Beware the mission, creep!


Fox news, likely acting, as usual, as front-end for the U.S. militaryindustrialcongressional complex, is already floating Libya "mission-creep" trial balloons, pimping deeper U.S. involvement. Even BEFORE the U.S. "background" involvement starts.

One of the (usually paid) "experts," Lt. Col Tony Shaffer, billed as coming from The Center for Advanced Defense Studies, claims that the U.S. is the only power that has enough advanced assets to pull this off. He claims you can’t do this half way and so the U.S. will likely be pulled deeply into the conflict.

This is further spun by a subsequent FOX guest, Gordon Chang who says the 36 or so planes from other countries won’t be enough to enforce the no-fly zone and so the U.S. will have to get more involved. Despite the current Obama Administration party line, several "experts" and "pundits" opine that "we" should commit ground troops and indeed need to do so.

FOX cites a "Senior Military Source" that we can expect Tomahawk missiles to be used, fired from two destroyers, to take out the Libyan air defense systems. The source says it shouldn’t take long, and that it "will be done after dark to minimize collateral damage."

So, the questions are:

How far will the U.S. Government allow itself to be dragged into Libya by the War Party?

How many civilians will the U.S. forces "collaterally damage" and what will the "collateral damage" equation be in Libya?

How long before the War Party finds an excuse to send in the ground troops?

25 thoughts on “Beware the mission, creep!”

  1. We'll see how limited the intervention remains after Libya attacks a US Navy ship. My prediction: not at all limited.

    1. Wish I could disagree. What makes you think Libya can attack a US ship, though?

      1. They have plenty of coastline to defend, so it would only make sense to have that ability. Also, they have aircraft and one could get through.

  2. The interventionist war is starting today, and I'm a bit dissapointed that is not more updated. There's radio silence in both the news section and blog!

    1. The international War Party moves so fast these days, it's hard to keep up. And antiwar runs on a shoestring and volunteers.

      If you write, maybe you could write something. If not, a donation perhaps? If not a donation or an article, just keep doing what your doing. Pass it on!

    2. There's a world of difference between the political climate in Norway and America. does what it can.

  3. I hate Fox, but I have to listen to it at work. It sounds like they are mostly arguing against this new war. The times I have heard "mission creep", it was with a tone of warning. Strange times.

      1. Yeah I heard it from the guests. But still, it seems FOX is against this "war". I voted for President Obama and now I am wondering why we are doing the same things from the Bush years. I'll go even further, as much as I hated the Iraq war, it seems we had more reason for action there than in Libya. Where is the President????

        1. > I voted for President Obama and now I am wondering why we are doing the same things from the Bush years.

          Because you voted for Obama

        2. Thank you Susan Reynolds for stating your point. This isn't about FOX news as other people had posted. It is about Barack Obama doing EXACTLY what Dubya did… starting unauthorized wars under the banner of the UN.

          So now we have a progressive lefty doing the exact same thing as a conservative righty !!!

          Many here don't get the irony of Obama attacking Libya exactly 8 years to the day of Bush attacking Iraq !!! Where's the change we were promised ???

          Do you think we will see anti-war protests against Obama? Nope
          Do you think we will see articles condemning this "war for oil?" No
          Do you think Cindy Sheehan and anti-war protesters will camp out where Obama lives like they did where Bush lived? Nah

          The anti-war movement is very hypocritical.

  4. “How long before the War Party finds an excuse to send in the ground troops?”

    At this point, they’re both War Parties. Goodbye meaningful dissent, hello mindless center.

  5. I watched FOX last night. Geraldo was actually sensible but the rest of them were awful. They seemed to have no reservations or sense at all about plunging into a war headfirst and chatstized Obama every other sentence as if that was what this was about. ____That said, as of right now Obama is probably threading the needle pretty well as far as satiating the international call for action while piling up at least the illusion of a coalition, reinforcing this by doing some random south american mission the whole time. ____If we get in and out AND khaddafy falls the GOP is gonna be PISSED.____Unfortunately I don't think it's gonna be that easy. Khaddafy may have to go, not for any real humanitarian reason but so the west can save face. I doubt Obama cares but the others might.

    1. Dear Lesterhalfjr. Thanks for overreacting… that way I know I came to the right place. An anti-FOX website. Oh wait… you mean this is not an anti-FOX website? Its an anti-war website?!?!?! Oh crap!!! Well I don't know what to do now… I wanna get all mad at FOX news and Georgie Dubya… but hmmmm… i got me a liberal, progressive lefty starting this war. WTF??? you mean it isn't Dubya's war??? Its Obama's??? Well where is the change???

  6. FOX's level of ignorance continues to baffle me, even though I didn't expect otherwise.

    What really is mind blowing about this intervention is how it represents a 180 degree shift from the track it had been on for almost 20 years. Consider this: Libya gave up its WMD program AND recompensed the victims of the Lockerbie terrorist attack AND ended its support for terrorists AND began to develop a cordial relationship with the US. Now we are at war with them. Simply unbelievable.

  7. Your guess is as good as mine.

    Personally I think this intervention has more to do with internal politics (in the US) than it does with Libya. While I do think oil is a prominent factor, I think there are at least three main reasons why Obama chose to intervene in Libya.

    These reasons are: 1) the American public's ignorance over the improvement between US-Libyan relations over the last 20 years, 2) its perception of Ghadafi as a plain terrorist dating back to the 1980s (you say 'Gadhafi' and they say 'Lockerbie') and 3) the Right's constant portrayal of Obama as "weak" on foreign policy have all contributed more to Obama's decision making process than even his supporters are willing to let on.

  8. Whereas snorkeling and scuba diving high the list, different actions, corresponding to jet snowboarding, windsurfing, kayaking, and parasailing should not far behind. The most well-liked sport amongst vacationers and locals alike is board surfing, which is a famous sport in Mission Bay.
    All Enlinea

Comments are closed.