U.S. urges U.N. to take military action against Libya - Polidicks

[QUOTE][b]Shifting away from earlier caution, the U.S. and allied diplomats ask the U.N. Security Council to OK airstrikes on Libyan ground forces and aircraft. Council members say they fear a humanitarian disaster in Benghazi.[/b] WASHINGTON — American and allied diplomats pressed the United Nations Security Council on Thursday to authorize a broad range of military actions against Libya, making a last-minute effort to prevent Moammar Kadafi's advancing forces from completely overrunning the outgunned rebels. In a shift from their earlier caution on military action, U.S. officials urged the council diplomats in a morning meeting to vote for a resolution that would permit airstrikes on Libyan ground forces and aircraft, which have encircled the rebel stronghold of Benghazi. Proposals for a no-fly zone or other military action have faced strong resistance in recent weeks from traditional U.S. allies, such as Germany, as well as Russia and China. But council members have grown increasingly worried about a humanitarian disaster in Benghazi, and now some U.S. officials are privately expressing confidence that they could win the resolution. William J. Burns, the State Department's No. 3 official, told a Senate committee, "I think we can produce a resolution. ... I hope we can today." He said the United States supported action short of "boots on the ground." A U.N. blessing of military action could open the way for strikes within days, some diplomats said. Even so, diplomats remained cautious about whether strikes would be effective or come soon enough. Some diplomats suggested privately that the last-minute diplomacy could also be aimed, at least in part, at giving political cover to the Obama administration and other governments that are facing criticism over what could be an impending slaughter in Benghazi, a city of about 700,000. Kadafi has declared that his victory over the rebels could come within as little as one day. French President Nicolas Sarkozy has said it might even be just hours away. Advocates of the allies' plan are arguing that military action may be needed to avoid a massacre and to properly enforce the arms embargo that the U.N. authorized last month, diplomats said. They are not proposing that the council authorize aid to the rebels. But U.S. officials contend that U.N. action could immediately help the opposition by giving them reason to hang on in the face of growing odds. It also may prevent a panicked exodus of civilians in eastern Libya, which also could contribute to a humanitarian disaster. A show of support by the United Nations also might accomplish another aim of the U.S. and allies, which is to peel off more of Kadafi's supporters. U.S. officials said they had been considering the military steps for days after they were encouraged by the support of the Arab League. The league, in a rare move against a former member, voted last weekend to support a no-fly zone. U.S. officials are eager to avoid perceptions that military action amounts to another U.S. intervention in the Arab world and, therefore, are pressing Arab countries to take part in any use of force. "Only the security council can authorize action," said Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in an interview with CNN. "And if they do authorize action, there needs to be a true international response, including Arab leadership and partnership." The most likely Arab participants are Saudi Arabia and other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council. Even if the U.N. approves the proposal, it remains to be decided which countries would take part in any military action and what role they would take, a potentially sensitive issue. But some diplomats speculated that countries that already had military ships and planes in the region, including the United States and some European nations, could begin military action as early as this weekend. It may take a week for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to approve any plan of military action, diplomats said, even though NATO officials have been weighing such steps. Tom Malinowski, Washington director of Human Rights Watch, said that although Russia and China traditionally oppose U.N. support for military intervention, advocates are hoping that in this case they would not exercise their veto, since many Arab countries and some Libyans are calling for action. He said the advocates could succeed in winning the nine council votes they need, even if there are no votes by some nonpermanent members and abstentions by some permanent members who hold veto power.[/quote] [url]http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/sc-dc-0318-un-libya-20110317,0,769116.story[/url] America, fuck yeah?

They're too late to do much. Byrocracy sucks.

Did the Libyan rebels not say that they did not want outside support?

I was under the impression Gates advised the US not to take action, at least in the form of a no-fly zone. Jingoistic officials shouldn't be able to override his advice.

Sounds like the US just have an itching trigger finger.

[QUOTE=Chickens!;28653444]Did the Libyan rebels not say that they did not want outside support?[/QUOTE] Well without it they are going to lose even faster.

[QUOTE=Nightsure;28653522]Sounds like the US just have an itching trigger finger.[/QUOTE] Or, ya know, want to prevent more unnecessary civilian deaths in Libya. Oh but no we're definitely doing this because we love killing people right? All Americans are warmongering, soulless bastards?

[QUOTE=Nightsure;28653522]Sounds like the US just have an itching trigger finger.[/QUOTE] aka hating on the us just to hate on them when every other country wants to do the same fucking thing

[QUOTE=Nightsure;28653522]Sounds like the US just have an itching trigger finger.[/QUOTE] Sounds like you were dropped on your head as a baby.

Just because they are picking on the scapegoat country, why don't the save Bahrain? Because the USA cares too much about Saudi oil.

[QUOTE=Col.Gaddafi;28657454]Just because they are picking on the scapegoat country, why don't the save Bahrain? Because the USA cares too much about Saudi oil.[/QUOTE] Might have something to do with the fact that a large part of the US navy is based in Bahrain.

[QUOTE=Col.Gaddafi;28657454]J.[/QUOTE] Wait what?

[QUOTE=Kimaru;28657501]Wait what?[/QUOTE] What?

too little too late unless it's a full-blown invasion but that will suck

It could turn into another Iraq, but something has to be done.

[QUOTE=Chickens!;28653444]Did the Libyan rebels not say that they did not want outside support?[/QUOTE] Considering that they're now having their asses handed to them on a silver platter, they're probably reversing that statement.

[QUOTE=Nightsure;28653522]Sounds like the US just have an itching trigger finger.[/QUOTE] Ever since the Libya riots the gas prices sored through the sky. They want to end this thing once and for all. A to bring peace back to Libya and B to lower gas prices again.

The general who's leading the damn Rebels ASKED FOR A NO FLY ZONE. Everyone keeps saying tehy don't want it but it was the Arabic League that said they didn't. Not the actual rebels!