We are now at a point in which we have basically fullfilled, insofar as possible, the UN mandate to establish a no-fly zone in Libya to protect the civilian populace. We learned, today, that there are CIA operatives on the ground in the "liberated" areas advising the fighters and getting to assess them. One would expect that part of that assessment process would be to determine the depth of Al Qiada influence with these people. I would also hazard a guess that these good people are being assessed for their ability to handle the kinds of arms needed to defend themselves and the amount of training required to make them capable of functioning as an effective fighting force.
Qaddafi, of course, has an army that is equipped with artillery, armour (tanks, mostly), and some hefty machine guns, grenade launchers, and small arms. The people we are thinking about arming have, as a group, little of no experience in using weapons to counter Qaddafi's, the ubiquitous AK-47 being the gun of choice; a great small arm. but useless against the massed fire of a well-armed platoon . If we decide to arm them, we will be taking on an enormous task - likely made more difficult by the inability of CIA operatives to fully comprehend the level of arms and extent of training neccessary. Who will determine the weapons mixture likely to be successful? A CIA guy? Give me a break.
I have watched the TV reports showing these "freedom fighters" in action. When, and if, they are successful, they immediately leap up, dance and shout, and fire their rifles into the air, thereby showing their total lack of military discipline. Unknown is whether or not they develop and carry out military operations that display any knowledge of tactics (some things would, perhaps, be obvious, like use the high ground effectively, use the low ground to conceal movement, etc). Who is going to train these people? Will they be willing to suspend their private lives for weeks or months, learning things military? Bear in mind that we send a soldier to basic training for several months, then on to Advanced Infantry Training for more months before we let them be followers. Where will the leaders come from? How long does it take to minimally train a fire team leader, a squad leader, a platoon commander, a company commander?
And while that is taking place, someone (NATO?) is going to have to hold Quaddafi at bay. Will that take "boots on the ground?"
I don't doubt that the thing is do-able, I simply question whether of not it is being thought out in anything other than political terms - the "wimpy President" vice the "warmonger President." The charge, by the way, seems to come from the same people, depending upon which they believe will most embarrass him. The point here is that none of those critics has had to confront these issues, even those with some military experience. Sen. John McCain was a Navy Squadron Commander of an Attack Squadron. I was the Weapons Officer on a Guided Missile Destroyer. He and I have comparable capabilities for conducting combined operations warfare - zilch!
With all of the harping going on, is there really going to be a sensible conversation over what the best course of action might be? The Commander in Chief will have to make the final decision. I have no clue right now what that will be, although Sec State keeps dropping "shoot 'em up, bang, bang" signals. I just want there to be the best chance possible for a good outcome to all of this. And that will take much more than just "seat of the pants" flying.
