Campaign Design and Strategy in Libya

Abu Muqawama: Post

Abu Muqawama retains its autonomy and the views and beliefs expressed within the blog do not reflect those of CNAS. Abu Muqawama retains the right to delete comments that include words that incite violence; are predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass; or degrade people on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. In summary, don't be a jerk.

May 26, 2011 | Posted by Abu Muqawama - 6:07pm | 258 Comments

From the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — President Obama has subtly shifted Washington’s public explanation of its goals in Libya, declaring now that he wants to assure the Libyan people are “finally free of 40 years of tyranny” at the hands of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, after first stating he wanted to protect civilians from massacres.

But if regime change is now the goal in Libya, Mr. Obama’s trip through Europe this week has highlighted significant tensions over how much time the NATO allies have to finish a job that is now into its third month.

Mr. Obama has urged strategic patience, expressing confidence that over time the combination of bombing, sanctions and import cutoffs will force Colonel Qaddafi from power. “Time is working against Qaddafi,”’ Mr. Obama said on Tuesday during a news conference in London with Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain.

But in Europe and in Libya, patience is calculated differently. Many countries are struggling with the rapid pace of operations, and some, like Norway, have already said they will sharply reduce their forces beginning next month. Colonel Qaddafi, according to NATO officials, has a calculation of his own under way: Indicted by the International Criminal Court, he now has few places to go and nothing to lose from waiting out NATO and betting that European public opinion will tire of the bombing campaign and its costs.

The U.S. and allied military campaign in Libya is an embarassment. From the very beginning, U.S. and allied political and strategic objectives have been unclear, and thus U.S. and allied military forces have been asked to carry out military operations without a clear commander's intent or end state. Out of all the operations orders that have been issued by the U.S. military for operations in Libya, in fact, only one -- the order to carry out the evacuation of non-combatants -- included an end state. None of the other orders issued to and by the U.S. military included an end state, in large part because senior military and civilian leaders either could not or chose not to explicitly articulate what the end state might be. The U.S. and allied military intervention is thus the very definition of an open-ended military intervention -- the kind in which most U.S. decision-makers swore we would never again engage after Iraq and Afghanistan.

The U.S. military, meanwhile, is sadly on familiar territory. The U.S. Army, in response to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (in which the military was asked to operate in a complex environment with often unclear policy guidance), developed commander's appreciation and campaign design (.pdf) to help officers properly frame and understand the problems in front of them. Good campaign design does three things:

It describes, as best as possible, what the intent of the commander might be,
It describes the campaign approach,
And it describes any factors that would force subordinate units and commanders to think differently about the problem.

Campaign design is a great tool for commanders, but it is also the reflection of a bigger problem -- one identified and described most eloquently by Hew Strachan in this essay in Survival. It is what happens when you leave military commanders to figure out strategy and policy for themselves. Speaking of the war in Afghanistan, Strachan writes,

Arguably, strategy has been absent throughout the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In part that is because the political objects have been unclear, or variable, or defined in terms too broad to be deliverable in strategic terms. Because there has been no clear relationship between the ends and the limited (and often inappropriate) means, strategy is simply not possible. The result has often been war shaped by platoon and company commanders, a series of ill-coordinated tactical actions, where killing and casualties define success, rather than the objectives of securing the population, establishing law and order, and delivering aid and reconstruction. Counter-insurgency theory has stepped in to give shape to what has happened. The US Army's Field Manual 3-24, published in December 2006, is a clear illustration. But, while positive in so many ways, counter-insurgency doctrine has only served further to complicate the relationship between the operational level of war and strategy. ...

If Obama really is to marshal his generals (not to mention his allies), he must have a policy which meets and channels operational effects. True, this is only one facet of the challenges which he confronts, and he will not be able to give his operational commanders clear and consistent guidance without significant opportunity costs - costs which will be borne in both regional and domestic politics. These are the issues which the McChrystal affair has brought into sharp relief. Resolving the latter has not removed the pressures of the former. As Henry Kissinger observed of McChrystal's dismissal, 'America needs a strategy, not an alibi'.

Truer words, etc.

I am in part frustrated because the difficulties of Libya were so painfully easy to predict. But I am also frustrated because the United States has now been applying force in Libya for over two months without explaining why. What is the political end we are trying to achieve? The United States needs to be honest with both its allies and its military. Because we should expect the U.S. military to go to great lengths to understand the environment and the enemy, but what makes the military intervention in Libya so embarassing is that the U.S. military is once again in the position of laboring to divine the intent of its own elected and appointed leaders.

P.S. That New York Times article also includes this gem: "[The Europeans would] like the war to be over, and have it done properly with no allied casualties or collateral damage to civilians." In related news, I want a winged unicorn for my birthday.

Libya

258 comments

Comment by Aaron Ellis (ThinkStrat) on May 26, 2011 - 6:27pm

I started reading Sherard

I started reading Sherard Cowper-Coles's book today, about his time in Afghanistan, and, from the start, he takes a passive voice about policy and strategy. 'Each year [our generals] assured us that, at least, they had the strategy and resources they needed to do the job. This year at last, they said each year, we were going to turn the corner.' My reaction each time he does this has been, "Well, where are the politicians and the diplomats in strategy-making here?"

Comment by Visitor on May 26, 2011 - 7:07pm

They're called alicorns.

They're called alicorns. (Which is also the name often applied to a regular unicorn's horn, confusingly enough.)

Have you commented, btw, on the possible application of the WPA to the Libya operation? Most commenters have been fairly incoherent on the subject when they bring it up at all. I don't always agree with you but you are rarely incoherent.

Comment by Kellie Strøm on May 26, 2011 - 9:11pm

I don't see a lack of clarity

I don't see a lack of clarity on the political and strategic objective - it's been clear from before the UNSC resolution that the US, UK and France want the regime gone and a transition to democracy.

That the requirement toprotect the civilian population leads to this objective has also been clear from the start.

That the only way out would be via Gaddafi's removal was clear once the UNSC referred the case to the ICC.

That there is political sensitivity around the phrase regime change is not new.

That the form of words to describe legal justification is different to the form of words used to describe the political objective is not a new or unusual phenomenon.

That the end state is intended to be that already publicly determined by the opposition in Benghazi has been clear from the start, as has the intent that the opposition should be the ones to complete the achievement of that end state.

This last part is key. NATO is not supposed to reach the end state by itself. A purely NATO imposed end state would be a failure. Some lack of control is essential to success. But all that is not the same as having no strategy, and no intended end state. Rather, it's a multi-player incremental strategy as opposed to the linear IKEA-style instruction leaflet some seem to want.

Comment by Visitor on May 26, 2011 - 9:15pm

Has anyone made a decision on

Has anyone made a decision on who will be in charge of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Libya yet?

Do we have a name AM?

If not, can you find the name of the NATO Commanding Operations Officer in Charge of this current Mission?

And has this person set a date or time period.... month / year on when the CPA / NATO will take control of Tripoli?

Even if the date were two years from now, someone needs to take control (%hit or get off the pot) and set a firm time-line on when the CPA / NATO will be on the ground and in control of the capitol, otherwise WE ARE WASTING OUR TIME AND MONEY. If that is the case and people are too scared to make hard decisions, we should remove ourselves immediately from this situation.

Comment by BK Price on May 26, 2011 - 9:47pm

KS, It may have been clear

KS,

It may have been clear that the ultimate goal was regime change but the administration (including the President when he eventually shared his thoughts with the nation) made it clear that regime change would NOT be achieved via military power. The military, according to this initial guidance, was only to prevent the indiscriminate bombing and shelling of the civilian population. Regime change was expected to be the result of pressure applied via other non-military means. So the only "end state" that was provided to the military was to keep bombing forces that threatened civilian populations until something else caused the Libyan regime to resign. That's not really an *end state* so much as a "just keep doing what you're doing until we figure out something else."

Cheers!

Comment by Zathras on May 27, 2011 - 12:23am

"Strategic patience" is that

"Strategic patience" is that quality called for from the American public when those calling for it have screwed up, and require the verdict on their screwing up to be postponed until some indefinite future date.

Comment by Elf on May 27, 2011 - 5:36am

"open-ended military

"open-ended military intervention"

Aren't they all? Unless you have the strength to walk away.

The guidance you seek is from the 4th Estate, they got us into this...that and social media.

Comment by Elf on May 27, 2011 - 5:50am

In all fairness the United

In all fairness the United States's Grand Strategy is certainly the maritime strategy we inherited from the British, who copied it from the Dutch. We also seemed to have pursued a Grand Goal of spreading Liberalism* and Democracy, in particular where we were forced or felt compelled to conduct regime change (Germany, Japan, elsewhere). In that regard over the long term we've had more success than failure. I am talking the last century. The fact that you have the Libyan NTC even talking about democracy and Human Rights is one example of it's success. Let's remember that our democratic Republic began in 1215 with Magna Carta, or so we were taught. I don't necessarily agree with the latter goal of spreading democracy, I absolutely agree with the maritime strategy.

*I mean classical Liberal values.

Comment by Jason on May 27, 2011 - 7:58am

"it's been clear from before

"it's been clear from before the UNSC resolution that the US, UK and France want the regime gone and a transition to democracy."

No, not really. What we've heard is pussy-footing around the idea that the West has a moral obligation to "protect civilians" from Qaddafi, there's been in the past and in the resolution the note that this isn't about regime change. And at the same time, there are those "subtle hints" that this is really what it's all about. If the issue is regime change, then it ought to be clearly stated and NATO should immediately invade Libya and set up its own provisional government.

That said, if we're that stupid to go along with another goat-rope that will only surpass Iraq's occupation in FAIL (other than spending billions of dollars a year for a decade), then we truly are lost as a democracy and should give up any right to the label "intelligent species."

Comment by MikeDC on May 27, 2011 - 9:31am

Then intent of elected

Then intent of elected leaders is to get re-elected.

Beyond that, I'm of two minds.

My primary belief is that just because the intent and strategy isn't openly defined doesn't mean it doesn't exist. To me, there's a pretty clear strategy and intent here. Despite all the whining, the intent is to topple Qaddafi. The strategy is attrition. Wasn't it Ricks who said Qaddafi had three months worth of cash to fight with?

So we're two months into it, and NATO need only continue to force Qaddafi to keep expending his resources through low-intensity bombing and allowing the rebels slow advance. If this theory is right, at some point in the next month or so, Qaddafi runs out of money, then mercenaries, then his force collapses.

The US (less so our allies, but oh well) can afford to thread the needle of keeping up enough pressure on Qaddafi while expending so little in proportion to our own wealth that we skirt the domestic policy issues. The lack of a clear public definition is a domestic political maneuver because, even if it's relatively cheap, few here have the real stomach for it, and we don't want to be on record that we have to support Qaddafi after he's gone.

Comment by Nuts...... on May 27, 2011 - 11:01am

Andrew, I am worn out. I

Andrew, I am worn out. I will save the long response and the miss spellings.

Obama and his administration have gone off the deep end. Someone needs to check his mental state. It goes way past Libya. The results of G8 gave $40B in funding to Arab countries. Read about in the news. FT stated the the non-oil exporting Arab countries are looking for $160B out of Euro banks. How's the bail out of Ireland, Greece, Spain and Portugal going?

The US Congress and Executive Branch really need to work up a Road Map for America. If that does not happen, then the US Supreme Court needs to issue warrants for all Congress and President for extortion of the American Public. Jail can be their work place, government leaders can not fly home for the weekend. Sentence is a complete, usable, and understandable Road Map for America's future.

When the Road Map for America is complete, then everyone can see how all the spending fits into place (Aid for Afghanistan, Aid for Arab Spring, Medicare for Americans, Social Security for American, US Military spending to secure US Corporations abroad, Developments for Infrastructure in the US, Interest payments for US debt.......to infinity).

I am done.

Almost.

Is NATO willing to lose those Apache crews? Will they turn a rescue into a ground mission?

See the future. here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqTNqEyt2zE&feature=related

Comment by Visitor on May 27, 2011 - 12:23pm

"[The Europeans would] like

"[The Europeans would] like the war to be over, and have it done properly with no allied casualties or collateral damage to civilians."

Easy! Just announce we're butting out, and that everyone in Libya should submit to the legal ruler of Libya, i.e. Qaddafi.

Classical international law = peace, order, live civilians, intact property.

Liberal interventionism = war, chaos, dead civilians, destroyed property.

Comment by Visitor on May 27, 2011 - 1:33pm

A sentence written in an

A sentence written in an alternate (intellecutally honest) reality:

"I am in part frustrated because the difficulties of Afghanistan were so painfully easy to predict" (for example, see here: http://www.democracyarsenal.org/2009/12/with-allies-like-these-pt-2.html)

Comment by Kellie Strøm on May 27, 2011 - 3:27pm

It seems to me that "end

It seems to me that "end state" is not a very strategic phrase. The long strategic game only ends for any player at the point where they lose. Those who don't lose that round have to carry on playing until they themselves lose a later round, and the game only ends when death sweeps the last pieces from the board.

In the big strategic game, the point is not to reach the end, but prolong our run as far as we can.

-
BK Price, we're very nearly saying the same thing, but putting it as "just keep doing what you're doing until we figure out something else" ignores the "something else" that has been underway on the ground since Feb 17.

-
Jason, not all regime changes are equal. Regime change directly to the opposition is very different than regime change to an occupation-enforced provisional govt.

Comment by melf on May 27, 2011 - 5:08pm

Happy Memorial Day, Remember

Happy Memorial Day, Remember the Fallen.

Comment by elf on May 27, 2011 - 6:57pm

This could not go unnoticed.

This could not go unnoticed. A member of Pakistan's Parliament and adviser to Mr 10% calls for a Marshall Plan for Pakistan --

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2011-05-27-Marshall-Plan-for-...

At first I LOL'd. But now to Serious'd - sure - after we level you the way we leveled Germany, and India invades from the East leveling you some more along the way.

They actually need a Morgenthau plan.

Comment by Mencius Moldbug on May 27, 2011 - 7:54pm

A Morgenthau Plan for

A Morgenthau Plan for Pakistan! Somebody owes me a keyboard. That's awesome.

Comment by diablotakahe on May 27, 2011 - 7:54pm

i prefer the current state to

i prefer the current state to one where the forecast massacre had been allowed to take place. the 'world' needed to see the 'west' going to war for an objective other than imperialism or revenge.

at least the current road to hell we are travelling is paved with good intentions.

you can all yell at me now.

Comment by Visitor on May 28, 2011 - 10:37am

The declared end state for

The declared end state for NATO operations in Libya (clearly expressed in UNSCR 1970, "An immediate end to the violence and calls for steps to fulfil the legitimate demands of the population," http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N11/245/58/PDF/N1124558.pdf?O...,) not conforming to your desired, narrow conception of a strategic military endstate and not implementing your beloved COIN doctrine doesn't make it any less valid. You fail to grasp the larger picture here---the operation in Libya isn't solely a military operation. Had UNSCR 1970 specifically called for regime change, Russia and China and perhaps even Germany would have likely voted against it instead of abstaining, thus leaving countries interested in intervening in Libya the possibility of repeating the mistakes of Iraq 2003--that is, intervention without international legal legitimacy. As the political process develops, say with Russia yesterday announcing support for regime change, a stated end state from the Obama Administration and NATO that resembles more of what you're looking for may emerge. Regardless, Obama should be applauded for acting within the bounds of international law, a policy stance which, had it been observed by George W. Bush, would have been admirable.

Comment by God Bless America? on May 28, 2011 - 12:11pm

On this Memorial Day Weekend,

On this Memorial Day Weekend, I want to wish those who currently / have served and their family's happiness, peace and I hope things get better.

I'm not sure if those who read this blog realize or even care, but our military is currently dealing with all-time high records for alcohol, prescription drug and illegal drug abuse. Suicide rates for U.S. military members, crime rates for city's adjacent military bases and divorce rates for military members are also at all-time record highs. On top of all this, birth rates for American's are at a record low. See the links below.

http://hometestingblog.testcountry.com/?p=5564

http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2010/07/18/army-suicides-hit-all-t...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/27/us-birth-rate-sets-record_n_697...

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/11/16/most-dangerous-military-towns/

http://www.mndaily.com/2008/12/12/military-divorce-rates-16-year-high

American Military Servicemen and woman are unhappy and involved in far too much self-destructive behavior. One has to scratch their head and ask why? We pride ourselves on being a first world country and savior to those in distress around the world. We take the tired, poor and huddled masses from around the world yearning to breathe free and give them a better place to live......or do we?

On this Memorial Day, let us give thanks for our freedom and remember those who made it possible. As those who have made our freedom possible, have more complications and problems in their personal lives than the average American and our leadership doesn't seem to be making any positive changes to change these figures.

God Bless America?

Comment by Nuts...... on May 28, 2011 - 5:48pm

Visitor at May 28, 2011 -

Visitor at May 28, 2011 - 10:37am.

the possibility of repeating the mistakes of Iraq 2003--that is, intervention without international legal legitimacy.

Go check your facts. Look at the number of nations that signed on for Iraq .vs. the number the said yes to Libya. Iraq was one largely agreed to operation. The Libya signers really only represent a small part of the worlds population. WMD were never found in Iraq and the massacre that Obama based Libya on never happened. AQ were not really involved in either. Think what Andrew is saying, we are repeating history. The devil is, Obama bad mouthed Bush and went and did the same.

God Bless America?..........Really there is no question to it, I would not want to live anywhere else.

Thing that I can not understand is, we have everything and people still live at the lowest energy state.

People are confused. Everyone is going in all directions at once and are still going no where. Family values are really non-existent. Marriage is at a all time low. Single mothers are raising children cause Dad bailed. Now we have people of the same sex wanting to get married, but the biology is a challenge. Personally I think social networking detracts people and they focus on the wrong behaviors.

People need to get their minds right and walk up straight. It is easy to get stuck in a rut when everyone around you is doing the same thing, makes it normal and it is not. People like the endless loop of being the victim cause it releases them of the hard work of being responsible for themselves.

It is hard to pull yourself up by your own boot straps, but people have done it for centuries.

Enjoy Memorial day, take a walk and see the world for the first time.

Comment by B on May 28, 2011 - 6:28pm

Two months ago, when the

Two months ago, when the whole Libya thing started, I got a phone call from a former colleague in the military, who wanted my opinion on whether his unit would deploy there. Naturally, the military rumor mill was pumping out sewage from all outlets, and for whatever reason he had it in his head that I was a fairly reliable analyst. Probably from our trip to Iraq together in 2008, when I predicted that the country would turn into Muslim Mexico.

I predicted that, while it was possible for Libya to collapse on its own or for us to launch an all-out invasion, neither of these scenarios were likely. Most probably, it would turn into a protracted goatfuck due to our country's lack of will to win or reason to be involved aside from the ideological motives of our reptilian overlords. Even those motives ("human rights! social justice! representative government!") are weak when compared to their non-ideological motives (budgets, re-elections, appointments, etc.) Odds were we'd get stuck bombing the place and hoping that Qaddafi resigned; meanwhile, the baboons we were backing would make little to no progress. Eventually, Qaddafi would get tired and offer a deal, which our national leadership would be embarrassed enough to take. Then, we'd wind up advising and assisting some sort of autonomous entity in Eastern Libya. Kosovo redux.

So, I said, my bet is that you WILL deploy to Libya, in a year or so, on a regularly scheduled rotation where you train the Cyrenaica Defense Force to shoot for six months. Meanwhile, that new family moving in down the street? Libyan refugees. Enjoy.

And, check this shit out:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/libyan-rebels-warn-money-...
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/05/2011528143329921352.html

Bottom line, we lack unity of command or a responsible leadership in touch with reality. This is a structural flaw. Thus, we have very little ability to formulate a comprehensive strategy or to implement it in a purposeful way. As a result, we can't impose our will on some dump like Libya or Iraq in any coherent, profitable manner, and everything we do turns into a big embarrassment. This is the kind of shit that led to the French coup attempts of the 50s and 60s, not that it did them much good.

Comment by Fnord on May 28, 2011 - 7:05pm

Its a siege, not an assault,

Its a siege, not an assault, dumbasses. His money will run out in minus x minutes. Jesus, when did the western militaries become news-cycle whores? Its a campaign of max 6 months.

Oh, and apropos Israel and things people dont talk about: Check out the crowing. http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=222417

Caroline Glick is telling your so called president where to stick it.

Comment by elf on May 28, 2011 - 7:15pm

Enjoy your Holiday. I don't

Enjoy your Holiday. I don't feel comfortable saying Happy Memorial Day, but celebrate our freedoms and those who continue to make it possible* as best you can. I will march in the town parade tomorrow, a first for me.

* we're all supposed to guard our Liberty. Remember.

Comment by B on May 28, 2011 - 7:46pm

Fnord-the Russians say that

Fnord-the Russians say that to him who is overly concerned with the problems of others, God gives some of his own.

I mean, are things so stellar in Norway that you need to go to Libya to find problems to solve? This video suggests otherwise:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_p__qffobdE&feature=player_embedded

As far as running out of money, I linked an article which points out that the rebels are having the exact same issues.

Comment by Elf on May 28, 2011 - 10:52pm

@ Fnord, "Jesus, when did the

@ Fnord,

"Jesus, when did the western militaries become news-cycle whores? Its a campaign of max 6 months."

In 91 Fnord me and my fellow 23 year old just back from Desert Storm saw the Kurds relief operation on TV. I said then watch they've found a branch of the Federal govt that works and will use it more and more. And hence we have our modern situation, including where I watched the LA riots and the Somali adventure develop on our local TV stations.

You must be kidding, they've been news-cycle whores since CNN began.

Comment by Visitor on May 29, 2011 - 7:58am

Caroline Glick really does

Caroline Glick really does appear to have problems with fear. While the more concrete substance of that fear seems most likely to be not achieving control over the resources necessary for Israel's long term survival, two examples being water and gas, the more pertinent cause of that fear, for me, is the threat implicit in these words by Gil Scott-Heron.

"There shall be work and security. All shall enjoy equal human rights. The people shall govern."

- June 26 -

Comment by Visitor on May 29, 2011 - 8:08am

Obama said this in

Obama said this in Poland.

“To the American people, even at a time when we have fiscal constraints, even at a time when I spend most of my day thinking about our economy and putting folks back to work … I want the American people to understand we’ve got to leave room for us to continue our tradition of providing leadership when it comes to freedom, democracy, human rights,” Obama said.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55868.html#ixzz1NjoTf7I8

POTUS is sworn to uphold the US Constitution. The US has no obligation to any foreign power or people unless in a treaty passed by Congress.

Obama is full of himself. It is time for him to come home and work on American issues and stop laying the foundation for more off-shored US jobs.

I am not paying this fucking yo yo $400,000/yr for the rest of his live to "think" about the US economy and Obama is all about destroying "tradition". His platform is change.
................IT IS TIME HE CHANGES. Time to take care of the America !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
................WALK the TALK.

Comment by Visitor on May 29, 2011 - 8:42am

A centrist on the question of

A centrist on the question of Israel believes that the settlements represent a corruption of Jewish ideals, but that Israel remains the physical manifestation of a righteous cause.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/05/the-greatest-ac...

In my view, a centrist would consider righteous causes to become too easily the stuff of genocide. It seems to me that a necessary precondition to being a centrist is to identify first as a human being.

Trained in subtle and not so subtle forms of prejudice with one's mother's milk, it takes magnificent effort to identify oneself first as a member of the human race, rather than as a gender, tribe, or nation. To paraphrase more of Gil Scott-Heron: The first change that takes place is in your mind, something that can't be captured on film.

Comment by Fnord on May 29, 2011 - 12:44pm

On Libya> Its the opening up

On Libya> Its the opening up of a new econoomic bloc for Europe, plain and simple. Sarkozys project. Redistributing the wealth in Tun/Lib/Egypt will open up new markets to continue growth. Millions of people want Nokias.

B> That rape statistic is very sqewed, its only assaultrapes in Oslo. And its a problem with africans, mainly. Given that we have no freaking PTSD help for other vets than our own, I am not surprised if a few former childsoldiers go berserk now and then. I always laugh when I read US rightwing reports from occupied Oslo, it reminds me of when CNAS greatest was on television hunting Mullah Krekar about five blocks from my house. Crouching in the bushes, trying to make it look like old Bronx... Lol.

Comment by Major Scarlet on June 1, 2011 - 10:08am

having served in Iraq at the

having served in Iraq at the 3 star staff level, i'd add that the vast majority of our general officer corps don't understand strategy to begins with. they are focused on tactical objectives and success. have very little visibility or concern of long range objectives and "mirror image" with the best of them. i remember reading a debate between Ike Skelton and Gen Caldwell where Mr. Skelton asked him what they were doing to promote officers with vision. Caldwell said that was what the Strategy functional area was created for. the problem with that solution is that you still work for a GO that doesn't "get it" and many times the Strategy staff simply goes along to get along.

Comment by Visitor on June 1, 2011 - 10:43am

Gaddafi getting ready for

Gaddafi getting ready for that peacekeeping force:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/854...

His regime has handed out thousands of weapons to ordinary civilians, saying they would turn Libya into a "living hell" if Nato ground forces invade.

He is also gathering a coterie of young members of his own tribe around him to make a last stand as his regular forces are depleted by defections and Nato bombing.

Anti-Gaddafi activists fear they could unleash a wave of killings and revenge attacks if Col Gaddafi is forced out whether by western military might or negotiations.

“The reason why people are given guns now is because Gaddafi wants it to be chaos whether he is in power or out of power,” said one activist living in a suburb of southern Tripoli.

The regime is playing up the spectre of a wave of vengeance similar to post-2003 Iraq rather than denying it. Moussa Ibrahim, the chief spokesman, said even if there were a negotiated solution opposition leaders like Mustafa Abdul Jalil, chairman of the Benghazi-based Transitional National Council, would be targeted by loyalists.
...
At the time the Nato no-fly zone was imposed, Col Gaddafi said he was issuing a million guns to people across the country. In the days afterwards, journalists were introduced to teenagers and young men proudly brandishing their new Kalashnikov assault rifles.

But the Tripoli activist said that the purpose of the distribution had since become clear. Families applying for weapons had to prove their pro-regime credentials.

Those with identity cards showing they were from areas where there had been anti-Gaddafi demonstrations were automatically refused.

“It is another trick by the regime. They only give weapons to supporters,” he said. “This is what worries us now.”

Comment by Visitor on June 1, 2011 - 11:07am

Visitor @May 29 808 AM You

Visitor @May 29 808 AM

You will pay for democracy, wage serf. Pony up for whenever and wherever Mr. Barak thinks we need to spend money. Right now it's the Libyans' turn and soon, hopefully, it will be the turn of the Pakistanis. No complaining, unless, you are a liberty hating, cowardly, closet Nazi. As the years go by and the number of "liberty" holes (formerly known as potholes) increases in our ever decrepit road system, along with an increasing number of payday loan offices and strip clubs, take pride in what your tax dollars have accomplished and know that America remains #1.

Comment by jonn1 on June 13, 2011 - 10:12am