US pulls out warplanes from Libya: Pentagon

[UrbScotty]

Source: AFP/Raw Story

The US military on Monday withdrew its fighter jets from the international air campaign in Libya, officials said, after NATO asked Washington to keep up bombing raids for another 48 hours.

The United States had planned to halt combat missions and Tomahawk cruise missile launches at the weekend but accepted a NATO request to continue the operations for another 48 hours until Monday.

US combat sorties ended at 2200 GMT, with American warplanes on standby as NATO takes the lead, Pentagon spokesman Captain Darryn James said.

After that, "US aviation assets are expected to cease strike sorties and will remain on an alert status if NATO requests their support," James said in an email.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/04/04/us-pulls-out-warplanes-from-libya-pentagon/

---

Never really was 100% convinced that they should've gone in there in the first place, but glad this step is being taken.

[leveymg]

1. I am no cheerleader for military interventions, but that one was blessedly brief . . . let's

hope it stays that way.

[El Supremo]

2. Now that wasn't so hard, was it? n/m

[TheWraith]

3. I'll wait for the plates of crow to be delivered for the claims we were going to be there forever.nt

[David__77]

5. If NATO withdraws too.

"We" are NATO. NATO is US-led. This is a US-led NATO bombardment, notwithstanding the nominal ownership of the planes.

[joshcryer]

10. I wasn't aware that Charles Bouchard was a United States citizen.

The US is pulling out in Libya, to a very large degree. We've already pulled out most of our ships. As I said from the beginning, our long term presence will be no more than a training exercise or typical deployment missions.

Of course, if the US brings in some big guns because of some atrocities happening (say we have credible evidence that Gaddafi is executing 10-15k people for being dissidents), then I'm sure people will bitch about that, too.

[Posteritatis]

29. Excellent goalpost shifting; I'll give that an 8.5. (nt)

[David__77]

30. I've only had one "goalpost."

I oppose any US initiative to lead or to support any type of military intervention in Libya, whether via NATO, the UN, or any other multilateral organ. I also oppose arming or providing logistical or other military-related support to insurgents in Libya. I expect the US to oppose such things actively. That's my goalpost.

[DCBob]

6. +1

however I suspect the crow eaters will be no shows.

[EFerrari]

14. Who do you all think NATO is? Martians?

[joshcryer]

15. Who do you think NATO is? Germany?

Oh, that's right, Germany, who contributes 50% what the US does to NATO is playing practically no role in the Libyan intervention.

[jakeXT]

24. The US is no.1 with 21-22 % , Germany has 14-15%

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_67655.htm


Your picture shows the percentage of GDP and the big bar is probably from Greece not from Germany



Remember

While Secretary General, Ismay is also credited as having been the first person to say that the purpose of the alliance was "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down," a saying that has since become a common way to quickly describe the alliance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hastings_Ismay,_1st_Baron_Ismay

[DCBob]

16. Are you still claiming the US will bogged down in Libya forever?

If so, you will again be dining on crow.

[EFerrari]

17. You're evading my question, aren't you?

And what do you mean, "again"?

[DCBob]

19. Well, the US getting bogged down in Libya was the original comment I replied to..

seems you should respond to that. As far as evading your question.. any idiot knows US is a major part of NATO.. as are some other countries. So, are you now saying NATO will be bogged down in Libya forever? If so, I belive you will also be crow munching on that one.

[daleo]

22. So far this is a one day withdrawal

And NATO is still involved. The U.S. is the senior member of NATO.

[SpartanDem]

31. You'll be waiting a long time

[seeviewonder]

4. Too bad they were there to begin with.

I'm all for democracy and rebellion against a tyrant who threatened to harm his people for disagreeing with him but it was not our place. Just my opinion.

[MrTriumph]

7. Yep, that was a quick half a billion $ plus

[EFerrari]

18. And while the White House is waffling, the rebels are begging for more

and there are demonstrations over the lack of air support.

The worst of all worlds.

[bvar22]

8. You DO realize this is all a Shell Game?

USA = NATO = USA

Without continuous leadership & support from the USA in Money, Hardware, and Personnel,
there is NO Libyan "Intervention".



If you are not FOR this NEW WAR,
Then you are with The Communists AlQaeda Saddam Qaddafi!!!

[joshcryer]

12. If by US sold military hardware, sure.

If by US logistics run by American military, no.

[joshcryer]

9. But... but... 20 YEARS!

[bhikkhu]

11. This is what Obama said we would do in the first place

So I'm checking this off on my "promises kept" list.

(I certainly hope it stays that way!)

[joshcryer]

13. I hope it stays that way, too.

Because if it changes that means something bad is happening in Libya to require our presence.

Obama made his promise and kept it, and I had no doubt he would.

And the cynical position makes it clear: he wants to get reelected.

[BenzoDia]

20. Agreed, he kept his word.

Hopefully NATO doesn't "call on us".

[IamK]

21. I guess CIA trainers in Libya don't really matter.. What if one dies?

[joshcryer]

23. We won't know about it and his wife and or loved ones will get a nice insurance payout.

Died skiing in the alps.

[PurityOfEssence]

25. self delete

.

[Keith Bee]

26. Obama has pissed off both hawks and doves

Translation: He got it right.

[No Elephants]

27. Pissing off both sides while being wrong is impossible? LOL!

[No Elephants]

28. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!