Obama Doctrine Not Working

By Semperpapa

Regardless of the efforts of NATO airpower, the military forces loyal to Gheddafi are pushing back the rebels in Libya, thwarting the effort, on the part of the West, to aid the toppling of the Libyan dictator (anyone who still believes that the elimination of Gheddafi as a leader is not the aim of the West better wake up).

So the part-time war approach is not working. I understand that these actions are time-uncertain, but my preoccupation is about the Obama doctrine of sort of a part-time operation, a part-time kinetic action.
What happens if NATO air strikes do not accomplish the mission in a clean, pro-regime media sanitized, Obama image enhancing way? What happens if the strategy of the part-time President does not work?

President Obama still maintains that no "boots on the ground" will be part of this war, but ultimately, as every military action in history has shown, it is only after the ground pounders hit the beaches that strategic objectives have a chance to to be reached.
And let us not kid ourselves: our "boots" are already on the ground, as the application of air power, as needed in this type of ground support, requires Special Ops teams to be in place to insure that the munition dropped does not become a propaganda tool for the enemy.

After the invasion and toppling of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2003, Gheddafi suddenly became open to the West and renounced his terrorist posture and programs of development of weapons of mass destruction. The reason was that he was suddenly concerned about the cowboy in the White House handing him his own ass after the capture of the Iraqi dictator.
But a new sheriff is in town now, one that will tell the enemy what he will or will not do beforehand, telephoning his strategies, assuming he has one.
Let me put it in terms that Col. Obama could better understand: what he is is doing is the same as if the basketball coach of his favorite NCAA team would show his opponent his playbook before the final game, or having the instructions of that last game time out being transmitted on the public address system.
Anyone that has a slight idea about military affairs and the best intentions toward the uniformed folks in the Armed Forces knows that you do not tell the enemy what you will or will not do, but, as amply demonstrated by the current part-time Commander-in-Chief, he appears to have neither.

So we are backing the Libyan rebels cause, getting deeper into a military situation that has no clear purpose or clear directive. Depending on who grabs the microphone on any given time of the day, we hear different scopes and strategies.
And what about those "freedom fighters" we are backing? Many different sources are placing al Qaeda forces among the rebels, the leader of the insurrection calling them "good Muslims" while Sec. of State Clinton says that there is no indication of al Qaeda presence among those we are supposedly helping.
Next we may hear James Clapper testify in Congress that the Libyan al Qaeda is a secular, populist group of well intended folks just interested in the welfare of the freedom loving Libyan people.

Then there is the question of arming the rebellion. Secretary of Defense Bill Gates is not to up to the idea, while rumors of weapons being handed over to the insurgents, including the elusive al Qaeda fighters, keeps on being fueled by Clinton and others.
The West could deliver an entire Armor brigade of M1-A1 to the rebels, but without the proper training performed by American Troops, they would just be large pieces of machinery littering the desert. And time constrains do not allow for groups of insurgents to travel outside the country for training and return to make a difference.

It all points out to what looks like a lose-lose proposition for the Obama doctrine, whatever that is. His attempt to get a nice, tidy little war under his belt does not look promising at this juncture, as the Libyan forces still loyal to Gheddafi seem to be much better able to utilize the weapons and tactics they already have. The sanitized little bellicose action, directed at convincing the feeble minds of independent voters that the man in the White House can be tough when his principles call for it, may be on its way to get dirty and bloody, while the ultra-Left in America, that portion of the population that sees America as a blood thirsty, imperialistic nation, are not too happy with their messiah for an action that reminds them of the much hated Bush.

The situation in Libya may get much worst before starting to improve. The Obama regime is making a lot of fuss about defections of high ranking officials of the Libyan government from their dictator, but these folks are away from the dangers of the situation on the ground, be it in New York or London. The reality on the streets of Benghazi and Sirte is that without a full and complete engagement of ground troops in the region, the regime in Tripoli can continue the tactic of attrition against the rebels, regardless of the amount of cruise missiles or aerial bombardment the "coalition" may do.

The President and Sec. Clinton and Sec. Gates continue to state that no American troops will have to step foot on Libyan soil, while at the same time the White House leaks the information that "covert" CIA teams operations have been taking place on Libyan ground for some time already. I hope someone will ultimately explain to the Oval Office genius the true meaning of the term "covert" once and for all.

That Col. Gheddafi has to go is a truth that has been known for many years. This piece of work should have been taken out years ago, specifically when the connection between Libya and the bombing of PanAm 103 came to the surface. Just the fact that Gheddafi paid millions of dollars to the families of those who perished in that terrorist attack, should have been considered an admission of responsibility and action should have been taken. Instead, the West allowed Megrahi, the only convicted terrorist, to leave his life sentence and "retire" in a Tripoli villa.
Given that Gheddafi's life should be worth less that camel dung for every American, the action of our government in this matter should be decisive and final.
Anything short from that is a demonstration that what the Obama loving media has dubbed as the "Obama Doctrine" is nothing more than just another catastrophic failure.
I just hope that such failure will not cost the lives of American servicemen.

Just my thoughts!