British Army officers are being sent to Libya to advise rebels fighting Muammar Gaddafi’s forces.
The UK group will be deployed to the opposition stronghold of Benghazi, Libya’s second city, in a mentoring role to help leaders co-ordinating attacks on the dictator’s army.
Of course to be useful, the ‘advisers’ will have to control forces in combat. Is that allowed? Oh yeah, I forgot. They are just ‘advisers.’ They will give ‘advice.’ Isn’t that how it always starts? And when the rebels don’t perform so well under the ‘advice’ of their ‘advisers’, then what? Then there will be more ‘advisers’ dispatched. But not just to give ‘advice.’
But how can this be? Pageantmaster repeatedly assured me that any such action was ‘illegal’ under the UNSCR that justified bombing Libya. “No Ground Forces Allowed!” I anxiously await the carefully parsed explanation that might account for this inconsistency. Not to mention repeated declarations that this will not – repeat NOT – lead to a further increase in the level of intervention.
carl
[blockquote] “Our officers will not be involved in training or arming the opposition’s fighting forces. Nor will they be involved in the planning or execution of the NTC’s military operations or in the provision of any other form of operational military advice.”[/blockquote]Right. They are just going to be performing a [blockquote] …mentoring role to help leaders co-ordinating attacks on the dictator’s army.[/blockquote] Who do they think they are kidding?
carl
Just like the “advisors” weren’t involved in the early years of the American Vietnam involvement…right.
Honestly, if we just committed group troops, this whole thing would be over in 48 hours.
Actually, the British army has a long history of doing this sort of thing successfully.
#4, agreed. Thank God it is the British doing this and not e.g. some other Army with a poor record of conducting low intensity operations.