POSTED RESPONSE TO AN EDITORIAL IN TORONTO'S GLOBE AND MAIL
"A no-fly zone could prevent a Libyan bloodbath"
I think that is, unfortunately, highly inaccurate.
First, "no-fly zones" are far, far easier to say or write than create: they are complex operations, pushing the operator into something close to a state of war.
Planes must first fly all over Libya to get the radars turned on.
Then attack planes must quickly follow-up to destroy the located radars.
But that's only the bare beginning.
Twenty-four hour-a-day flyovers must be maintained after to assure radars are not replaced and to attack planes which break the ban.
Has anyone kept track of American pilots brutal efforts in Afghanistan and in Iraq?
They regularly kill scores of innocent people, even in a situation where they have complete, unchallenged air superiority. They have certainly killed innocent Afghans in the hundreds.
It also will not assure victory to the rebellion. Only troops on the ground can do that. So when you start with the no-fly zone, you are entering the prospect of eventually being dragged into war.
We do not want America starting another damned war.
I dearly hope the people can topple Gaddafi, but I fear they cannot without help.
Perhaps the best help is for appropriate weapons - Stinger missiles, anti-tank guided rockets, night-vision goggles, and other such material - to be supplied in generous quantities, and quickly, to the rebels.
Incidentally, there are very troubling stories on the Internet about Israel intervening for Gaddafi, both in arranging his African mercenaries and in receiving Gaddafi's son for talks.
If these are true, could not we put some pressure on Israel finally to do something right in the world and desist?
The Globe should cover this matter if there is truth in it, having a great bearing on people's knowing who their genuine friends and allies are.
