Mrs Clinton also said today "no ground forces".
I see the US have started deploying reconnaissance drones, the ones that fly 13 miles up so hard to knock down if you could ever find them.

Also there are claims now that the French planes have started attacking Gadaffi's ground forces.

Saudi Arabia is "teethless" and Egypt, as already explained, in an interim phase, and in case of Syria, heaps of weaponry does not mean much in regard to real capability.

And you should have realized that the UN acted upon the basis of a resolution of the Arab League

And who says/said "Death to the West" ? Can you define that ? You may find some Hizbullahi and may be even some Hamas folks, but elsewhere ? Please clarify before accusing the Arab World ?

"Death to ____________" (someone or another) is a well known protest chant in the region. You can fill in anything they don't like in that blank. I don't know of any other groups going around chanting like that in the rest of the world. If they meant to impress, they definitely have made an impression. But unfortunately, the impressions are not in their favor.

Why did the Germans abstain ? Ever heard a tiny bit about history ? About the final failure of THIS
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?...20081209135527
man here ? They do NOT want to be in Libya militarily again, as simple as that !

No, it is not more well known "in the region" than in Europe. It has nothing to do with "not in that blank". Simply to take a slogan used in faraway Asian Iran and picked up by some Hizbullahi and then chatter as if this was the dominant thing in the region is absolutely unacceptable (to put it politely) and is cheap abysmal demagoguery

It looks like the US military decided to play with its toys:

U.S. Tomahawk Cruise Missiles Hit Targets in Libya

I often wonder if the US Military is compelled to use its arsenal from time to time, just for the sake of securing their financing and making sure they still work.

Also, I wonder if we get paid for that. Can we have it in barrels of oil please?

I thought that, but they are not too expensive- about $500,000 each.
I expect the Arab league to commit the bulk of the ground troops.

At today's rate, I believe that should be about 4947 barrels per missile?

I think crude is $114 a barrel so that's just under 4386. the US has launched 110 missiles- so a few more barrels.

The US has had way more than that from the Middle East. The US wasn't to happy when the Shiekh demanded more from Aramco- to split the profits 50/50. The USA wasn't built on a measly few free barrels. Plus anyway we have to demonstrate our arms, for the arms deals. Did Saudi Arabia get their shipment yet?

So Obama has done really well. France is the first aggressor. Germany commits troops so that we can draw out of Afghanistan. If we get bogged down in a split state then it won't be US troops. Saudi Arabia is warned- this could be you if you don't back the democracy movement in the Middle East, Obama is wielding the rhetoric looking very 'leader of the free world'. Soon the US will be refueling in Libya-looks good to me!

What part of 'air strikes' did Amr Moussa not understand? Now he is criticizing the air strikes, saying that they have gone too far.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...d7cce7921da560

He is trying to support both sides & will likely fall into the hole in the middle.

I do not love your way to ridicule the good work of the US Navy.

At the other hand, it is obvious that those Tomahawk missiles in the 2003 war in Iraq were not up to expectations .... and for the Royal Navy, it is the moment to test some hightech-gear not yet really tested in war, actually a unique opportunity

In political terms, to be seen on the side of the democratic forces may well be worth lots of barrels of oil !

Interesting is that fighter planes of Qatar have started to operate in Libya against Khaddafi. In political terms a "flight forward" of the Emir of Qatar who wants to be seen on the side of the democratic forces and who does not want to become dependent on support from the UAE, Oman and the KSA.

Amr Moussa is criticizing the air strikes he wanted to see all along ! He "understands" everything very well indeed, but he is deep in his election-campaign for the Egyptian presidency. And his "appearance" today in quite a big way was an attack against rivalling Mr el-Baradei, who is widely perceived as an unconditional ally of "the West".

What the anti-Khaddafi opposition needs is weapons, and weapons are delivered by Egypt. France now takes care of the airforce of Khaddafi and of his tanks. Libya is neither Iraq nor Vietnam. It is a vast country geographically with a very small population.

You may mention WWII, but Field Marshal Montgomery had to push a vast army into the field as being confronted by the Afrika-Corps of Generalfeldmarschall Erwin Rommel. Had he been confronted with Lieutenant Khaddafi and his men only, he only would have needed one regiment

This shrewd diplomat is not "supporting" anybody but will open that hole in the middle for everybody to fall into, and will use developments for his election-campaign for the Egyptian Presidency

quoute "Amr Moussa has apparently told the UK government that he was misquoted earlier on. The Secretary General of the Arab League apparently said that his group supported a no-fly zone, not the air strikes that have taken place, but he now says that he was simply reiterating their position that Libyan civilians must be protected."

Amr Moussa is really wriggling now!! As I wrote earlier "He is trying to support both sides & will likely fall into the hole in the middle."
He is trying to walk on a tightrope that is becoming ever thinner; interesting too see if he can retain his balance & his credibility. My view is that he will fail but what do I know!

Also the Russians are playing a dangerous game with similar criticisms; if the rebels win then they will be frozen out of future oil/gas contracts.
On the other hand maybe they are just saying what is necessary to get their nationals safely out of Libya & will return to a more rational line when that is accomplished.

added
Sheikh Youssef Qaradawi, the prominent Sunni cleric, has criticised Amr Moussa's apparent flip-flop on the military intervention. According to Sultan Al Qassemi, a Middle Eastern journalist, on Twitter:
@SultanAlQassemi: Qaradawi now asked about Amr Moussa's comments. Qaradawi: "You cannot protect the civilians without taking out (Gaddafi's defenses)"

added 2
"But Arab League chief of staff Hisham Youssef said Moussa's comments did not signify a shift by the organization."

But he is taking a major risk by talking "on behalf of the Arab League" without "apparently" taking opinions from the otherArab League members.

Do you knw the Chinese proverb? "he who thinks he is building a mountain is in fact digging a hole"

Gets even wierder in Libya; it is reported today "the Libyan government spokesman calls on all Libyan people to march in a "symbolic" move from Tripoli to Benghazi."

Tripoli to Benghazi is 400 miles!!

Will be interesting to see how that works out.....

Qaradawi hardly is a position to criticise anyone when it comes to protecting civilians.

Quote " Influential Muslim cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi issued a fatwa on Monday that any Libyan soldier who can shoot dead embattled leader Moamer Kadhafi should do so "to rid Libya of him."
"Whoever in the Libyan army is able to shoot a bullet at Mr Kadhafi should do so," Qaradawi, an Egyptian-born cleric who is usually based in Qatar, told Al-Jazeera television.
He also told Libyan soldiers "not to obey orders to strike at your own people," and urged Libyan ambassadors around the world to dissociate themselves from Kadhafi's regime."

Qaradawi can't be all bad!