No U.S. Troops in Libya… At Least Not Yet

When President Obama first announced the United States involvement in Libya, he made sure to say that he would not commit ground forces to the “Kinetic Military Action” there. It now appears that the CIA is operating in Libya. From the National Journal:

The CIA has sent more than a dozen covert operatives to Libya as part of an escalating U.S. effort to vet the rebels working to oust Libyan strongman Muammar el-Qaddafi and lay the groundwork for funneling American aid to the insurgents, according to a person with direct knowledge of the CIA operations there.

Now, I am not saying that President Obama has broken his promise or that the CIA is the equivalent of U.S. ground troops being deployed to Libya, it isn’t. However, the entire way this “not a war” was launched was amateur hour at best. First of all, not only is it a horrible idea to announce to your enemy the extent that you are willing to fight, but when you make a politically motivated statement such as “no troops on the ground,” you place yourself in a terrible position. What happens when forces loyal to Khadaffi do what I would do and begin to appear as though they are rebels themselves? How hard would it be for them to load up in a Toyota and roll out? This would make it impossible to to determine who’s who from the air. Now, your no-fly-not-a-war-kinetic-military-action is worthless. At that point, what choices do you have? You can either bomb everything that looks like a rebel or leave all together. Both of these decisions would lead to same massacre we were supposed to stop. The only other option you have is to do what? Commit U.S. ground forces to the battle.

They’re not there yet folks, but it’s looking more and more like that’s the corner we are going to paint ourselves into. At that point, President Obama will have to make a decision, and for an administration that is more concerned with appearances and politics than effective policy or strategy, I don’t think that bodes well for us… or Libya.