| Could Qaddafi have thought ahead to the possibility of what is now taking place with the result that he has made plans and carried out measures intended to inflict casualties on western boots on the ground in Libya?
Could Qaddafi have the assistance on various rogue states for that purpose?
Could there exist a strategy crafted for the purpose of enticing say NATO countries into a gradually escalating military presence on Libyan soil? This in order to create a tar baby scenario where the invaders are trapped between a politically difficult withdrawal and the prospect of an unwinnable war?
In military history, there seem to have been a lot of terrible battles which seemed to have been far less serious when being entered into.
Could the apparent chaos on the rebel side mask the presence and activity of embedded clandestine Qaddafi and/or Syrian and/or Arab looking Iranian operatives?
Could there be a hidden marriage of convenience between Qaddafi and Al Qaeda or another radial Muslim group?
Can we rely on our own intelligence people to know what's going on in Libya any more than they knew what was going on in Iraq under Saddam?
I'm probably wrong but this whole situation is kind of off the wall and looks like it could be a big mess in the early stages of development. A lot of that is being made more likely by ineffectual leadership from the White House.
One thing that might be good about being aggressively on the initiative is that it probably compensates for a multitude of weaknesses.
But how can we be sure that we have any business in Libya at all? There seem to be a lot of people here, not on the left, saying we have no business in Libya.
What, simply, is the case for intervening there? Will that case hold up? |
