So the UK and France were going to head this up......

[VoteProgressive]

And now they are doing nothing useful!
What is that deal?

[rpannier]

1. Two words

Sarkozy Cameron

Pretty Much says it all

[BklnDem75]

2. Care to elaborate?

Why do you assume they're doing nothing?

[tekisui]

3. I think the OP overstated it. But, the US is definitely doing the heavy lifting.

[BklnDem75]

4. Why do you think that?

Casualties:

Odyssey Dawn: Multiple anti-aircraft defenses and air force targets damaged or destroyed

Harmattan: 14 soldiers killed,<1> 7 tanks and 2 APCs destroyed<2>

[tekisui]

6. Over 100 US missiles in the opening salvo.

US jet downed. US in largely in charge of the planning. Y

[BklnDem75]

8. I updated my question but will post again

Casualties:

Odyssey Dawn: Multiple anti-aircraft defenses and air force targets damaged or destroyed

Harmattan: 14 soldiers killed,<1> 7 tanks and 2 APCs destroyed<2>


The Pentagon and the British Ministry of Defence confirmed that, jointly, HMS Triumph and U.S. Navy ships (including USS Barry, pictured) and submarines fired more than 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles, supported with air attacks on military installations, both inland and on the coast.

Can you confirm how many of those were American missiles?

[tekisui]

9. UK fired 12 of the 110.

"Defence insiders say as many as 12 of the weapons have been fired from the hunter–killer submarine Triumph in the past four days.

If this is correct, the Navy will have used up to 20 per cent of its 64 Tomahawks in the opening salvos of the war, leading to fears that it is "burning through" its armoury. "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8400079/Libya-Navy-running-short-of-Tomahawk-missiles.html

"Admiral Gortney cast the United States as the “leading edge” among coalition partners in the opening phase of the attack. But in keeping with Mr. Obama’s and Mrs. Clinton’s emphasis that the administration was not driving the efforts to strike Libya, the admiral and other Pentagon officials repeated that the United States would step back within days and hand over command of the coalition to one of its European allies. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/20/world/africa/20libya.html?pagewanted=2

We are leading the opening. That has been widely reported.

[BklnDem75]

19. Though the information is coming only from insiders,

I'll assume it true until a better source comes along. Still doesn't back your claims that we're doing all the heavy lifting. Bigger forces just use more weapons.

[tekisui]

10. U.S. retains leading role in Libya attacks

The prominent role played by the United States in carrying out and commanding the initial coalition attacks on Libya appeared to extend far beyond President Barack Obama's description of a narrow mission in which U.S. forces would play only a supporting part.

Senior U.S. military officials continued Sunday to describe the U.S. involvement as "limited" in extent and duration. They emphasized plans to relinquish command and control responsibilities to coalition partners within days. They repeated Obama's pledge that no U.S. ground troops would be deployed.

But administration officials and military leaders came under a barrage of questions about the parameters of U.S. participation and the operation's goals, especially if Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi does not capitulate.

"There have been lots of options which have been discussed, but I think it's very uncertain how this ends," Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged on CBS's "Face the Nation."

(snip)

A second wave of attacks Sunday, mainly from American fighters and bombers, targeted Libyan ground forces and air defenses, following a barrage Saturday of Tomahawk cruise missiles. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the United States expects to turn control of the mission over to a coalition — probably headed either by the French and British or by NATO — "in a matter of days."

http://www2.journalnow.com/news/2011/mar/21/wsnat02-us-retains-leading-role-in-libya-attacks-ar-877102/

Sorry to break it to you, we are leading this so far.

[BklnDem75]

17. Already debunked

France had planes doing runs before US and British forces started their salvos.

David Cameron, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, confirmed that British aircraft were in action over Libya on the 19th,<21> although it was the French Air Force who made the first coalition aerial presence over Libya earlier the same day.

A French plane fired the first shots against Libyan government targets at 1645 GMT on Saturday, destroying a number of military vehicles, according to a military spokesman.


http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=156574955
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ellamy

[vaberella]

18. Just by the phrasing this particular article has a spin to it.

"attacks"? In any event, the attacks are not mainly from US fighters and bombers---this is a coalition effort. When the first attacks happened it was all French. Sunday is all American, I'm sure Monday was all British. Basically it's a bloody effort and I doubt there is one group firing more than other----and most of the places you're getting your information.

Most of the places I depend on for legitimate news have yet to mention the claims you're getting from yours. I tend to look at the euobserver, AJE, sometimes nyt and wsj. And I'm a bit skepitcal as to some of the claims going on here. However much like the Italians it is true that the Americans are extremely eager to turn over the rest of this to NATO and fast.

[tekisui]

12. Norway jets to operate under US command in Libya: PM

OSLO, Mar 23, 2011 (AFP) - Six fighter jets sent by Norway to the military campaign in Libya will fall under US command for the time being, opening the way for them to take action, Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg said Wednesday.

Norway said this week its six F-16s -- which arrived Monday at a base on the Greek island of Crete -- would not take action until it was clear who was commanding the multinational mission to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya.

"In the coming hours, we will place our planes under US command," Stoltenberg said in parliament.

(snip)

The operation is coordinated from US headquarters in Ramstein in western Germany and Naples in southern Italy, but the United States has said it wants to pass on leadership of the operations.

Many countries, such as Britain and Italy, have said they want NATO to take over command in Libya.

http://www.zawya.com/story.cfm/sidANA20110323T125846ZDVJ69

[BklnDem75]

15. Does not back your claims

[tekisui]

13. Obama: US To Transfer Lead Role In Libya Mission Soon

(RTTNews) - U.S. President Barack Obama said Monday that the United States would soon transfer its current lead role in the ongoing international military mission to enforce a no-fly-zone over Libya to other members of the coalition force involved in the operation.

Speaking while on a visit to Chile, Obama emphasized that there would a "transition taking place in establishing the no-fly zone" over Libya as per a UN resolution passed last week, insisting that the move would come "within a matter of days, not weeks.

He insisted that the U.S. would become "one of the partners among many" with the imminent transfer of its present lead role in the operation. He said "how quickly this transfer takes place will be determined by the recommendation of our commanding officers that the first phase of the mission has been completed."

"The way that the U.S. took leadership and managed this process ensures international legitimacy, and ensures that our partners, members of the international coalition, are bearing the burden of following through on the mission," the President said.


http://www.rttnews.com/Content/GeneralNews.aspx?Id=1580433&SM=1

[BklnDem75]

14. Sorry, but Obama's statement doesn't back what you're insisting

[tekisui]

20. LOL! Funny shit. This is US lead. We are in charge and doing the bulk

of the work so far. We may transition out, but for now we are the big dogs.

[BklnDem75]

21. Well since you say so...

But seriously, you don't know what the French and British are doing, so just like the OP, your claims are more from lack of knowledge than anything else.

[tekisui]

22. You give some evidence that ANYONE is doing more than the US.

Anything at all to prove otherwise. I gave you a shitload of articles,and there are more that show this is a US lead deal. If you claim otherwise, prove it.

[BklnDem75]

23. Articles that had nothing to do with your claim

That's the thing about claims. The burden is on you to back it up. It's not on me to prove you wrong.

[tekisui]

24. You got nothing.

My claim is that the OP overstated, and that US is doing most of the heavy lifting. I showed that the US is in a leadership role and gave information. I understand if you have nothing to counter that. Really, I do.

But, in the outside chance you can show that anyone is doing more than the US, either through leadership, planning or in action, I would love to see it.

[BklnDem75]

25. Except you didn't

Hate to break it to you, but trying to point out what the US is doing does not back yours or the OP's point. If you don't know what the French and British are doing, how can you claim the US is doing more? Showing uninformed, debunked articles is not proof.

[tekisui]

26. Check. You got nothing.

You could easily prove me wrong, if you could.

:rofl:

[BklnDem75]

30. Here's an idea:

Read the OP. Now read your original response. Now try not to move those goalposts. Good luck!

Here's a rundown: OP claims France and UK are doing nothing. You claim the US is doing the heavy lifting. As proof, you post articles showing everything the US is doing and nothing on what the French and British are doing. Pressed to back your claims, you claim victory and run a victory lap. LOL

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BklnDem75]

32. Lol. Personal attacks now?

How dare I make you back your claims! I'm on lunch, so I'll enjoy a good laugh when I get back.

[tekisui]

33. I've backed them up, even did your work for you, as you offered nothing.

You aren't very good at this. I'll let the record stand for anyone to read. :hi:

[BklnDem75]

34. Sorry. It's not my job to prove you wrong.

You make the claim, you back it up. Btw, a quick glance at one of your articles doesn't seem to address your claims at all. You keep trying to equate the US leading role, as if that somehow proves our Allies aren't pulling enough of their weight. Don't blame you there. Can't back a claim, change the claim. Pretty clever! I'll read further and address them point by point.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tekisui]

27. More for you to bury your head in:

NATO Struggles to Define Libya Role as U.S. Prepares Strikes

NATO members failed to agree on an expanded role in Libya, as squabbles prevented the U.S. from handing off command of the campaign against leader Muammar Qaddafi.

The 28-member bloc has yet to find the formula to balance military needs and political sensitivities in the five-day-old operation. France is resisting overall NATO command to encourage more involvement by Arab countries.

“These are difficult discussions on very difficult issues,” alliance spokeswoman Oana Lungescu told reporters in Brussels today. “NATO is ready to act if and when required.”

Foreign ministers of the countries involved in the military operation in Libya will meet March 29 in London, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said. President Barack Obama spoke with U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicolas Sarkozy yesterday to try to resolve the issues, statements from their offices said.

“It paints a pretty bad picture of the political dynamics,” Bastian Giegerich, a consulting fellow at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, said in an interview. “Normally the U.S. is the first among equals in NATO, but with the Americans stepping back it makes it more difficult to create consensus.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-23/nato-members-fail-to-agree-on-libya-role-as-france-seeks-arab-involvement.html

:hi:

[BklnDem75]

35. Nice article. Doesn't back your claim, but here's one for your new claim

On the fifth straight day of foreign, air- and sea-based attacks against Qaddafi's forces, there is still no one leading the massive Western force. The U.S., as Pentagon officials frequently point out at daily press conferences, is not in charge. NATO, still deadlocked by internal disputes, is not in charge. The United Nations Security Council, which only gave enough authority to enforce a no-fly zone, is not in charge of the now far more aggressive campaign. The Arab League, which withdrew its support within hours of granting it, is certainly not in charge. It would be as if, in June 1944, the allied powers decided to invade Normandy at roughly the same time, but didn't bother to appoint General Eisenhower to command and coordinate the multi-national force.

Journalists trying to answer the question of who is in charge have been reduced, perhaps because no concrete answer yet exists, to speculating as to whether the U.S. might be willing to support France's proposal for a "steering committee" for the war, though it's not even clear who would lead that committee or how it would delegate authority between the Western powers. Not only is no one in charge, no one wants to be, and no one has any idea who to appoint.

There appear to be two primary reasons for the confusion, both of which may also help explain why there's no clear objective. First, the leading Western powers all have different goals for the strikes. The U.S., France, Italy -- to possibly be joined by forces under NATO command -- are all coming to Libya with what look to be very different goals, which means conducting different missions in different ways.


http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/03/ghosts-of-iraq-why-the-war-against-libya-remains-leaderless/72916/

[tekisui]

28. US Admiral is Tactical Allied Commander:

The initial wave of allied airstrikes, which concentrated on Libya’s air defenses, have not ended attacks on civilians by Qaddafi, said U.S. Admiral Samuel Locklear, the tactical allied commander. The alliance now is “considering all options” for using air power to protect civilians in battleground cities of Misrata, Ajdabiya and Zawiyah, said Locklear, who spoke yesterday to reporters at the Pentagon via telephone from his command ship in the Mediterranean Sea.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-23/nato-members-fail-to-agree-on-libya-role-as-france-seeks-arab-involvement.html

This is too easy. You haven't offered one shred of evidence that this is anything other than a US led operation so far.

[BklnDem75]

36. LOL. Your own article doesn't even support that claim

Being in command of a coalition doesn't make it a US led operation. You're going to have to do better than that.

[tekisui]

29. Here, I am going to do your work for you:

19 March 2011 - BBC News reported at 16:00 GMT that the French Air Force had sent 19 fighter planes over an area 100 km by 150 km (60 by 100 miles) over Benghazi to prevent any attacks on the rebel-controlled city.<101> "Our air force will oppose any aggression by Colonel Gaddafi against the population of Benghazi", said French President Nicolas Sarkozy.<102> BBC News reported at 16:59 GMT that at 16:45 GMT a French warplane had fired at and destroyed a Libyan military vehicle - this being confirmed by French defence ministry spokesman Laurent Teisseire.<101>

According to Al-Jazeera, French aircraft destroyed four Libyan tanks in air strikes to the south-west of Benghazi.<12> The French military claimed that their aircraft had also flown reconnaissance missions over "all Libyan territory". On the same day, British Prime Minister David Cameron confirmed that Royal Air Force jets were also in action and reports suggested that the U.S. Navy had fired the first cruise missile. CBS News' David Martin reported that three B-2 stealth bombers flew non-stop from the United States to drop 40 bombs on a major Libyan airfield. Martin further reported that U.S. fighter jets were searching for Libyan ground forces to attack.

The Pentagon and the British Ministry of Defence confirmed that, jointly, HMS Triumph and U.S. Navy ships (including USS Barry, pictured) and submarines fired more than 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles, (we know only 12 were UK missiles) supported with air attacks on military installations, both inland and on the coast.<103><104>

Initially, the U.S. element of the operation was under command of United States Africa Command commanded by General Carter Ham.<105> Tactical command of the operation was executed from USS Mount Whitney in the Mediterranean Sea under command of Admiral Sam Locklear, commander United States Naval Forces Europe.<105> United States Secretary of Defense Robert Gates indicated that control of the operation would be transferred to French and British authorities, or NATO, within days.<106>

Regime Forces attacked south of Benghazi

20 March 2011 - Several Storm Shadow missiles were launched by British jets.<107> Nineteen U.S. warplanes also conducted strike operations in Libya. The warplanes included Marine Corps AV-8B Harriers,<108> Air Force B-2 stealth bombers, and F-15 and F-16 fighter jets.<109> A military convoy was destroyed near Benghazi in eastern Libya by multiple air strikes. Seventy military vehicles are known to have been destroyed along with multiple Libyan government ground troop casualties.<109>

Four Danish F-16 fighters left Italy's Sigonella air base for a successful five-hour long "high risk mission",<110> and three Italian Tornados ECR<15> took off from the Trapani base,<111> which suggested that they accompanied attack(s) against high risk targets such as air defence systems.<15> A second immediate ceasefire was declared by the Libyan Army on 20 March, starting at 9pm.<112>

21 March 2011 - SA-2, SA-3 and SA-5 air defence systems in Libya have been taken out. Only SA-6, hand held SA-7s and SA-8 mobile SAMs remained a possible threat to aircraft.<113> A spokesman for the National Transitional Council said Gaddafi's forces were using human shields in defence of their military assets, bringing civilians to Misurata to surround their vehicles and troops to deter airstrikes.<114> Among the buildings hit on late 20 March and early 21 March were parts of the Bab al-Azizia compound often used by Colonel Gaddafi.<95> Further strikes on Tripoli and, according to Libyan government spokesmen, Sabha and Sirt, took place on late 21 March.<95>

22 March 2011 - During a mission over Libya, a US F-15E crashed in rebel-held territory. It was reported that the aircraft, based at RAF Lakenheath in England, came down due to a mechanical fault, and that both crewmen had been rescued,<116><117><95> but there are unconfirmed reports that six local villagers were injured by gunfire from the rescuing US forces.<117><118> The American military has denied these reports. There are claims that the pilot called in a bomb strike by Harrier jump jets, possibly injuring the civilians.<119> The U.S. announced that Qatari forces would join the operation by the weekend.<120>

23 March 2011 - Coalition aircraft flew at least two bombing missions against loyalist forces near the besieged city of Misrata.<121>NATO announced it is providing support to enforce the arms embargo.<122><123[br />
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya

_______________________________________

From wikipedia. Clearly, the US is doing the most work out of all of the allies. This isn't even a point up for debate, no matter how hard you try to make it so.

[BklnDem75]

37. #28 also applies

[vaberella]

5. How so? Because the French were heavy going in...more so than others. n/t

[tekisui]

7. Links to the comparative numbers?

[vaberella]

16. Ahhh...I can comment on some of those bits of info...link below for the "leading" thing:

Actually, I give little to no credence to whatever the telegraph says. It's utterly tabloid news to conservative gossip. So at the moment that's irrelevent. The more dependable news agents such as AJE or even The Guardian has not made any mention of how many tomahawks the US has released. Until then that's just fodder to get people worked up.

Secondly, as far as the comments made by the Pentagon. You did not bother taking the entire quote into context. In a post of mine I typed up the entire transcript of what Adm. Gortney stated...and leading-edge amongst a coalition. Basically when it comes to leading there are three main countries on the forefront. But the leaders are definitely the French----I already discussed this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=633538&mesg_id=633625

[tekisui]

11. Read above posts, so far the US is leading this.