Lybia

[IAN 2411]

There were many reasons the sudden commitment of personnel came from the CIA, and not the U.S. military. Not surprisingly, political concerns place high on that list, with a war-weary American public skeptical about any more long-term troop commitments in the Arab world. Indeed, on March 18, Obama had explicitly told a group of congressional leaders at a White House briefing on Libya that he had not authorized any deployment of U.S. ground troops, according to Hill officials with knowledge of the briefing.

That same refrain was repeated today, in Defense Secretary Robert Gates' testimony before the House Armed Services Committee.

Asked by a committee member if there were any U.S. "boots on the ground" in Libya, Gates responded: "Not that I am aware of," and then added: "The opposition said they don't want any."

Gates then fielded another question about the likelihood of a later deployment of U.S. troops on the ground in Libya.

"Not as long as I am in the job," he replied sharply.

So with no U.S. ground troops in play, the CIA is tasked with gathering intelligence and performing logistical groundwork at a critical stage of the effort to rein in Muammar Gadhafi from brutalizing civilians and tip the balance against him in Libya's civil war.

Neither the Americans nor the European and UAE allies, can as you say put boots on Libyan soil. They have to abide by the, 1974 UN mandate/whatever that was passed to NATO, to put troops of any kind on Libyan soil would be illegal. It seems to me the only one with a brain when that question was tabled was Defence Secretary Robert Gates, the rest had not even read what they signed up to.

I do however agree that there are more than likely CIA and British Intelligence officers out there, and as said a need for FACs, but the training of Libyan people? [Why do any of us need to get involved with another countries revolution apart from the humanitarian issue?].

According to the Ap:

Last Thursday March 24th, President Barack Obama, just back from a five-day trip to Latin America, convened his national security team for a White House meeting on Libya.

The meeting came five days into the U.S.'s air strikes targeting Libyan air defenses and military sites. And some lawmakers on Capitol Hill were already expressing misgivings over what they said were insufficient White House consultations with Congress on the nature and depth of America's military commitment there.

The Thursday meeting appeared as a sort of afterthought in the publicly announced March 24 schedule for the president: "Also in the afternoon, the President will meet with his national security team to review our efforts in Libya." But the confab stretched from the afternoon into evening--and by the time it wound down, CIA Director Leon Panetta had offered to send CIA personnel covertly to work on the ground in Libya.

"Once again, we were the only ones at the table who stepped up," Panetta later described the Agency role, according to a source who insisted on anonymity because of the sensitive consultations.
A CIA spokesman did not immediately respond to a query on the CIA's role in Libya, which was first reported Wednesday by the New York Times.

Are those your words denu or words of someone on the comity, If they are your words denu then would you please explain.

Be well IAN2411