AC-130s and A-10s over Libya now?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - AC-130s and A-10s over Libya now? (Page 1 of 3)

Posted: 3/27/2011 7:57:39 AM EDT

According to this aviation blog, both are starting to perform missions over Libya now that the Libyan's air defenses have been taken out.

Posted: 3/27/2011 8:05:10 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
According to this aviation blog, both are starting to perform missions over Libya now that the Libyan's air defenses have been taken out.

Why did a "no fly zone" turn into a full up air war on a country we are not at war with?

Posted: 3/27/2011 8:25:35 AM EDT

[#2]

cool, but I dont support them being there.

Posted: 3/27/2011 8:40:23 AM EDT

[#3]

I do hope we're keeping track of our expenses, and plan to pull it out of Gaddafi's bank accounts after this is over.

I have nothing against Libyans, but I've never seen one open up their wallet to help defend *my* rights...

Posted: 3/27/2011 8:43:57 AM EDT

[#4]

Have we heard from the Pres lately on this? A-10s and AC-130s aren't exactly air superiority fighters....

And where are A-10s flying sorties from?

Posted: 3/27/2011 8:45:53 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:

Why did a "no fly zone" turn into a full up air war on a country we are not at war with?

It went that way pretty quickly.

I think it might have been the French taking out the first armour on the ground. Then British Tornado jets started taking out tanks.

It's getting messy for sure.

Posted: 3/27/2011 8:46:49 AM EDT

[#6]

He's incorrect as the unit the gunships belong too, so I question how accurate the rest of his information is.

Posted: 3/27/2011 8:58:13 AM EDT

[#7]

Maybe al qaeda requested air support.

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:00:42 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Maybe al qaeda requested air support.

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:11:45 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:

Have we heard from the Pres lately on this? A-10s and AC-130s aren't exactly air superiority fighters....

And where are A-10s flying sorties from?

Europe?

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:13:12 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:
According to this aviation blog, both are starting to perform missions over Libya now that the Libyan's air defenses have been taken out.

Why did a "no fly zone" turn into a full up air war on a country we are not at war with?

Because when the U.S. puts an ass whoopin' on, we don't pussy foot around. Screw the "at war with" malarky.

Shortly, the Libyan army will be reduced to running Toyota hilux trucks with light machineguns bolted to the bed... we will have absolutely eliminated the Libyan military threat in that region. It will take a decade or longer to rebuild those assets... if they're even allowed to rebuild forces beyond simple defensive equipment.

Why leave any potential adversary with the means to attack or retaliate when you have opportunity to gut their forces and decimate their defenses?

For 30 some years the U.S. has wanted to stomp the living daylights out of Qaddaffi... Perfect opportunity!!!!

The Brits are singin' the blues because they missed incinerating his ass when they tomahawked the C&C compound in Tripoli. If they could get their hands on him, they'd keel haul him on an ancient frigate.

For all we know at this point, Libya may be slated for a NATO/ U.N. occupation and 'temporary' governance complete with U.N. observers for their upcoming 'democratic' elections.

I'm sure the U.N. has a throbbing hard-on anticipating the fucking they're about to give Libya.

The kenyan may well be viewed as a hero and savior to the new rulers in Libya! He may well be nominated to a high level U.N. position for this timely intervention!!

In the U.S. not so much.

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:24:51 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
I do hope we're keeping track of our expenses, and plan to pull it out of Gaddafi's bank accounts after this is over.

I have nothing against Libyans, but I've never seen one open up their wallet to help defend *my* rights...

This, I don't mind us being the fixer for the world but it's about time we started getting paid back for all we do. What is wrong with saying "look, we'll help you over throw your tyrannical dictator but for doing it we want xxx,xxx,xxx barrels of oil a year for $xx.xx for xx years."?

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:28:51 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Have we heard from the Pres lately on this? A-10s and AC-130s aren't exactly air superiority fighters....

And where are A-10s flying sorties from?

Europe?

Would assume so (based in Germany)...but that's a long flight for an A-10 considering what their normal job is and it's combat range fully loaded kinda sucks. It'd have to refuel...a lot.

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:31:27 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:
According to this aviation blog, both are starting to perform missions over Libya now that the Libyan's air defenses have been taken out.

Why did a "no fly zone" turn into a full up air war on a country we are not at war with?

Husseins close air support for his AQ buddies?

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:34:55 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Maybe al qaeda requested air support.

cheer up , it may get danger close

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:39:05 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

Quoted:
According to this aviation blog, both are starting to perform missions over Libya now that the Libyan's air defenses have been taken out.

Why did a "no fly zone" turn into a full up air war on a country we are not at war with?

Excellent question.

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:40:15 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:
According to this aviation blog, both are starting to perform missions over Libya now that the Libyan's air defenses have been taken out.

Why did a "no fly zone" turn into a full up air war on a country we are not at war with?

It's not a war!

It's a police action.

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:42:02 AM EDT

[#17]

Mission creep has turned into into flat out escalation.

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:47:16 AM EDT

[#18]

I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:48:06 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

I'm sure the U.N. has a throbbing hard-on anticipating the fucking they're about to give Libya.

If you're talking about the U.N. soldiers that will be raping Libyan children then I agree.

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:48:20 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I do hope we're keeping track of our expenses, and plan to pull it out of Gaddafi's bank accounts after this is over.

I have nothing against Libyans, but I've never seen one open up their wallet to help defend *my* rights...

This, I don't mind us being the fixer for the world but it's about time we started getting paid back for all we do. What is wrong with saying "look, we'll help you over throw your tyrannical dictator but for doing it we want xxx,xxx,xxx barrels of oil a year for $xx.xx for xx years."?

Damned straight. Everyone hates us anyway. If we're going to be the world's rental cop, we better be getting paid for it.

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:53:59 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
According to this aviation blog, both are starting to perform missions over Libya now that the Libyan's air defenses have been taken out.

Why did a "no fly zone" turn into a full up air war on a country we are not at war with?

It's not a war!

It's a police action.

Nope. It's a "kinetic military action".

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:54:36 AM EDT

[#22]

Here's some good news!

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/al-qaeda-snatched-missiles-in-libya/story-e6frfku0-1226028543204?from=public_rss

A well equipped military force WILL emerge from this conflagration... just maybe not the one we had hoped would emerge.

Again, the kenyan gives direct aid and solace...

Posted: 3/27/2011 9:59:31 AM EDT

[#23]

Did I hear that A-10's were retired a couple of years ago or did we give them to some other nations?
Just wondering.

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:01:49 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Did I hear that A-10's were retired a couple of years ago or did we give them to some other nations?
Just wondering.

The Air Force is currently working to extend their life. Quite the opposite of retirement.

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:14:41 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
According to this aviation blog, both are starting to perform missions over Libya now that the Libyan's air defenses have been taken out.

Why did a "no fly zone" turn into a full up air war on a country we are not at war with?

It's not a war!

It's a police action.

Nope. It's a "kinetic military action".

Oh yeah, I forgot.

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:17:11 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Did I hear that A-10's were retired a couple of years ago or did we give them to some other nations?
Just wondering.

If I recall correctly, there was talk of it being retired and replaced by F-16s in the early '90s. Never happened.

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:20:44 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

If I recall correctly, there was talk of it being retired and replaced by F-16s in the early '90s. Never happened.

Thanks to Desert Storm.
There are quite a few in the Boneyard, though. IIRC.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:23:41 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:

Mission creep has turned into into flat out escalation.

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:27:12 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Maybe al qaeda requested air support.

To laugh or cry...

Don't expect the more rabid interventionists to care about that, though. 9/11 is just a few numbers to them; no need for us to STILL be all mad at AQ in their view, I suppose.

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:30:41 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

Because we dealt with him for his transgressions in the past. How would like

it if you were retried for a wrongdoing in the past?

Libya was not a threat to our domestic security nor to any of our allies.

We have no business there.

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:33:48 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

Because it's a clusterfuck.

There wasn't any planning. There wasn't any coordination. There wasn't a following of the law (Bush informed Congress every time). There wasn't even any damn C2 until a few days ago. And the rebels on the ground may or may not be aligned with Al Queda but nobody knows because nobody bothered to ask.

Obama basically went "Man, I'm getting hammered in the press about this. Somebody tell the Air Force to bomb something."

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:35:07 AM EDT

[#32]

This thread needs more A-10

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:37:17 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
According to this aviation blog, both are starting to perform missions over Libya now that the Libyan's air defenses have been taken out.

There are reports of British SAS and American Specops on the ground in Libya training the rebels and calling CAS.

And, many reports point to a ground invasion (50,000 troops) sometime in Mid April should Gudaffi not step down.

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:42:14 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

My biggest reason? We're fucking BROKE, not to mention I do not like the POTUS initiating military actions without the congress's approval. Especially when there is no discernible, concrete benefit on the horizon for us. All people can provide is that this might help us democratize the M.E. then again though it might be the next hard line theocracy that comes to power, and even if we install a decent govt there's no guarantee it'll stay loyal after we bring back our forces (and eventually we do have to bring them back).

Easier to understand?

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:43:13 AM EDT

[#35]

If true, good luck to the men and woman manning those aircraft. Kick some ass.

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:51:35 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Why did a "no fly zone" turn into a full up air war on a country we are not at war with?

It went that way pretty quickly.

I think it might have been the French taking out the first armour on the ground. Then British Tornado jets started taking out tanks.

It's getting messy for sure.

Anyone who thought all this buildup was necessary for the two asthmatic pigeons and three wind-up balsa wood planes the Libyans fielded wasn't paying attention.

Posted: 3/27/2011 10:58:43 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Maybe al qaeda requested air support.

To laugh or cry...

Don't expect the more rabid interventionists to care about that, though. 9/11 is just a few numbers to them; no need for us to STILL be all mad at AQ in their view, I suppose.

Rabid interventionists.

One commander in one town in Libya claims an AQ background, now the entire movement is AQ.
One politician claims AQ grabbed surface to air missiles, when is unknown it could have happened anytime after unrest started included the two or three weeks without a no-fly zone, now the US is arming AQ.

Such is GD "logic."

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:00:42 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

Obama Derangement Syndrome

He is still a fuckstick and he took about three weeks too long to do this, but I support him taking out Daffy.

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:03:40 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Maybe al qaeda requested air support.

To laugh or cry...

Don't expect the more rabid interventionists to care about that, though. 9/11 is just a few numbers to them; no need for us to STILL be all mad at AQ in their view, I suppose.

Rabid interventionists.

One commander in one town in Libya claims an AQ background, now the entire movement is AQ.
One politician claims AQ grabbed surface to air missiles, when is unknown it could have happened anytime after unrest started included the two or three weeks without a no-fly zone, now the US is arming AQ.

Such is GD "logic."

So we have an acceptable AQ content then? No need to put any conditions on our airpower, such as telling the rest of the rebels "Any AQ among you should be promptly strung up and left to the vultures" or something like that; Nah, lets lets swing our big stick like an angry retard after Europe and the Arab League suckered us into this stupid mess. Never mind the Al Qaeda.

Seriously, how much of an AQ content must a given movement posses before you could consider it a problem?

ETA: As for arming Al Qaeda, it appears that the matter is under consideration. (Or are there going to be some sort of magic runes or such on these weapons which would prevent these few 'bad seed' AQ rebels to take them?)

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:13:13 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Maybe al qaeda requested air support.

To laugh or cry...

Don't expect the more rabid interventionists to care about that, though. 9/11 is just a few numbers to them; no need for us to STILL be all mad at AQ in their view, I suppose.

Rabid interventionists.

One commander in one town in Libya claims an AQ background, now the entire movement is AQ.
One politician claims AQ grabbed surface to air missiles, when is unknown it could have happened anytime after unrest started included the two or three weeks without a no-fly zone, now the US is arming AQ.

Such is GD "logic."

So we have an acceptable AQ content then? No need to put any conditions on our airpower, such as telling the rest of the rebels "Any AQ among you should be promptly strung up and left to the vultures" or something like that; Nah, lets lets swing our big stick like an angry retard after Europe and the Arab League suckered us into this stupid mess. Never mind the Al Qaeda.

Seriously, how much of an AQ content must a given movement posses before you could consider it a problem?

ETA: As for arming Al Qaeda, it appears that the matter is under consideration. (Or are there going to be some sort of magic runes or such on these weapons which would prevent these few 'bad seed' AQ rebels to take them?)

Nothing is ever going t be 100%. It's the real world. Deal with it.

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:17:10 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

Because the people we are doing so in support of are the same ones that committed 9/11, and have been fighting us in iraq and afganistan for the last decade?

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:19:15 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

Because the people we are doing so in support of are the same ones that committed 9/11, and have been fighting us in iraq and afganistan for the last decade?

Again with the sweeping generalizations. One commander in one town has claimed AQ involvement.

Are there some who are sympathetic to AQ? Yes. There is no doubt. There are radical elements everywhere. Nothing is 100% pure as the wind-driven snow.

How do you marginalize the radicals? Give the people a say in how they are governed.

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:19:27 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

My biggest reason? We're fucking BROKE, not to mention I do not like the POTUS initiating military actions without the congress's approval. Especially when there is no discernible, concrete benefit on the horizon for us. All people can provide is that this might help us democratize the M.E. then again though it might be the next hard line theocracy that comes to power, and even if we install a decent govt there's no guarantee it'll stay loyal after we bring back our forces (and eventually we do have to bring them back).

Easier to understand?

All valid points, and to top it off we are doing it on behalf of AQ

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:21:02 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

My biggest reason? We're fucking BROKE, not to mention I do not like the POTUS initiating military actions without the congress's approval. Especially when there is no discernible, concrete benefit on the horizon for us. All people can provide is that this might help us democratize the M.E. then again though it might be the next hard line theocracy that comes to power, and even if we install a decent govt there's no guarantee it'll stay loyal after we bring back our forces (and eventually we do have to bring them back).

Easier to understand?

All valid points, and to top it off we are doing it on behalf of AQ

Again with the lie.

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:23:21 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

Because the people we are doing so in support of are the same ones that committed 9/11, and have been fighting us in iraq and afganistan for the last decade?

Again with the sweeping generalizations. One commander in one town has claimed AQ involvement.

Are there some who are sympathetic to AQ? Yes. There is no doubt. There are radical elements everywhere. Nothing is 100% pure as the wind-driven snow.

How do you marginalize the radicals? Give the people a say in how they are governed.

You cant see where we have a problem with doing ANYTHING on behalf of AQ? Even if the present asshole in charge deserves to die?

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:24:14 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

My biggest reason? We're fucking BROKE, not to mention I do not like the POTUS initiating military actions without the congress's approval. Especially when there is no discernible, concrete benefit on the horizon for us. All people can provide is that this might help us democratize the M.E. then again though it might be the next hard line theocracy that comes to power, and even if we install a decent govt there's no guarantee it'll stay loyal after we bring back our forces (and eventually we do have to bring them back).

Easier to understand?

All valid points, and to top it off we are doing it on behalf of AQ

Again with the lie.

There are reports that some of the rebels are AQ. I have no first hand knowledge to say there are not, do you?

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:25:37 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

My biggest reason? We're fucking BROKE, not to mention I do not like the POTUS initiating military actions without the congress's approval. Especially when there is no discernible, concrete benefit on the horizon for us. All people can provide is that this might help us democratize the M.E. then again though it might be the next hard line theocracy that comes to power, and even if we install a decent govt there's no guarantee it'll stay loyal after we bring back our forces (and eventually we do have to bring them back).

Easier to understand?

All valid points, and to top it off we are doing it on behalf of AQ

Again with the lie.

There are reports that some of the rebels are AQ. I have no first hand knowledge to say there are not, do you?

Some of the rebels. Not all of the rebels. In fact, from the reports that are out there they are a small minority. You make it sound like they are all AQ. They are not.

You also make it sound like AQ has radios with direct contact to our aircraft calling in strikes, they do not and they are not.

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:28:26 AM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'm really having a hard time understanding why Arfcom has such a hard time liking that we're bombing another Middle East dictator who's killed a bunch of Americans in the past... is this DU now or did I miss something?

Because the people we are doing so in support of are the same ones that committed 9/11, and have been fighting us in iraq and afganistan for the last decade?

Again with the sweeping generalizations. One commander in one town has claimed AQ involvement.

Are there some who are sympathetic to AQ? Yes. There is no doubt. There are radical elements everywhere. Nothing is 100% pure as the wind-driven snow.

How do you marginalize the radicals? Give the people a say in how they are governed.

You cant see where we have a problem with doing ANYTHING on behalf of AQ? Even if the present asshole in charge deserves to die?

"On behalf of AQ" means we are working for them. We are not. There are other organizations other than AQ that are fighting in Libya. In fact AQ is a small minority of the people fighting in Libya, but you won't know that by reading Fox's website.

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:28:57 AM EDT

[#49]

Of course that is not the case, but IMO we shouldnt be doing jack shit to help AQ or any of their friends either.

Posted: 3/27/2011 11:29:54 AM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Of course that is not the case, but IMO we shouldnt be doing jack shit to help AQ or any of their friends either.

A government where the people of Libya have a say in how things are run, doesn't help AQ in the least.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - AC-130s and A-10s over Libya now? (Page 1 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us