Oh, that's not what they're saying their intentions are; they're claiming that they're planning to arm the "Libyan government" (which, remember, doesn't even control all of the capital city of Tripoli) to fight ISIS. But the headline above will be the effect, just as it has repeatedly been in "Iraq":
The United States and....world powers say they are ready to supply Libya’s internationally recognized government with weapons to counter the Islamic State and other [Muslim] groups gaining footholds in its lawless regions.
The world powers aim to push for exemptions to a U.N. arms embargo imposed on Libya to keep lethal arms away from Islamic [jihad]ists and rival militias vying for power. But in a communique obtained by the Associated Press, the U.S., four other permanent U.N. Security Council members and the more than fifteen other nations participating at the talks say they are “ready to respond to the Libyan government’s requests for training and equipping” government forces.
“The Government of National Accord has voiced its intention to submit appropriate arms embargo exemption requests to the U.N. Libya Sanctions Committee to procure necessary lethal arms and materiel to counter U.N.-designated terrorist groups and to combat [ISIS] throughout the country,” said the communique.. “We will fully support these efforts while continuing to reinforce the U.N. arms embargo.”
In other words, they will confusedly and blatantly contradict themselves. If the purpose of the U.N. arms embargo against what used to be Libya has been to keep as many armaments as possible out of the hands of ISIS, al Qaeda, Ansar al-Sharia, etc., and the "Government of National Accord" is barely more than an empty storefront shell, then where do YOU think that Western military aid is going to wind up? Do I even need to elaborate further?
And even if the military resources lavished upon the "GNA" didn't wind up in the enemy's arsenal, the notion that it could "combat ISIS throughout the country" is sheer fantasy:
[The] Islamic State controls the Mediterranean port of Sirte and in recent weeks has gained territory in government-held areas.
Earlier this month, Mr. Serraj’s government announced the formation of a military task force to address the threat posed by [the] Islamic State. But the task force isn’t backed by the rival government in the eastern-Libyan town of Tobruk, which is quarreling over the allocation of country’s oil and financial resources.
The U.S., U.K., France and Italy have said they would only consider easing the embargo and a possible military intervention against the three Islamic State affiliates in Libya if the unity government forms a centralized military force. [emphases added]
So, really, the whole story is a red herring and false alarm, designed, once again, to make it look like the Obama Regime is doing something about ISIS, when in reality it continues to do nothing - except tacitly arm them and facilitate their continued expansion.
And the only way to actually defeat the Islamic State - sufficient ground forces to crush them within three months - will...never...happen.
But as retired Major-General Paul Vallely argues, it could, if there was the will to do so:
"The best thing you can do, bring some of the retired generals and admirals back on active duty that know how to defeat these unconventional jihadi[st]s and I'll tell you what....We could defeat ISIS in ninety days with the right mix of troops and air power and ground operations, along with the Kurds....It can be done. I know that having been on the ground over there."...
"It's not a matter of numbers," he said. "They keep talking about numbers. As [fellow panel member Van Hipp, Jr.] knows, it's the Joint Strike Force capability of raids, use of Special Operations forces, good intelligence, and good targeting. And just like we took to the Taliban, al-Qaida in the fall of 2001, in thirty-one days with one hundred men and air power.
And the will. Which hasn't existed in at least seven and a half years and is unlikely ever to return, at least until long after it's too late. Which it probably already is.
For Libya, it was too late five years ago. All the "GNA" represents is rigor mortic twitching.
Exit question: After ISIS's reprise of (or improvement upon) 9/11, will there even be any temporary national unification as their was fifteen years ago? Is that even possible? Personally, I'm dubious of it.