacks on rebel forces. Several countries have prepared to take immediate military action at a conference in Paris on 19 March, 2011.[2]
[edit] Summary of action
[edit] Day 1: 19 March 2011
21h : Allied operations began with surveillance operations, air attacks and missiles aimed at Libyan military targets. It was reported by the Pentagon that the first strike involved the launch of over 110 Tomahawk cruise missile against shoreline air defenses of the Gaddafi regime.[3][4][edit] Command
The operation is under command of United States Africa Command commanded by General Carter Ham.[5] Tactical command of the operation is executed from USS Mount Whitney in the Mediterranean Sea under command of Admiral Sam Locklear.[5]http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34646.html
Excerpt:
Bush announces launch of Operation Iraqi Freedom, March 19, 2003
On this day in 2003, President George W. Bush announced the launch of Operation Iraqi Freedom "(Remember they wanted to call it Operation Iraqi Liberation 'O.I.L.' ...cal)"
The U.S.-led military strike, according to Bush, sought to rid Iraq of its dictator, Saddam Hussein, and eliminate its ability to develop and deploy weapons of mass destruction.
Bush said, “Helping Iraqis achieve a united, stable and free country will require our sustained commitment.” He acknowledged the substantial domestic opposition to the war and said that he had only “reluctantly” authorized the invasion. At the same time, the president noted his administration’s refusal to “live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.”
Within six weeks, the pre-emptive strike morphed into an occupation. Hussein’s eventual capture by U.S. troops led to his trial in an Iraqi court, which sentenced him to be hanged.
A post-invasion investigation by the Iraq Survey Group concluded that Iraq had ended its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs in 1991 but that it intended to resume production if sanctions were lifted.
Though Bush announced on May 1, 2003, that the U.S. mission had been “accomplished,” violence against coalition forces and among sectarian groups soon escalated into a full-fledged insurgency. Strife between Sunni and Shiite Iraqis continued, and the violent group Al Qaeda in Iraq, which used suicide bombers, emerged.
During the war’s most intense phase, which lasted more than four years, U.S. casualties climbed to more than 3,000 dead, with more than 23,000 wounded. Iraqi civilian fatalities were estimated at more than 50,000.
In February 2009, President Barack Obama announced an 18-month withdrawal window for combat forces, with some 50,000 troops remaining “to advise and train Iraqi security forces and to provide intelligence.”
Source: “Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq,”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/mar/18/relief-fade-real-impact-libya-intervention
Excerpt:
The US was worried about the cost of military action, too, given its ailing economy. Abdel Rahman Halqem, the Libyan ambassador to the UN, has told me that Qatar and the UAE have agreed to foot most of the bill for the operation. And what is the motive of these autocratic states: to protect the Libyan people, a grudge against Gaddafi, or to bind the US further into the region?
So this is the second problem: the main players in this intervention are western powers led by Britain and France with US involvement likely. If Libya's neighbours, Egypt and Tunisia, were playing the leading role that would be something to celebrate. Democratic countries helping their neighbours would have been in the spirit of the Arab uprisings, and would have strengthened the sense that Arabs can take control of their future. It could have happened too: Egypt gets $1.3bn of US military aid a year. Diplomatic pressure by Hillary Clinton could have brought that mighty war horse into the arena, or at least encouraged Egypt to arm the rebels. Instead, an Egyptian foreign ministry spokesperson stated categorically on Wednesday: "No intervention, period."
Unlike in Tunisia and Egypt, the uprising in Libya quickly deteriorated into armed conflict. Gaddafi could question whether those the UN is seeking to protect are still "civilians" when engaged in battle, and suggest instead that the west is taking sides in a civil war (where the political agenda of the rebels is unknown).
And what of the long-term impact of this intervention on Libya, and the world? Here lies yet another concern. Libya may end up divided into the rebel-held east and a regime stronghold in the rest of the country which would include the oil fields and the oil terminal town al-Brega. There is a strong risk, too, that it will become the region's fourth failed state, joining Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen. And that ushers in another peril. Al-Qaida thrives in such chaos; it played a key role in the Iraqi and Afghan insurgencies and is based in Yemen – and it may enter Libya, too. Several of Bin Laden's closest associates are Libyan, and Gaddafi is no stranger to terror groups – the Abu Nidal Organisation found a safe haven in Libya from 1987 to 1999. Gaddafi has also threatened to attack passenger aircraft and shipping in the Mediterranean.
Fifth, there is no guarantee that military intervention will result in Gaddafi's demise. In 1992, the UN imposed two no-fly zones in Iraq – to protect the Kurds in the north and the Shi'a in the south. Saddam remained in power for another 11 years and was only toppled after an invasion. To date, over a million civilians have died in Iraq. The international community has a duty to ensure that this sorry history is not repeated in Libya.
Finally, there is the worry that the Arab spring will be derailed by events in Libya. If uprising plus violent suppression equals western intervention, the long-suffering Arab subjects of the region's remaining autocrats might be coerced into sticking with the status quo.
The Libyan people face a long period of violent upheaval whatever happens. But it is only through their own steadfastness and struggle that they will finally win the peaceful and democratic state they long for.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If this gets to all of yaw'll Good onya and HI to Jeff Farias and Mitch Rubin....... and of course all the rest of you guys and girls that I miss seeing round the streets in good ol Phoenix!!! You're always in my thoughts and prayers and heart. (I hope someone gets this over to Mitch and Jeff as I seemed to have misplaced their emails.)
Good onya Arizona for having the strength to stand up and say NO to war.
Peace, Love and Solidarity,
...cal
TAKE THE LIGHT RAIL to the Roosevelt & Central stop
or park on Portland, one block north of RooseveltThen march to the teach-in with signs and banners.
The U.S.-led military strike, according to Bush, sought to rid Iraq of its dictator, Saddam Hussein, and eliminate its ability to develop and deploy weapons of mass destruction.
Bush said, “Helping Iraqis achieve a united, stable and free country will require our sustained commitment.” He acknowledged the substantial domestic opposition to the war and said that he had only “reluctantly” authorized the invasion. At the same time, the president noted his administration’s refusal to “live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.”
Within six weeks, the pre-emptive strike morphed into an occupation. Hussein’s eventual capture by U.S. troops led to his trial in an Iraqi court, which sentenced him to be hanged.
A post-invasion investigation by the Iraq Survey Group concluded that Iraq had ended its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs in 1991 but that it intended to resume production if sanctions were lifted.
Though Bush announced on May 1, 2003, that the U.S. mission had been “accomplished,” violence against coalition forces and among sectarian groups soon escalated into a full-fledged insurgency. Strife between Sunni and Shiite Iraqis continued, and the violent group Al Qaeda in Iraq, which used suicide bombers, emerged.
During the war’s most intense phase, which lasted more than four years, U.S. casualties climbed to more than 3,000 dead, with more than 23,000 wounded. Iraqi civilian fatalities were estimated at more than 50,000.
In February 2009, President Barack Obama announced an 18-month withdrawal window for combat forces, with some 50,000 troops remaining “to advise and train Iraqi security forces and to provide intelligence.”
Source: “Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq,”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/mar/18/relief-fade-real-impact-libya-intervention
Excerpt:
Relief will fade as we see the real impact of intervention in Libya
Welcome though it seems on humanitarian grounds, there are six serious problems with this UN resolution
The first reaction was relief. The UN security council resolution 1973 authorising foreign intervention in Libya was held up as an attempt to protect the Libyan rebels and alleviate their suffering, and who would not welcome that? Who would not want to stop a bully intent on "wiping out" those who oppose him? But any relief should be tempered by serious misgivings.
First, what motives lie behind this intervention? While the UN was voting to impose a no-fly zone in Libya, at least 40 civilians were killed in a US drone attack in Waziristan in Pakistan. And as I write, al-Jazeera is broadcasting scenes of carnage from Sanaa, Yemen, where at least 40 protesters have been shot dead. But there will be no UN no-fly zone to protect Pakistani civilians from US attacks, or to protect Yemenis. One cannot help but question the selective involvement of the west in the so-called "Arab spring" series of uprisings.
It is true that the US was reluctant to act and did so only after weeks of indecision. Unwilling to become embroiled in another conflict in the region where it would be perceived as interfering in the affairs of a sovereign state, Obama wisely insisted on a high level of Arab and Muslim involvement. At first the signs were good: the Arab League endorsed the move last week, and five member states seemed likely to participate. But that has been whittled down to just Qatar and the UAE, with Jordan a possible third. This intervention lacks sufficient Arab support to give it legitimacy in the region.The US was worried about the cost of military action, too, given its ailing economy. Abdel Rahman Halqem, the Libyan ambassador to the UN, has told me that Qatar and the UAE have agreed to foot most of the bill for the operation. And what is the motive of these autocratic states: to protect the Libyan people, a grudge against Gaddafi, or to bind the US further into the region?
So this is the second problem: the main players in this intervention are western powers led by Britain and France with US involvement likely. If Libya's neighbours, Egypt and Tunisia, were playing the leading role that would be something to celebrate. Democratic countries helping their neighbours would have been in the spirit of the Arab uprisings, and would have strengthened the sense that Arabs can take control of their future. It could have happened too: Egypt gets $1.3bn of US military aid a year. Diplomatic pressure by Hillary Clinton could have brought that mighty war horse into the arena, or at least encouraged Egypt to arm the rebels. Instead, an Egyptian foreign ministry spokesperson stated categorically on Wednesday: "No intervention, period."
The third problem is that, although he is often dismissed as mad, Gaddafi is a master strategist and this intervention plays into his hands. He quickly announced a ceasefire in response, which was claimed by some as an early victory for the UN resolution; in fact, it both deflates the UN initiative and allows Gaddafi to appear reasonable. Meanwhile, a ceasefire at this point suits Gaddafi: under its cover, the secret police can get to work. Similarly, Gaddafi accepted the earlier arms embargo: again, this apparent concession suited him. His regime has sophisticated weaponry, whereas the rebels have few arms.
Gaddafi knows how to play the Arab street, too. At the moment he has little, if any, public support; his influence is limited to his family and tribe. But he may use this intervention to present himself as the victim of post-colonialist interference in pursuit of oil. He is likely to pose the question that is echoing around the Arab world – why wasn't there a no-fly zone over Gaza when the Israelis were bombarding it in 2008/9?Unlike in Tunisia and Egypt, the uprising in Libya quickly deteriorated into armed conflict. Gaddafi could question whether those the UN is seeking to protect are still "civilians" when engaged in battle, and suggest instead that the west is taking sides in a civil war (where the political agenda of the rebels is unknown).
And what of the long-term impact of this intervention on Libya, and the world? Here lies yet another concern. Libya may end up divided into the rebel-held east and a regime stronghold in the rest of the country which would include the oil fields and the oil terminal town al-Brega. There is a strong risk, too, that it will become the region's fourth failed state, joining Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen. And that ushers in another peril. Al-Qaida thrives in such chaos; it played a key role in the Iraqi and Afghan insurgencies and is based in Yemen – and it may enter Libya, too. Several of Bin Laden's closest associates are Libyan, and Gaddafi is no stranger to terror groups – the Abu Nidal Organisation found a safe haven in Libya from 1987 to 1999. Gaddafi has also threatened to attack passenger aircraft and shipping in the Mediterranean.
Fifth, there is no guarantee that military intervention will result in Gaddafi's demise. In 1992, the UN imposed two no-fly zones in Iraq – to protect the Kurds in the north and the Shi'a in the south. Saddam remained in power for another 11 years and was only toppled after an invasion. To date, over a million civilians have died in Iraq. The international community has a duty to ensure that this sorry history is not repeated in Libya.
Finally, there is the worry that the Arab spring will be derailed by events in Libya. If uprising plus violent suppression equals western intervention, the long-suffering Arab subjects of the region's remaining autocrats might be coerced into sticking with the status quo.
The Libyan people face a long period of violent upheaval whatever happens. But it is only through their own steadfastness and struggle that they will finally win the peaceful and democratic state they long for.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If this gets to all of yaw'll Good onya and HI to Jeff Farias and Mitch Rubin....... and of course all the rest of you guys and girls that I miss seeing round the streets in good ol Phoenix!!! You're always in my thoughts and prayers and heart. (I hope someone gets this over to Mitch and Jeff as I seemed to have misplaced their emails.)
Good onya Arizona for having the strength to stand up and say NO to war.
Peace, Love and Solidarity,
ARIZONANS TO SAY NO TO BOMBING LIBYA ON THE EIGHTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE INVASION OF IRAQ
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Noon to 3 p.m. Rally and Teach-In
Noon to 3 p.m. Rally and Teach-In
Rally at noon - Corner of Central & Roosevelt
at the "Release the Fear" melted weapons sculpture
at the "Release the Fear" melted weapons sculpture
Music by the Haymarket Squares
TAKE THE LIGHT RAIL to the Roosevelt & Central stop
or park on Portland, one block north of Roosevelt
Teach-In
424 North Central Avenue
at the Fair Trade Cafe courtyardTAKE THE LIGHT RAIL to the Central & Van Buren (ASU Downtown) stopor park at Central and Fillmore - $4.00 all day.
Speakers
Keynote Speaker - UA Prof. of History and Government
"Saying no to Military Intervention in Libya, the history of the current U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and what we can do to stop the war."
Richard A. Smith, Esq.
Is military intervention in Libya justified? Eight years in Iraq and almost a decade in Afghanistan. How much longer? How many more people killed? How many more cuts here to finance destruction there? How many more trillions? The U.S. spends almost as much on its military as the entire rest of the world combined. Who wins? Those who benefit, the few who profit, will not stop it. Only we can stop it!
Music by talk show host and activist Jeff Farias
at the Fair Trade Cafe courtyardTAKE THE LIGHT RAIL to the Central & Van Buren (ASU Downtown) stopor park at Central and Fillmore - $4.00 all day.
Speakers
David N. Gibbs, Ph.D.
Navy Veteran and Spokesperson of Veterans for Peace, Keynote Speaker - UA Prof. of History and Government
"Saying no to Military Intervention in Libya, the history of the current U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and what we can do to stop the war."
Sylvia Herrera
Co-director TonaTierra Committas Barrio Defense
Richard A. Smith, Esq.
Phoenix Chapter
"The criminal complaint against George W. Bush for acts of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees."
Dan O'Neal
Progressive Democrats of America, Arizona Coordinator
"Healthcare not Warfare!"
Is military intervention in Libya justified? Eight years in Iraq and almost a decade in Afghanistan. How much longer? How many more people killed? How many more cuts here to finance destruction there? How many more trillions? The U.S. spends almost as much on its military as the entire rest of the world combined. Who wins? Those who benefit, the few who profit, will not stop it. Only we can stop it!
Event Sponsors - End the War Coalition
Member groups of ETW Coalition
Arizona Alliance for Peace and Justice
Arizona Institute for Peace Education and Research
Code Pink Phoenix
Grandmothers for Peace
Progressive Democrats of America, Phoenix Chapter
Veterans for Peace, Phoenix Chapter
Women in Black- Phoenix
Member groups of ETW Coalition
Arizona Alliance for Peace and Justice
Arizona Institute for Peace Education and Research
Code Pink Phoenix
Grandmothers for Peace
Progressive Democrats of America, Phoenix Chapter
Veterans for Peace, Phoenix Chapter
Women in Black- Phoenix
Tuesdays 7 PM in the rear meeting room of the
Phoenix Public Market at 721 North Central Avenue
(3 blocks south of Roosevelt) in downtown Phoenix
Phoenix Public Market at 721 North Central Avenue
(3 blocks south of Roosevelt) in downtown Phoenix
Tuesdays 7 PM at the rear public meeting room at the
Downtown Phoenix Public Market721 North Central Avenue (3 blocks south of Roosevelt) Phoenix
email:
Downtown Phoenix Public Market721 North Central Avenue (3 blocks south of Roosevelt) Phoenix
email:
Bring friends and spread the word.
bring sings opposing the new war and the outrageous military spending.
bring sings opposing the new war and the outrageous military spending.
Eight years too many. Oppose the New War.
No comments:
Post a Comment