U.S. Libya: US Flies 801 Bombing Missions

The U.S. is mostly providing intelligence, surveillance and recon in Libya…right? No. We’re doing all that, and then we’ve also flown 801 strike sorties (“132 of which dropped ordnance”) since March 31st. The point to note here is that the administration claims the 1973 War Powers doesn’t apply to our involvement in Libya, because our involvement is limited, but we learned this week that not only are U.S. NATO resources being used, under a U.N. resolution, but F-16s have entered the conflict from Shaw Air Force Base, South Carolina.

“American strikes are limited to the suppression of enemy air defense and occasional strikes by unmanned Predator UAVs against a specific set of targets.” The report also says the U.S. provides an “alert strike package.”

Dalrymple named the Air Force’s F-16CJ and Navy’s EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft as the primary platforms that have been suppressing enemy air defenses.

However, those F-16s are not solely drawn from units based in Spangdahlem, Germany, or Aviano, Italy. The service has reportedly deployed U.S.-based units to Europe to conduct these operations.

Earlier this month, Malta Today reported that two F-16s from the 77th Fighter Squadron, 20th Fighter Wing, made emergency landings on the island. The 20th Fighter Wing is based at Shaw Air Force Base, S.C.

Air Force Lt. Gen. David Deptula says it is not unusual that we are “participating,” because we are members of NATO, but what is unusual is that we are participating in actual bombings not planned and carried out by U.S. commanders. Staring that fact in the face is the 1973 War Powers Resolution which requires that the President seek permission from Congress for the combat activities we are involved in, or withdraw troops within 30 days:

“It’s not necessarily a violation of the War Powers Resolution,” said retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Charles Dunlap, now associate director of the Center on Law, Ethics and National Security, and visiting professor of the practice at Duke University School of Law. “[But] it does raise questions about the scope and intensity of our participation versus how it’s been represented.”

Others disagreed. The president is in clear violation of the War Powers Resolution, said Robert Turner, co-founder of the Center for National Security Law at the University of Virginia. Under the legal definition of hostilities, even providing logistical support or intelligence data qualifies as such, he said, never mind firing missiles from Predator UAVs or F-16 fighters.

The Obama administration says the War Powers Act doesn’t apply to Libyan hostilities because…the U.S. role is limited. Read the entire story at AirForceTimes.

  • When will Americans decide they have had enough of Obama’s lies? Do we have to wait until November of 2012 to express our anger? We need another march on Washington soon!

  • Pingback: Gaddafi Warns: I’ll Take this War to Europe – Homes, Offices Targets | Maggie's Notebook()

  • A QUESTION OF SANITY
    The Western media for quite some time has utilised Gaddafi’s eccentricities to portray him as mad.
    In reflecting on how this war in Libya has progressed, I, however, have reason to doubt the sanity of some Western leaders.
    The war has been advanced by mainly three NATO nations, America, France and Britain.
    Obama, while bombing Libya has professed that this is not a “war”. With stunning linguistic gymnastics, the war has somersaulted from the feet first “war” to a head over heels “support” mission and merely an “intervention”. I must now conclude that if I dislike my neighbour and start throwing Molotov cocktails on his roof and stones into his windows, I am not at war with him, but in an effort to have him remove from the neighbourhood, I am involved in a support mission and have merely intervened across the fence into his property. Sounds like a defence, then once I run it, I would have provided the Judge a good reason to order a psychiatric examination.
    Sarkozy, for his part, is faced with a UN Resolution which prohibits the supply of arms to Libya. He then in seeking to enforce the UN Resolution supplies arms to the rebels, while professing to be upholding that UN Resolution. Candidate number two for mental status assessment.
    In Britain, by parity of reason, one must assume that if a community took up arms, set up its own central bank, professed itself the new legitimate government of the UK, then for consistency, David Cameron, would simply fold his arms and direct that the British army not suppress the rebellion? Absolutely, because, no doubt, he would have to be politically consistent with his conduct in Libya – now, would he? On the 1st of July, and after 3 months of bombardment of Libya by NATO, several thousand people have marched in the streets of Tirpoli in support of Gadaffi, yet in the words of Cameron:-
    “As I’ve said, we will help fulfil the UN Security Council [resolution] – it is for the Libyan people to determine their government and their destiny. But our view is clear – there is no decent future for Libya with Colonel Gaddafi remaining in power. [The world cannot] stand aside while this dictator murders his own people.”
    So, there are no equivalent public mass rallies in Benghazi of any size, and yet Gadaffi’s own people come out in mass support of their leader, but we cannot forget what Obama said:-
    “Muammar Gaddafi has lost the legitimacy to lead and he must leave,”
    and that Cameron and Obama are of one mind.
    All three leaders are, of course, on a “humanitarian mission”. And to implement same, one drops bombs relentlessly on the Libyan people, who then come out in mass support of their leader and demand that the NATO bombing stops. But, as we know, Obama, Sarkozy and Cameron are all great humanitarians and thus they shall not relent from the humanitarian bombing for accomplishment of the noble humanitarian mission of removing the leader who over a million people want, while insisting that a leadership that no one ever heard of before – is installed in power to uphold the democratic wishes of the Libyan people.
    Who really needs to consult the psychiatrist, Gadaffi, Obama, Sarkozy, Cameron or the masses of Libyans who marched in Tripoli ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHVDIMP-l80)?
    P.S. I note now that you tube is busy, yet again, blocking the videos showing the size of the pro-Gadaffi demonstrations. Of course, we have freedom of expression here in the West.
    (www.globaljusticeonline.com)

  • Luke

    Imagine if other country entered a war like that !

    There is no direct threat to United States and therefore entering this war is illegal.

    But on the other hand, during 2nd WW US could have entered the war sooner and it would be a good move.