What is the "end game" for the no fly zone? How can you have it last only days?

[Statistical]

I am genuinely interested in an answer.

So Gaddafi is going to kill thousands of people so we implement a no fly zone. Lets ignore for a fact that dictators all over the world kill thousands of people and we do nothing but that is ancient history so we have a no fly zone.

Obama keeps repeating "it will be over in matter of days not weeks". Well I am no commander in chief but if I was Gaddafi doesn't that mean I need to simply stall for a couple of days until the US gives up?

How can you set a limit on military action before you begin? So what happens if in 2 weeks, or 2 months, or 2 years if Gaddafi resumes killing rebels?

Either:
a) we stick with the timeline and let them die. Sorry guys we extended your lives by a week but that is the limit of our resolve.
b) we continue the no-fly zone for weeks, months, years.

I mean has anyone thought this out? What is the endgame? What if Gaddafi doesn't budge?
How can you have both a timeline and genuine support for the rebels at the same time?

"We have your back for as long as it takes*" (legal counsel advised us to tell you that "as long as it takes" implies no longer than 9 days).

[Demeter]

1. Run out of planes, pilots and bombs?

Or maybe, the coalition of the willing falls apart....

[MannyGoldstein]

2. I've asked this question several times on DU

Not once have I received a response.

[riderinthestorm]

3. Yeah, good luck with that question. Be prepared to be labelled a Gaddafi lover

for asking questions....

Even daring to ask "who are the rebels?" will get you the evil eye here today.

[elleng]

4. Analysis, Wes Clark

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnnr9-UT6K0

[Warpy]

5. The bombing will only last days.

What lasts longer are routine flights over their airspace and shooting down any violators as well as targeting anti aircraft sites.

That's how it worked in Iraq when it contained the overweening ambition of Saddam Hussein.

[dkf]

11. Exactly...never ending til Qadaffi is killed.

We are so stuck.

[joshcryer]

32. No, the French and the UK are taking "protecting civilians" part of the resolution literally.

It's actually kinda remarkable, because I've never seen anything like this in the history of the planet.

Foreign force protects civilians (and of course, the armed revolutionaries) by bombing encroaching armed forces.

It's a new type of warfare that goes by intelligence and technology more than forces on the ground.

The revolutionaries will advance, take a city, the NFZ participants will kill any encroaching forces, wash, rinse, repeat.

Think of it as a kind of shield that the revolutionaries have.

Yes the ultimate goal is regime change, but no one is admitting it.

[Warpy]

41. Obama has told them (and our generals) that the US portion

will be over quickly and extend only to wiping out their air force and anti aircraft capabilities. The only other function would be to conduct flights over the country to enforce the no fly zone and eliminate other anti aircraft facilities that might be built, much like it was done in Iraq.

There is a great deal of squabbling in NATO right now because France and the UK, especially, want to force regime change.

[anarch]

6. World War IV

[Canuckistanian]

7. Not to mention that aerial bombardments do nothing to stop ground troops

Ground troops are highly manoeuvrable, especially in urban settings. They can do a lot of damage with only small forces.

If an air force tried to dislodge them, it would cause MASSIVE collateral damage.

Already, air operations are pulling back from attacking cities directly.

[msongs]

8. forward he cried, from the rear, and the front rank died..... as true as ever nt

[Xithras]

9. It will last until Ghaddafi regroups his ground army.

By all estimates, he still has at least 25,000 highly trained soldiers loyal to him, and just as many conscripts with less training, but good weapons. Right now those armies are spread all over Libya in the various cities they retook, and are still doing "mop up" operations to exterminate any lingering resistance to them. While the UN is busy calling the no fly zone a success, people are still getting butchered on the ground in cities like Misrati.

Once those cities are secure enough to prevent new uprisings, he'll move his forces on Benghazi, which is the last major city the rebels have left. As history has shown time, after time, after time, after time, AIR POWER CANNOT DESTROY GROUND TROOPS. They may not be able to bring in the artillery, but they still outnumber the trained Libyan rebels by at least 5 to 1. Benghazi will fall, the rebellion will be crushed, and the no-fly zone will cease to be relevant to anyone as the uprising ends.

I give it a week.

[bluestate10]

19. If Qaddafi's troops attempt to mass, they will be sitting ducks.

If that happens, I vote to have NATO decimate them. If they are dispersed, they become fairer game for rebels.

[Xithras]

39. Nobody masses armies anymore.

That tactic went out with the rise of air power. Armies today tend to move in a more distributed fashion precisely to avoid that kind of obliteration. The Libyan army may be small by American standards, but they're not stupid.

As we saw in Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam...and many others...bombing a distributed army on the ground is completely ineffective. We can stop the movement of heavy weaponry, but it's foot soldiers that do the most damage in an urban war.

As for being "fairer game", they're pretty severely outnumbered at this point.

Call me a pessimist, but if the Libyan army has one ounce of tactical skill, these rebels don't have much of a chance at this point. They've already lost too much ground, and too many fighters. I was watching a couple of tacticians on TV last night who were essentially saying the same thing. The assumption by the rebels, and the UN, is that the uprisings in the other cities will begin again once the air and artillery forces are decimated. If that doesn't happen, the rebellion is essentially over.

[KurtNYC]

10. are they starting to float 'looking at all options' and 'will have the LEAD ROLE

for only a few days' ? That's what I saw today.

[Historic NY]

12. They have degraded the air defense systems enough to make it safer to enforce the NFZ.

[quaker bill]

13. Where did this impression come from

I have been listening and reading. I have no impression that the action is restricted to a "no fly zone". The UNSC authorization includes far more than a no fly zone. I have read stories and seen pictures of demolished tanks, last I checked, they don't fly.

Our task, per the President, was to use our "special capabilities" to remove Libyan air defenses. From everything I have heard so far, this is what we are doing and are nearly done with. From there, the ball will apparently be carried by others. I gather they will be striking ground targets as well when necessary to prevent the slaughter of civilians.

I don't get all the confusion here and in the press. They are not being at all cryptic about any of this. Read the resolution, it says little about a "no fly zone".

[Statistical]

15. Still doesn't answer the question.... what is the end game?

Kill entire Libyan Army? If not what happens when Gaddafi resumes killing rebels in 2 weeks, 2 months, 2 years?

The way I see it there are only three outcomes
a) end military action and allow Gaddafi to resume his attacks
b) wipe out both Gaddafi and possibly his army
c) maintain the "no fly zone" = euphemism for limited air war (to include both air & ground targets) indefinitely.

So in your opinion what is the end game. The fact that the air war isn't limited to only air targets changes little.

[bluestate10]

22. Decimate Qaddafi's forces until someone close to him has had enough,

and refuse to fight and die for him. Once that happens, Qaddafi is done. My vote is to hammer his forces every day to bring about Qaddafi's end quick.

[quaker bill]

36. First

the "end game" is in the hands of the British, French, and others, that is the point of turning over control.

Second, I expect the end game will be somewhere between b and c. Specifically to remove enough of the pro Quadafi forces military capabilities to level or tilt the playing field toward the rebels. My guess is when he feels he can't win and will likely die in any attempt to maintain power, he will leave.

[obxhead]

14. What I find even more remarkable

is all the politicians from both parties who rail against any "timeline" in Afghanistan or Iraq as aiding the enemy, yet they are all strangely silent on this timeline.

[Statistical]

16. Exactly and this timeline is measured in days...

I mean for an enemy it is far easier to remain strong when confronted with a timeline measured in days as opposed to one in months (years).

Telling the Taliban we are abandoning Afghanistan in a few years will provide aid and comfort to the enemy but telling Gaddafi we aren't willing to fight more than a few days won't?

[Iterate]

17. There are several backstops in place

such as the frozen assets and accounts, weapons embargo, and so forth. These were not you run-of-the-mill sanctions, though he does have cash, a printing press, and I'm sure enough small arms. I'm sure as well that arms and mercenaries are being smuggled across the border with Algeria, another repressive state which could soon find itself with an uprising and has no interest in seeing the revolution succeed. Just today I think I saw something about mercenaries who were found with counterfeit cash.

The initial ICC report is due to be presented to the UN in about 5 or 6 weeks I think. It seems there will be an abundance of evidence. The UN resolution also requires that basic needs like electricity, food, water, and medicine be restored or delivered, especially to the cities he's shelled. It's part of a nation's Responsibility to Protect.

Frankly, the impression I get -and not from US media, I see none - is that they expect the revolution to catch it's breath, arm and rearm, regroup as need be, then continue to Tripoli, or wherever the regime hides. Almost every city was in open peaceful revolt just a few short weeks ago. That anger didn't go away. He might have 30,000 troops, but they have ~6,000,000 Libyans. More arms to the Libyans?, probably that too, but you have to wait for the history book to know.

For a nation sitting on oil, they have precious little internal refining capacity, and storage facilities are vulnerable. Tanks are thirsty creatures, and it's a long haul across that desert. Most of the refineries rely on foreign labor (with a Libyan unemployment rate of 30%, can you imagine why they are angry?), but much of that labor has fled. He did close the border crossing though into Tunisia and force some workers back into labor, but I doubt anyone knows how many or how well motivated they might be.

Let's not forget that he has not only threatened the hollow out Libyan cities (and goo on the promise with some), he's made explicit threats against other nations. People tend to take that sort of thing seriously.

If you're interested in some more in-depth understanding of the situation, some link sharing, some sane discussion, I'd be happy to cooperate. Others I've seen seem similarly interested on the broader topic, and have said as much in other threads. What I would not be interested in though is...well, you can guess.

[bluestate10]

18. Devastate Qaddafi's ability to fight by destroying his planes, copters

tanks, APC and any thing else that moves and has a turret attached to it. Destroy until those close to him have second thoughts and overthrow Qaddafi. That is how it's done, no mercy for any military vehicle out in the open or parked in hangars.

[Statistical]

23. That is at least an honest and potentially viable plan...

Now a follow on question why isn't Obama making that case to the American public? Why the need to minimize and obfuscate?

Americans love smart bomb camera footage (remember the first Gulf war) and they especially love bloodless wars (or at least no American blood). Hell Obama poll numbers might even rise if we was honest. I guess I just find the tone and language from the administration insulting. I mean it is so false as to be laughable. For any limited air war (lets call a spade a spade shall we) to be effective it would need to continue until Gaddafi army is significantly degraded to give the rebels a fighting chance. So to minimize the conflict and tell us it WILL (expressed as a matter of fact not a wish or desire) be over in a matter of days is BS.

[KG]

20. i'm waiting for the fan-boys to show up to explain this part...

[neverforget]

21. All Qaddafi has to do is wait us out. The rebels are disorganized, poorly

led (btw, who is their leader?)and poorly equipped. We may own the Libyan skies but the rebels need a help on the ground and it's help that is not coming from us....supposedly.

[bluestate10]

24. Will be tough for Qaddafi to wait out a scorched earth campaign.

Any forces of his that mass must be located and destroyed. NATO is fully capable of doing that from the air.

[neverforget]

25. boots on the ground are needed to tell the difference between friend

and foe. Easier said than done.

[bluestate10]

26. The end game will take care of itself if NATO destroys any of Qaddafi's

forces that come out in the open. And even locate and destroy forces that are in hiding. Hammer his forces every single minutes of every single day until the one thought in those forces heads is their own survival

[neverforget]

33. easier said than done.

[caraher]

27. The endgame?

Eventually, the Sun will run out of nuclear fuel and turn into a red giant, engulfing Earth.

As near as I can tell, that's the strategy for ending this thing in Libya...

More seriously, I think there's a hope that if we just take the Libyan air force out of the equation, the rebels will rally, elements now loyal to the dictator will defect and a plane will take him away into exile somewhere as Tripoli changes hands. It's hard to see that as much more than blind hope, though, unless there's a lot of additional support for the rebels nobody will talk about right now.

[applegrove]

28. Doesn't he mean American involvement will last just a few more days and then

others will take over with the monitoring of the no fly zone? That is what I understood.

[joshcryer]

29. The endgame is an organized rebel army.

That takes weeks if not months to build.

But certainly less than years.

Gaddafi will likely go in to exile when that time comes.

[Statistical]

30. So miltary advisors then? Where do I remember us doing that in the past.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_advisor

Of course there weapons are inferior to Libyan arm so maybe some arms shipments also.

[joshcryer]

34. For the most part the rebels and pro-Gaddafi forces are equally armed now.

For instance, you can expect the French to bomb any movement of tanks on the pro-Gaddafi side (and eventually you'll have tank drivers who say "fuck that" and refuse to even drive them).

BTW, it is a NFZ, but it's kinda more than that. Since it has a "responsibility to protect" aspect to it, what the French are doing is saying "Hey, those tanks are moving in on a city, we have a responsibility to protect that city, thus those tanks should be removed."

As I said up thread, this is perhaps the first time in our history we've done something like this, with our technology helping a force, rather than boots on the ground helping (though there are probably special forces there doing a good deal of the targeting, particularly on fixed positions).

What's being ignored, and the western states aren't saying it, is that the cease fire is for both the revolutionaries and the pro-Gaddafi forces, it's not "Hey, stop shooting Gaddafi, hey revolutionaries, you can shoot at will!" The revolutionaries are, of course, going to completely ignore the cease fire, regardless, and of course Gaddafi has no intentions to agree to the cease fire. So the west is going to pretend that every advance that the revolutionaries make is because Gaddafi isn't cease firing and the revolutionaries have to defend themselves.

OF course, one does not defend themselves by going forward. Usually. This may have to change how military tactics are looked upon.

BTW, the French bombed 14 tanks going into Benghazi (along with many other armored vehicles). They did it when the NFZ was not even in place. Don't ANYONE EVER tell me that the French are pansies. Infurated me over the Freedom Fries shit.

[lonestarnot]

31. Just say we're done now and leave.

[Baclava]

35. I know....How about a DMZ like in Korea? East/West Libya instead

...draw a line in the sand.

Build a wall, some minefields, lots of concertina wire (U.S. Steel, of course).

We'll build some "UN" bases around it, keep a few planes, some radars, a Starbucks or two.

No matter what new warlord takes over, Ta-da! Peace for the next 50 years.

[joshcryer]

37. That's ultimately the plan, the revolutionaries will have none of it.

East-Libya has all the oil, the west would be fine with a dividing line. The question is if Gaddafi keeps the revolutionaries back long enough to just say "meh, we'll take the dividing line idea."

ie, a Kurd-Iraq solution.

[Baclava]

38. So they're headed for a stalemate? That can't be good, right?

But Hillary said in the beginning she wanted Moe's head on a stick, or something like that.

[Taitertots]

40. The no fly zone is an excuse to launch military attacks against them

We are not shooting down planes that are trying to breach the no fly zone. We are destroying land targets, not upholding a no fly zone.

[Catherina]

42. It was a secretarial typo. The mighty ones meant "No Drive Zone". n/t