On the ground Qaddafi seems to have the iniative

Hillary Rodham Clinton, January 2007Image via Wikipedia
NY Times:

...

“We meet now in London at a turning point,” Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told the conference, urging continued military action by the NATO-led coalition in Libya along with “political and diplomatic pressure that makes clear to Qaddafi that he must go.”

On the ground, though, there was no indication that Colonel Qaddafi was prepared even for the cease-fire demanded by the United Nations resolution 12 days ago authorizing the military operation in Libya. Under withering allied airstrikes loyalist forces had fallen back in the last week from the gates of Benghazi hundreds of miles to the east to the strategically crucial town of Surt, Colonel Qaddafi’s hometown, which had been depicted as recently as Sunday as the next rebel objective. Surt is critical for both sides since it blocks the rebels’ advance to western Libya and the capital of Tripoli.

But on Monday the pro-Qaddafi forces struck back, sending volleys of missile and tank fire that pushed the battle lines farther east. A chaotic cavalcade of hundreds of trucks and cars carrying fighters streamed late Monday afternoon into Bin Jawwad, a battered ghost town about 80 miles east of Surt. Bin Jawwad has switched hands three times in the last month, and it did not seem that loyalist forces planned to recapture it as much as simply push the rebels farther eastward.

By Tuesday, Colonel Qaddafi’s forces were on the outskirts of Ras Lanuf, to the east of Bin Jawwad, and had started shelling it, primarily from the sea, rebel commanders said. There was no obvious sign by midday Tuesday of the coalition airstrikes that had facilitated the rebel advance so far. In theory, Western military commanders say they send their warplanes into action only to protect civilians, and there was some cloud cover in the area of Ras Lanuf on Tuesday.

American warplanes were active late Monday in the western port city of Misurata, firing on three Libyan vessels to prevent them from shelling merchant shipping, news reports said, quoting a statement from the United States Navy Sixth Fleet.

...
I am surprised Qaddafi has any naval forces left. What remains needs to be added to the NATO target list most ricky tick. It would be nice to get a count of Qaddafi's remaining tanks to know how much work is left in destroying them. With the arrival of the A-10s we should be plunking tanks right now, and the AC-130 gunships should be taking out the supporting infantry.

I do not expect Qaddafi to take any deals until it is obvious that his cause is hopeless. That could be sometime because of the way we have chosen to attack his forces. A Marine Corps landing cutting off forces east of Tripoli would gut those forces to the east and the Marine positions would require Qaddafi to mass his forces in the open to try to break through the Marine position giving us and opportunity to destroy them with our superior firepower. There does not appear to be anyone on his national security team who is arguing for this option.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Is the F-35 obsolete?