Norway withdraws from NATO's Libya operation

[poiuytrewq0987]

The flight will take place two days before the country officially withdraws from NATO's operation in the north African country.

Norway is also the first member of the alliance that gave an exact date of its withdrawal.

The decision was announced in Oslo last month.

A Norwegian military spokesman could not confirm that the last flight would take place tomorrow, but said the country would withdraw on August 1.

Norway is one of eight countries from the 28-member western alliance that participated in the operation which started on March 19.

Six Norwegian F-16 jets participated, while the government in Oslo said at the time its limited capacities prevented it from taking part in such important missions for a prolonged period.

Other countries which are bombing targets in Libya with the mandate to protect civilians from the Gaddafi forces are the U.S, Belgium, Italy, Britain, Canada, France, and Denmark.

http://www.b92.net/eng/news/world-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=07&dd=29&nav_id=75682

[The Lawspeaker]

A good decision. I am not sure about the status of our own participation as our government has kept us in the dark about it. It's one of those conflicts were no European country should concern itself about.

Muslims killing Muslims.. what else is new ?

[Hevneren]

In this conflict, pressure was actually the greatest on Norway and Denmark to bomb targets, because of internal military policies that enabled Norwegian and Danish fighter jets to do so. It was an absurd situation in which Norwegian and Danish jets did disproportionally more bombing than British or French jets, and this policy was expected to continue by NATO command.

Issues of whether civilian casualties occurred were secondary to NATO command, whereas the Norwegian public remained skeptical to this policy of engagement. Basically, Denmark and Norway were expected to do NATO's dirty work, spend tens of millions of dollars on fuel and bombs while causing destruction to Libya and possibly causing civilian casualties in the process.

[Joe McCarthy]

In this conflict, pressure was actually the greatest on Norway and Denmark to bomb targets, because of internal military policies that enabled Norwegian and Danish fighter jets to do so. It was an absurd situation in which Norwegian and Danish jets did disproportionally more bombing than British or French jets, and this policy was expected to continue by NATO command.

Issues of whether civilian casualties occurred were secondary to NATO command, whereas the Norwegian public remained skeptical to this policy of engagement. Basically, Denmark and Norway were expected to do NATO's dirty work, spend tens of millions of dollars on fuel and bombs while causing destruction to Libya and possibly causing civilian casualties in the process.

The US has carried a disproportionate share of the NATO burden forever. That someone else in the alliance would find themselves doing the same for once is no great outrage.

[The Ripper]

The US has carried a disproportionate share of the NATO burden forever. That someone else in the alliance would find themselves doing the same for once is no great outrage.

Recent NATO operations have been an outrage.

;)

[Joe McCarthy]

Recent NATO operations have been an outrage.

;)

I'd say Libya is mostly misguided. Overthrowing that asshole is no outrage in itself. But the point is a different one about members sharing their weight of the load, and unsurprisingly Norway decided not to take the long approach.

[Hevneren]

I'd say Libya is mostly misguided. Overthrowing that asshole is no outrage in itself. But the point is a different one about members sharing their weight of the load, and unsurprisingly Norway decided not to take the long approach.

We've been "sharing" above our size in Afghanistan, spending the second most per citizen (second only to the USA) on that war and rebuilding. In Libya we (and the Danes) pulled above our weight once more. Nobody in NATO has any right or reason to complain. If anything, we in Norway should complain about the extraordinary waste of men and resources on our nation in Afghanistan, and recently in Libya. I'm in favour of Norway leaving NATO. People like you, Joe McCartney, don't appreciate our effort anyway, and honestly NATO isn't what it once was supposed to be.

[Joe McCarthy]

We've been "sharing" above our size in Afghanistan, spending the second most per citizen (second only to the USA) on that war and rebuilding. In Libya we (and the Danes) pulled above our weight once more. Nobody in NATO has any right or reason to complain. If anything, we in Norway should complain about the extraordinary waste of men and resources on our nation in Afghanistan, and recently in Libya. I'm in favour of Norway leaving NATO. People like you, Joe McCartney, don't appreciate our effort anyway, and honestly NATO isn't what it once was supposed to be.

I do appreciate the effort in Afghanistan. Just to be clear: my comment about not taking the long approach had less to do with Norway specifically than the lukewarm approach Europeans have in general about contributing to alliance upkeep. Still, to just pull out of Libya altogether sends the wrong message, and works to undermine the good feelings over Norway's Afghanistan contributions.

[Drawing-slim]

It is a fact, all other NATO members complain the most and do the least.
Then US gets blamed for everything for actually doing the right thing the most nobel thing removing genocidal maniacs out of this world.

[Turkey]

Any lybian citizen could a get interest free loans before this.

[Hess]

Good move. Europeans should not concern themselves with the affairs of Muslim countries. The Libyans are simply not ready for a more enlightened form of government, and it's time both Europe and America accept it.

[Drawing-slim]

Good move. Europeans should not concern themselves with the affairs of Muslim countries. The Libyans are simply not ready for a more enlightened form of government, and it's time both Europe and America accept it.Sure, in principle you have a point, but it is gadafi that brought down a plane in scotland some years ago if im not mistaking.
so i think is cadafi that sticks his nose in every european and western business creating conflicts with his maniac agenda, to the point of coming to UN and acting like a big shot, almost bitch-slappin aboma around! wich in this case i really wished bush was still president, judging the good reflexes he demonstrated dodging that shoe, he might have punched gaddafi right in that tranvestied face of his! lool

[Turkey]

Sure, in principle you have a point, but it is gadafi that brought down a plane in scotland some years ago if im not mistaking.you mean zion-scotland

so i think is cadafi that sticks his nose in every european and western business creating conflicts with his maniac agendalooking after his own people so they don't become part of the zioist's herd?
, to the point of coming to UN and acting like a big shot, almost bitch-slappin aboma around!and this is a bad thing?
wich in this case i really wished bush was still president, judging the good reflexes he demonstrated dodging that shoe, he might have punched gaddafi right in that tranvestied face of his! lool i suppose that would have been good lol.:D