US crew rescued after Libya crash

Two US airmen have been rescued after ejecting from their F-15E Eagle warplane just before it crashed during allied operations in eastern Libya.

The plane appeared to suffer mechanical failure near the rebel stronghold of Benghazi, the US military said.

It came down after a third night of US-led coalition attacks on Col Muammar Gaddafi's forces, aimed at enforcing a UN resolution to protect civilians.

Debate is continuing in the coalition over who should take command.

Rest assured that the VISIONARIES have got this all worked out.

Stephanie wrote:Well, those people must not heed the words of (visionary) Congressman Paul.

March 14, 2011No-Fly Won't Fly Constitutionally

Last week we once again heard numerous voices calling for intervention in Libya. Most say the US should establish a “no-fly” zone over Libya, pretending that it is a benign, virtually cost-free action, and the least we could do to assist those trying to oust the Gaddaffi regime. Let us be clear about one thing: for the US to establish a “no fly” zone over all or part of Libya would constitute an act of war against Libya. Establishing any kind of military presence in the sovereign territory of Libya will require committing troops to engage in combat against the Libyan air force, as well as anti-aircraft systems.

The administration has stated that nothing is off the table as they discuss US responses to the unrest. This sort of talk is alarming on so many levels. Does this mean a nuclear strike is on the table? Apparently so. In this case, I would like to make sure we actually follow the black letter of the law provided in the Constitution that explicitly grants Congress the sole authority to declare war. This week I will introduce a concurrent resolution in the House to remind my colleagues and the administration that Congress alone, not the president, decides when to go to war. It is alarming how casually the administration talks about initiating acts of war, as though Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution does not exist.

Frankly, it is not up to the President whether or not we intervene in Libya, or set up “no-fly” zones, or send troops. At least, it is not if we follow the Constitution. Even by the loose standards of the War Powers Resolution, which cedes far too much power to the president, he would have no authority to engage in hostilities because we have not been attacked – not by Gaddafi, and not by the rebels. This is not our fight. If the administration wants to make it our fight, let them make their case before Congress and put it to a vote. I would strongly oppose such a measure, but that is the proper way to proceed.

Constitutional questions aside, Congress also needs to consider the interests of the American people. Again, we have not been attacked. Whatever we may think about the Gaddafi regime, we must recognize that the current turmoil in Libya represents an attempted coup d’etat in a foreign country. Neither the coup leaders nor the regime pose an imminent threat to the United States and therefore, as much as we abhor violence and loss of life, this is simply none of our business. How can we commit our men and women in uniform to a dangerous military operation in Libya when they swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution?

We must also understand that our intervention will undermine the legitimacy of whatever government prevails in Libya. Especially if it is a bad government, it will be seen as our puppet and further radicalize people in the region against us. These are terrible reasons to put our soldiers’ lives at risk.

Finally we need to consider the economic cost. We don’t have the money for more military interventions overseas. We don’t have the money for our current military interventions overseas. We have to rely on the Fed’s printing presses and our ability to borrow from China to fund these wars. That alone should put an end to any discussion about getting involved in Libya’s civil war.

SamCogar wrote:It t’was back in 2002 when a few visionaries realized there was a highly probable "fear factor" amassing in the Middle Eastern Muslim dominant countries that would pose a terrible and gawd awful “threat” to the economic stability of the Western World iffen it was not “nipped in the bud” and/or if infrastructure was not “in place” to better deal with said “threat” at a moment’s notice.

And said visionaries also realized that the general populace of the Western World are not visionaries, but “spur-of-the-moment” thinkers, and thus are actually unconcerned and could really give a shit less about any potential or real problems, risks or threats that are highly likely to become reality, next month, next year or 5 years from now.

This “mindset” is the result of the fact that the general populace is no longer being nurtured to “plan for one’s future”, but on the contrary, being taught to react and respond to “brushfires”, ..... either real or imagined ones, ........ and to get what they can or want today and to hell with next year or 5 years from now.

Thus, to convince the general populace to support any plans for “nipping” the potential Middle Eastern problem “in the bud”, said visionaries had to convince the general populace that there was a “brushfire” burning in Iraq that needed their immediate attention. And they did, and the general populace jumped on the “fire brigade” and Operation Iraqi Freedom began on March 20, 2003.

Operation Iraqi Freedom was progressing pretty much as planned ……. but then started to “go-to-hell-in-handbasket” pretty quick like when the “Bush Hating” and partisan Democrats started doing everything they could to discredit Bush and prevent a “landslide” election for his 2nd term as POTUS.

Thus, the “Bush Hating” and partisan Democrats created a more urgent “brushfire” to captivate the general populace’s attention. This resulted in the embolden of every radical Imam, every Leader of every “Hate-the-Infidels” Muslim terrorist and partisan group and most every Muslim dominated country …… to side with, support and further enhance Muslim domination, the results of which are evidenced by the current turmoil in 15 countries in the Middle East and Africa.

And Bush still won his 2nd term as POTUS.

ziggy wrote:Is the "visionary" the same thing as the "decider"?