Gen.: U.S. troops not ideal, but may be considered in Libya

Libyan rebels riding on the back of an armed pickup truck retreat east towards Benghazi from Ajdabiya, Libya, April 7, 2011. / AP

WASHINGTON - The United States may consider sending troops into Libya with a possible international ground force that could aid the rebels, according to the general who led the military mission until NATO took over.

Army Gen. Carter Ham also told lawmakers Thursday that added American participation would not be ideal, and ground troops could erode the international coalition and make it more difficult to get Arab support for operations in Libya.

Ham said the operation was largely stalemated now and was more likely to remain that way since America has transferred control to NATO.

Complete coverage: Anger in the Arab World

He said NATO has done an effective job in an increasingly complex combat situation. But he noted that, in a new tactic, Muammar Qaddafi's forces are making airstrikes more difficult by staging military forces and vehicles near civilian areas such as schools and mosques.

The use of an international ground force is a possible plan to bolster rebels fighting forces loyal to the Libyan leader, Ham said at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.

Asked if the U.S. would provide troops, Ham said, "I suspect there might be some consideration of that. My personal view at this point would be that that's probably not the ideal circumstance, again for the regional reaction that having American boots on the ground would entail."

Video: Ex-Rep. Weldon on Libya visit, Qaddafi meeting

President Barack Obama has said repeatedly there will be no U.S. troops on the ground in Libya, although there are reports of small CIA teams in the country. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told lawmakers last week that there would be no American ground troops in Libya "as long as I am in this job."

Ham disclosed that the United States is providing some strike aircraft to the NATO operation that do not need to go through the special approval process recently established. The powerful side-firing AC-130 gunship is available to NATO commanders, he said.

Other strike aircraft, including fighters and the A-10 Thunderbolt, which can provide close air support for ground forces, must be requested through U.S. European Command and approved by top U.S. leaders, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Ham said that process is quick, and other defense officials have said it can take about a day for the U.S. to approve the request and move the aircraft in from bases in Europe.

Ham said recent bad weather and threats from Qaddafi's mobile surface-to-air missile systems hampered efforts to use aircraft like the AC-130 and the A-10 to provide close air support for friendly ground forces. He says those conditions contributed to the stalemate.

Since the U.S. handed off the strike mission to NATO, U.S. planes account for only 15 percent of NATO planes now doing those air attacks, Ham said.

Meanwhile, rebel fighters claimed NATO airstrikes blasted their forces Thursday in another apparent mistake that sharply escalated anger about coordination with the military alliance in efforts to cripple Libyan forces. At least two rebels were killed and more than a dozen injured, a doctor said.

The attack - near the front lines outside the eastern oil port of Brega - would be the second accidental NATO strike against rebel forces in less than a week and brought cries of outrage from fighters struggling against Muammar Qaddafi's larger and more experienced military.

"Down, down with NATO," shouted one fighter as dozens of rebel vehicles raced eastward from the front toward the rebel-held city of Ajbadiya.

• no previous page
• next

1/2

[bamio]

Obamie lied when he said "No ground troops.." Obamie lies about everything.

[piercetheval]

Which particular corporate interest are we talking about protecting this time? Until all you working stiffs decide to send someone other than another corporate hand puppet to Washington this crap is going to continue. Until we as a nation severely limit corporate lobbying and manipulation of politics, rebuke and rescind foreign ownership of American land and also get rid of the 'Federal Reserve system' this crap is going to continue...it will be war after war after war...with the lower and the middle class Americans being the ones that will be sent to fight it.
You friggin 'Tea Partry' elitists have got some G88damn nerve carrying on about being taxed what you believe is excessive while sitting in your clubhouse sipping expensive drinks from imported crystal and boasting about your Mercedes while about 75% of the rest of Americans can't even find or beg for a pot to pi$$ in and are also being told that we can't organize collectively to demand a freakin' 'Pi$$ Pot'.
Read author Andrew Hitchcocks' piece "The Money Changers" folks...it may not be 100% accurate but it's close enough to give you an idea of why we need to dismantle and abolish the Federal Reserve System.
Meanwhile...I say why don't we, the aforementioned 75% start our own movement..."The Pi$$ Pot Party"...I'm in and I'll take the first pi$$ ...let me see...I think I'd like to pi$$ on Rep. Boehners' expensively coiffed pin head.

[Ammeh]

The top Pentagon officials need another hobby or career beside this. They have too much time on their hands. How about grave diggers at Arlington National Cemetery? Perhaps, a job at body bag production factory or prosthetic arms and legs technicians? By the way, since when do they have the right to dictate foreign policy and declaration of war?

[bennyblack1]

DO NOT SEND TROOPS TO LIBYA!!!! It's another COMPASSION TRAP for the United States. We can HELP them with airstrikes and controlling the airspace..but NO TROOPS!!! If it is what they want, THEY WILL OBTAIN IT. We need to STAY OUT OF IT!!!

We never learn.

[James93x]

American Jehadi deserve an opportunity to fight at Libya. The Qaddafi camp prefers a chance at NATO. The Rebel side wants revenge on the Coalition. Melees are a real part of war.

[pschnall]

This is a terrible idea. If foreign troops are necessary why not the U.N.???

[K. Daraa]

General Carter Ham has it right. American troops, on the ground in Libya, WILL CREATE MORE PROBLEMS in the Middle East and North Africa than it will solve. This would be the magnet for every potential jihadi in the entire world - the opportunity to kill more Americans to 'save Islam'. We just don't have a dog in this fight. What part of 'national security' does this serve for the American public, if it actually helps extremist to concentrate force and improve their image?

[AlFranken]

Will the ones collecting unemployment be the first considered to go? That's a win/win for the GOP -- stop paying them unemployment so they can get killed securing the GOP oil. Yes!!!!

[AlFranken]

You know you can't turn down a job offer while collecting unemployment. Maybe someone in the GOP should really start considering calling all the unemployed and offer them a job fighting in Libya or get off the govt. welfare!!!

[Forty-Four]

I wanna go...lol

[Ericwvb]

I'm sure if we gut Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security we can afford a few more wars, invasions and occupations AND give more tax cuts to the top 1%. I am sure the tea party wing of the GOP is hard at work making it so.

[RepublicNotAnEmpire]

Obama has tripled US troops occupying Afghanistan (up to 105,000), still has 40,000 troops occupying Iraq, massively expanded drone attacks in Pakistan and Yemen and now is bombing Libya without even an "authorization for use of force" from Congress. He even got the Democrat-controlled Congress to extend the "tax cuts to the top 1%" last year.

And Ericwvb thinks "the tea party wing of the GOP is hard at work" on all those things.

"Put down the Kool-aid and step away from the computer, Eric."