In news coming from the EU Observer we can watch this progress developing in real time:
Foreign ministers wary of EU military role in Libya
Foreign ministers have endorsed the basic outlines of an EU 'military-humanitarian' mission to Libya, amid concern about putting ground soldiers into a volatile situation.
Are we learning yet another new phrase? We already have "responsibility to protect", now we have a new entry: "military-humanitarian mission". How clever. A military action that can be cloaked in "humanitarianism". Interesting.
The meeting in Luxembourg on Tuesday (12 March) saw ministers approve the so-called concept of operations (Conops) for the Eufor Libya mission, the first step in the planning of any mission which involves military assets.
"We are only in the planning phase now of Eufor Libya. The next step would have to be a request from the UN office for the co-ordination of humanitarian affairs (OCHA) on opening or maintaining of humanitarian passages. It could be evacuations, but that request hasn't come yet. If that request comes, then we'll have to take more concrete measures.
So a formal request would come from the UN. I suppose that would legitimize any subsequent actions.
Is anyone connecting the dots yet?
Earlier in the day, an EU diplomat said France is "basically trying to get 'boots on the ground' via an EU humanitarian-military mission. But a lot member states are very reluctant in signing up to that."
For her part, foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton said "In support of humanitarian efforts, military assets are to be used very carefully."
"Some member states stress more the humanitarian aspects and do not want any reference to the security situation, others say the two are intertwined and press for the two to be mentioned," the source said. "It is a very unusual military operation - we don't know what we would be asked to do - so planning is very loose at the moment."
"It certainly doesn't mean to engage in riskier operations, but to exert the maximum military pressure possible and strike military targets. If artillery is firing at Misrata, it means there is artillery which needs to be tracked down and annihilated."
In other words, the EU is on the threshold of sending troops into Libya - a sovereign country who has not threatened any other countries nor is at war with any other countries. In a unilateral decision, the UN has determined that based on this vague, ill-defined notion of "responsibility to protect", the EU was able to begin military actions in Libya.
Now, we are seeing this military action taken up a notch, with the use of ground troops, under the premise of an even more vague "military-humanitarian" action.
Meanwhile, as we saw yesterday, the rhetoric that is being used against Israel looks a lot like the rhetoric that is being used to justify the actions in Libya.
This is a fascinating development, and it seems easy to see where this is going.
As we approach the September date - a time that the UN will take a vote on establishing an independent "PA State" - we are already seeing rhetoric (from the SAME people) that would justify military action in Israel. Yesterday's news revealed that a "PA State" can't be successful with the status-quo and some sort of military presence would be necessary.
This whole process seen in Libya seems to be emerging for Israel - certainly based on the rhetoric we are currently seeing. In fact, the timing of this rhetoric and the parallels to Libya seems far more than coincidence. It actually seems that a plan is unfolding. An evil plan which involves the marginalization and ultimate destruction of the Nation of Israel.
But don't forget - God is watching - and as He clearly stated in Ezekiel 38-39, His "hot anger will be aroused" and He will take action to protect Israel. And just as God equally clearly stated "It is coming". And it appears to be coming sooner rather than later.
Will the U.S. fall in line?
U.S. to lay out new Mideast policy in weeks
Just as we approach September.
WASHINGTON - The United States plans a new push to promote comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Tuesday, suggesting reinvigorated US role in trying to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
US President Barack Obama will lay out US policy toward the Middle East and North Africa in the coming weeks, Clinton told Arab and US policy makers in a speech that placed particular emphasis on Israeli-Palestinian peace.
"America's core interests and values have not changed, including our commitment to promote human rights, resolve long-standing conflicts, counter Iran's threats and defeat al Qaida and its extremist allies," she added. "This includes renewed pursuit of comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace."
"Commitment to promote human rights" sounds a LOT like "responsibility to protect". Doesn't it?
We shall see.