Outside the Beltway

The NYT says it’s time for U. S. advisers and military air traffic controllers on the ground in Libya.

One can almost hear the pitter-patter of American boots in the distance.

A version of a piece I wrote Wednesday, titled “NATO’s Death Greatly Exaggerated,” has finally been published at Foreign Policy under the title “Back in the Saddle: How Libya Helped NATO Get Its Groove Back.”

Should transparency stop at the water’s edge?

Continuing problems with the coalition operation in Libya reinforce an old military adage: You fight like you train.

Remember when President Obama said there would be “no boots on the ground” in Libya? You didn’t actually believe that, did you?

President Obama says he acted in Libya to avert an imminent genocide, but there’s no evidence that any such thing was about to occur.

Modern life requires us to put a high degree of trust in those to whom we delegate responsibility

A NATO airstrike killed 13 rebel fighters, who were mistaken for Gaddafi’s forces. Apparently, they were shooting at NATO planes.

Todays’ horrific attack on the UN complex in Mazar-i Sharif may well the the Tet Offensive of Afghanistan: a relatively minor event that permanently changed the American public’s view of the war.

Politicians in office have a nasty habit of behaving completely differently than they promise on the campaign trail.

President Obama has pledged no slaughter and no ground troops for Libya. He may well be forced to pick one.

The U.S. seems to be on the verge of changing war strategies in Libya, even as it becomes clear that these rebels aren’t necessarily our friends.

As allied involvement in Libya’s civil war increases, there are signs that the rebels may not be able to close the deal.

Ten days after sending American forces into kinetic military action in Libya, President Obama addressed the nation to explain “what we’ve done, what we plan to do, and why this matters to us.”

President Obama’s grand coalition against Libya is a lot less than meets the eye.

Canada is leading the operation in Libya but no one is leading Canada.

The Libyan rebels probably aren’t strong enough to defeat Gaddafi on their own, and the no-fly zone isn’t going to be enough either. Which means this operation is going to be far more extensive than President Obama is willing to admit publicly.

The public, and Congress, are skeptical of the mission in Libya, and the reason for that is because the President has failed to tell us exactly why we’re there and what we’ll be doing.

It has become quite apparent that neither the White House nor our coalition partners have any idea what the path to an endgame in Libya even looks like. That’s not good.

Jorge Benitez has written a useful Libya Primer: Who is In Charge of Allied Forces? The short answer: No one.

The uneasy coalition that coalesced around action in Libya will be strained by decisions to come.

There are many opportunities to go to war. Here’s a guide for choosing between them.

What are the limits of Resolution 1973? Are there any?

America is about to enter a third war in the Muslim world with no clear idea of the end game.

The Obama Administration is asking the U.N. Security Council to authorize direct military intervention in Libya. The question is, why now?

Alain Juppé’s concession that “the moment has passed” for NATO to successfully intervene in Libya is correct.

John Kerry’s Washington Post op-ed supports U. S. leadership in establishing a no-fly zone in Libya.