Apparently the US made a bit of a meal of the operation to save those two airmen who bailed out of their F-15 near Benghazi. According to reports, the men landed in different positions. One of them hid in an animal pen but was found and given food and thanked by locals, and the other got stuck in a field. He called in air support because he assumed the people approaching him were hostile, and (allegedly) a Harrier and a helicopter gunship were sent. The plane bombed several vehicles nearby after buzzing them, and the gunship fired on a crowd of people in the field. No fatalities but quite a few wounded, including some lost limbs.

Marines were landed in Ospreys to extract the downed airmen and again they are alleged to have fired on civilians.

This is one of the reasons why it's not good to get involved. Bad propaganda stories like this one, where someone was a bit gung-ho, always damage your nation's image.

Right. I know the Marines are making a big deal about how the story is false and no shots were fired, as well. Either way I'm glad the US is just going along for the ride rather than taking charge.

NATO is seriously screwing up right now, though.

O.o I'm shocked. I haven't heard of the U.S. shooting at civilians during the pilot's rescue. I had to research pretty thoroughly to find a German article about the incident. Imo this is almost as unacceptable as Gaddafi's attacks. And I'm pretty angry about the fact that it's being tried to cover up.
Whoever was responsible for that should be punished accordingly. Even when they were afraid about the well-being of their pilot they can't shoot first and ask later.

Generally it is my opinion that the intervention came too late. I realize the problems and implications of intervention, but still I think when someone in power decides to murder his own people for thinking differently there has to be done something about this. It has been like a week until the UN took action all the while innocent civilians got bombed.
We have these organizations for just that purpose: To stop dictators from going crazy and start killing people, so I don't think "it's none of our business" applies here. On the contrary, we have the responsibility of helping those who can't help themselves. This is further backed by the Lybians asking for help.

Btw. about the argument the attacks are doing the same as Gaddafi: killing civilians.
It's one thing if there's some accidental deaths while trying to disarm the aggressor and once that goal is achieved the attacks are stopped.
But it's a whole new level if the intention of the attack is to kill as many people as possible and if civilians die - "even better, they were traitors anyway".
Both of them are bad of course, but I'm sure the 2nd option is worse, and more importantly totally out of control.

excuse my grammar, but it's late and I just had to comment that right now.

I really want to believe that no shots were fired. The crappy thing about this is that the "cover up" idea could go either way. What a better way to spread anti-American sentiment than to say the Americans started firing on civilians. I know the U.S. government is keen on the cover-ups, but I'm still on the fence on this one until it becomes more clear.

I saw this story on the news. They showed a clip of an injured guy (he had like a tiny piece of shrapnel in his leg) who forgave the soldiers or w/e. He said something like "It was a misunderstanding and it happens. They have to protect their pilots" or some stuff.

Immediately I said out loud "That guy is really cool if that's what he actually said."
"if that's what he actually said"

Though I've become less of a fan of CNN over recent years, it is articles like this one that make me question stories like the civilians being fired at by Marines. It is widely known now that Gaddafi has set up snipers all around various Libyan cities to further his martial law. It was big news that he sent forces (mainly tanks) to fire on a hospital in Misrata, and his troops have been taking out civilians in another large city as well. And now he is claiming that Americans are killing Libyan civilians rather than strategic military targets, further propelling the anti-American sentiment, and we're supposed to believe that (and more importantly this somehow trumps the fact that he has killed civilians himself).

I accidentally read the comments on that article, too, and immediately remembered why I think half of my country is retarded.

EDIT:
And for fuck sake, I'm so sick of the hypocrisy of this Tea Party bullshit. John Boehner wrote a letter to Obama asking for clarification because apparently Obama says we need to get Gaddafi out of there, and the UN says that wasn't part of the plan. I want Obama to respond with, "I'm sorry, bud, are you saying you want Gaddafi to remain in power?" If he tries to get Gaddafi out of power (similarly to Saddam Hussein), he'll be called out as going against the UN (even though Bush got rid of Hussein without UN support). If he doesn't get Gaddafi out of power and follows the UN, he'll be called weak for not doing everything he can to spread democracy. When the next presidential election comes around, I have no doubt that the smear campaign against Obama will include accusing him of things Bush was praised for. Ugh. Now I remember why I stopped posting in LD and SD.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Mar 24 2011, 6:15 pm by DevliN.