Libya VIII

128 posts / 0 new
Last post
Fidel

I'm just glad they didn't actually use the words, KILL! KILL! KILL!, in the resolution like they did with ones for Iraq and Af-Pak theaters of warfiteering and oil/land grabs. Because that would really be objectionable.

NDPP

Trump: I 'Screwed' Gadhafi

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/21/trump-i-screwed-gaddafi/...

" I rented him a piece of land. He paid me more for one night then the land was worth for two years, and then I didn't let him use the land,' Trump boasted. 'That's what we should be doing. I don't want to use the word 'screwed', but I screwed him."

I'm sure they're working on it DT....

NDPP

Mullen Warns of Libya Stalemate - by Jason Ditz

http://news.antiwar.com/2011/03/20/mullen-warns-of-libya-stalemate/

"And even though the war was only about a day long at the time, Admiral Michael Mullen warned early Sunday that a war could rapidly devolve into a stalemate, leaving Moammar Gadhafi in power in West Libya over the long term...And predictably, the pundits are alreaedy calling for a major escalation, with a ground invasion of Libya being sold as an exit strategy for a conflict America has barely entered...

Three Key Questions About Libya (and vid) interview with former Supreme NATO Commander Allied Forces Europe, Wesley Clark

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/03/20/clark.libya.coalition/index.html

"How these initial military actions will relate to the stated - and unstated - goals of the operation, remains the major challenge for the coalition..."

Frmrsldr

Resolution 1973 wrote:

4. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect (my emphasis) civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack (my emphasis) in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi,...

West Coast Greeny wrote:

Don't see anything there about banning airstrikes. Ergo, action is 100% legal under international law.

Don't see anything there about airstrikes, period. The word isn't even mentioned in the quoted passage.

What the quoted passage does say is that "Member States are authorized to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack."

That would leave essentially the cities of Benghazi and Tobruk. Lo and behold: Benghazi is mentioned by name. That would exclude Tripoli and essentially every other city in Libya.

The passage also says that "Member States are authorized to protect civilians and civilian populated areas..."

Hence, the Member States were to enforce the no-fly zone as a war of defense/protection. NOT a War of Aggression, which is illegal according to the U.N. Charter.

Attacking Tripoli is to attack civilians in a "civilian populated area[ ]..."

THAT IS VIOLATION OF THE RESOLUTION NUMBER ONE.

Finally, the passage: Member States are authorized to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack." does not identify who the attackers are.

Thus, this is a universal prohibition, prohibiting ANYONE, INCLUDING US from attacking civilians and civilian populated areas. This would be in conformity with the U.N. Charter, the Nuremberg Principles, the Geneva Conventions and all other applicable international laws.

THAT IS VIOLATION NUMBER TWO.

 

al-Qa'bong

Bomb Tel Aviv!

 

Palestinians wounded in Israeli air strikes

 

Quote:

At least 17 people, including children, have been wounded in a series of Israeli air strikes on the Gaza Strip, Palestinian emergency workers said.

Witnesses and medics said Israeli jets carried out at least five air strikes late on Monday in the northern town of Beit Lahiya and Gaza City.

 

 

trippie

Good one on ya Frmrsldr, this whole hting about bombing people and it being legel is kinda insane.

trippie

Was watchin CBC National tonight and they had a panel of said experts, the usual suspects. It was kind of sickening to listen to them talk as if this was walk in the park on a Sunday afternoon in the spring. Like the whole barbaric undertaking was some how OK.

Frmrsldr

NDPP wrote:

The Foreign Secretary, William Hague acknowledged the possibility of non-occupying ground troops moving into Libya, which he claimed would not breech the terms of the UN resolution...

Can someone explain to me what foreign "non-occupying ground troops in[side] Libya" are?

Are there any historical examples any of you know of out there?

I'm curious to see what they look like.

Would our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq be examples of "non-occupying troops"?

Frmrsldr

Fidel wrote:

I'm just glad they didn't actually use the words, KILL! KILL! KILL!, in the resolution like they did with ones for Iraq and Af-Pak theaters of warfiteering and oil/land grabs. Because that would really be objectionable.

Well, the invasion and drone bombing of Pakistan is an (undeclared) covert war.

Like the Doctor and the Madman's covert 1970 invasion of Cambodia and (aerial) bombing of that country and Laos.

Frmrsldr

Fidel wrote:

They should have worded it something like,

...to protect civilian populated areas, including the Anglo-American backed armed insurrection under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya from or by those who we can no longer tolerate sharing our oil revenues with, including Benghazi and region of Cyrenaica, traditional strongholds of the royal Senussi dynasty.

It might make the resolution a little more readable.

And provide legal cover for what the U.S., the U.K., France and other countries (soon to follow) are doing in the name of the U.N., international jurisprudence and universal morality.

Fidel

They should have worded it something like,

...to protect civilian populated areas, including the Anglo-Franco-American backed armed insurrection under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya from or by those who we can no longer tolerate sharing our oil revenues with, including Benghazi and region of Cyrenaica, traditional strongholds of the royal Senussi dynasty.

It might make the resolution a little more readable.

Fidel

Yes, maybe I should have said ...Anglo-Franco-American backed armed insurrection...

NDPP

Obama: NATO To Join Libya War

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/171127.html

US President Barack Obama says the United States will transfer control of the air assault against Libya to the NATO Alliance within days...'We anticipate this transition to take place in a matter of days and not in a matter of weeks,' Reuters quoted Obama saying at a news conference during a visit to Chile on Monday. 'NATO will be involved in a coordinating function because of the extraordinary capacity of that alliance but details of the transfer would be provided by US military chiefs, he said.

Meanwhile, Turkey has criticized NATO's role in the military campaign against Libya, saying its large-scale military operation was similar to those in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ankara has called for a review of other possible measures NATO could take in Libya. It also called for an immediate Western ceasefire..."

NDPP

The Rebels: One Family Against Gaddafi  -  by Evan Hill

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/03/201131812113468047...

"Five brothers held in Libya's most notorious prison describe how they hope to overthrow the regime, or die trying."

the cited experience fighting US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan might soon come in handy...

RT: Bombs for Peace? 'UN Completely Disgraced in Libya' (vid)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=f3NFU3KL0uo#at=32

Interview with Diana Johnstone

RT: 'We'll See DU Missiles Thrown by Western Aircraft On Libya (vid)'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgnJ28YeTKU&feature=related

"We need a ceasefire, we need dialogue : Marco Gasnic

NDPP

RT: Coalition Forces Strike Gaddafi Compound (and vid)

http://rt.com/news/coalition-forces-gaddafi-compound/

'A command post also used as one of the private residences of the embattled Libyan leader has been completely destroyed as a result of an air strike by the coalition forces late on Sunday. Libyan officials called the strike a 'barbaric' bombing,' but did not say whether Gaddafi himself was inside the building.

Gaddafi has not appeared in public since the intervention began on Saturday, instead delivering his addresses via telephone. The US says it has fired 12 more cruise missiles at targets on Monday, and Canadian planes have now joined the action..The agency also quotes the US commander as saying that the Libyan mission is not about supporting opposition forces.."

A_J

NDPP wrote:

RT: 'We'll See DU Missiles Thrown by Western Aircraft On Libya (vid)'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgnJ28YeTKU&feature=related

Depleted Uranium isn't used in missiles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Ammunition

While the U.S., U.K. and France do use DU ammunition, the Harrier aircraft appears to be the only weapon being used over Libya at the moment that could be equipped with it (as 25 mm cannon ammunition).

A_J

Frmrsldr wrote:

NDPP wrote:

The Foreign Secretary, William Hague acknowledged the possibility of non-occupying ground troops moving into Libya, which he claimed would not breech the terms of the UN resolution...

Can someone explain to me what foreign "non-occupying ground troops in[side] Libya" are?

Are there any historical examples any of you know of out there?

I'm curious to see what they look like.

Would our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq be examples of "non-occupying troops"?

I would imagine they would be small groups of soldiers on the ground to target airstrikes or act as liasons with the rebels (something that happened all of the time in the Balkans, and early in the invasion of Afghanistan), if an aircraft went down, then a search and rescue team would need to be sent in to recover the crew. Here's an account of a combat search and rescue mission:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrkonji%C4%87_Grad_incident

NDPP

Stop Bombing Libya!  -  By Marjorie Cohn

http://warisacrime.org/content/stop-bombing-libya

"All necessary measures' should first have been peaceful measures to settle the conflict. But peaceful means were not exhausted before Obama began bombing Libya. The burgeoning conflict in Libya is a civil war, which arguably does not constitute a threat to international peace and security. Humanitarian concerns do not constitute self-defense. The UN Charter does not permit the use of military force for humanitarian interventions..."

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

Libya rebels struggle to regroup; US jet crashes
 

Quote:

Moammar Gadhafi's forces shelled rebels regrouping in the desert dunes outside a strategic eastern city of Ajdabiya on Tuesday, and his snipers and tanks roamed the streets of the last major opposition-held city in the west, Misrata, signaling a prolonged battle ahead.
 
Disorganization among the rebels could hamper their attempts to exploit the air campaign by U.S. and European militaries, who themselves have struggled to articulate an endgame. Since the uprising began on Feb. 15, the opposition has been made up of disparate groups even as it took control of the entire east of the country.
Regular citizens - residents of the "liberated" areas - formed an enthusiastic but undisciplined force that in the past weeks has charged ahead to fight Gadhafi forces, only to be beaten back by superior firepower. Regular army units that joined the rebellion have proven stronger and more organized, but only a few units have joined the battles while many have stayed behind as officers struggle to get together often antiquated, limited equipment and form a coordinated force.

Regular army units that joined the rebellion will be the core of any force that takes any serious ground fight to Gadaffi... they are probably getting organized for that task around Bengasi. That will be no easy task considering they have to build everything from the bottom up. This is where international help in the form of weapons and equipment would be of immense help to the rebellion. I have yet to hear of ANYBODY providing this to them.
Meanwhile the city of Misrata's population is still under duress from surrounding Gadaffi forces.
Please read the article from more details of the plight of this city's population.  

Also a US jet went down from mechanical failure around Bengasi. The crew ejected and has been recovered, one with the aid of rebel forces.

Quote:

An American fighter jet crashed, both crew ejecting safely. The U.S. Africa Command said both crewmembers were safe in American hands after what was believed to be a mechanical failure of the Air Force F-15 on Monday night. One was picked up by a rebel force and the other by a Marine Corps Osprey search and rescue aircraft.

 

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

RT analysis notes that the first priorities of the current NATO atrocities are as follows:

1. (a) Eliminate Libya's defences and

1. (b)  Gain control of Libya's oil region by provoking civil war between tribes.

and, only after that ...

2. Protecting Libyan civilians.

For NATO, Libyans are expendable.

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

 

Well judging by what's happing on the ground right now, nobody seems to be controlling much of anything... "NATO" included.

 

Jingles

What's with all the appeals to the legality of this war crime? 

I thought it would be well understood by now that the law exists to restrain the weak. The strong make the law serve their purpose. 

Any pretense of legality or legitimacy through the thoroughly corrupt UN would be laughable if it were not so disturbing. UN resolutions exist to provide cover for the colonial powers to do as they will to their former colonies. When a UN resolution offends the powerful, they are ignored or branded as irrelevant. When CF-18s plod their way over Israel to enforce compliance with the many UN resolutions violated with impunity, then talk to me about legality and legitimacy. 

Quote:
" you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.".

Thucydides

431 A.D.

I would argue that the more immoral the crimes of state, the greater effort goes into renedering it "legal" by its perpatratoirs.

Slumberjack

BTW, has anyone caught any whiff at all of the NDP response regarding the fact that the country has entangled itself in yet another war?  Or is it the case that after 'taliban' Jack, he's become a little wary of it changing into 'Muammar' Layton?

Doug

I would imagine so. Not the best way to start off an election campaign.

trippie

From what I understand, Layton has been calling for a No Fly Zone all along. I guess that sums up what one needs to think of the NDP.

Also, I think it was a unanimous backing by the Canadian bourgeois parliament to participate in this imperialist invasion of Libya.

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

France wants body outside NATO to head Libya fight

 

Quote:

France has proposed that a new political steering committee outside NATO be responsible for overseeing military operations over Libya.

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe says the new body will bring together foreign ministers of participating states - such as Britain, France and the United States - as well as the Arab League. It is expected to meet in the coming days, either in Brussels, London or Paris.

Juppe says not all members of the military coalition are members of NATO and "this is therefore not a NATO operation." But he says the coalition would use the NATO's "planning and intervention capabilities."

Not all NATO members are in favor of the no-fly zone and airstrikes against Libya.

 

  

Sounds good to me... I nominate France and the UAL. 

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

What about Osama bin Laden? Wasn't he able to arrange a no-fly zone in the entire US air space with only 19 people?

Put him in charge. He'll get 'er done. Wink

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

N.Beltov wrote:

What about Osama bin Laden? Wasn't he able to arrange a no-fly zone in the entire US air space with only 19 people?

Put him in charge. He'll get 'er done. Wink

 

Naaah... Too expensive with all those jets crashing into buildings and stuff.Laughing

 

Unionist

N.Beltov wrote:

[url=http://rt.com/news/expendables-oil-libya-civil-war/]For NATO, Libyans are expendable[/url]

Yeah maybe for NATO, but not for us:

[url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canadian-jets-abort-ground-... jets abort ground attack in Libya over fears of civilian casualties[/url]

God, are we ever nice!

 

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

uh huh ... except the Conservatives are on the hot seat over expensing some unnecessary recent zillion dollar aircraft, have been burned (along with the preceding Liberal regime) over the issue of Canadian complicity in torture in handing over "enemy combatants" to Afghan torturers, and so on.

Maybe not so "nice", eh?

Besides. It's hard to keep up the facade of Canadian peacebleness. Especially when you're dropping munitions on little boys and girls.

Don't you know about "good cop, bad cop" routines? I'm sure NATO has all sorts of charts, bar graphs, arrows pointing here and there (just think of Arlo's mocking song, "Alice's Restaurant"), and so on. They'll get her done. Yup.

duncan cameron
Unionist

Excellent - really - thank you, duncan. Needs to be shared on Facebook and wherever.

NDPP

How Canadian Companies Navigated the Complexities of Doing Business with Libya

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/time-to-lead/how-canadian-c...

"in the early 2000s - about the time Petro-Canada gained a foothold in the country, - dinner at the Canadian ambassador's house was a chance for shadowy middlemen to offer their services on behalf of the Gadhafi regime. There some middlemen pressed Canadian companies to sponsor an art show by Said Gadhafi. Petro Canada and SNC Lavalin agreed..."

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Jingles wrote:

Quote:
" you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.".

Thucydides

431 A.D.

Good quote, Jingles, but it's B.C., not A.D.

NDPP

A Hundred Years of Rain: Air War Comes Full Circle in Libya  - by Chris Floyd

http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/2110-...

"A hundred years on, as missiles rain down on Gaddafi's defenseless and sleeping Libyan soldiers are blasted and burned, we hear claims of a similar kind: the might of the western onslaught will dissipate all support for Gaddafi's regime and usher in a new golden age for everyone...

Just as Shock and Awe were meant to in Iraq. Or bombing and defoliation were meant to in Vietnam. Or as the London Blitz was meant to break Britain's spirit. Yet all the evidence suggests that dropping high explosive on places where people live increases their opposition, their solidarity and their resolve. Happy Anniversary."

Statement On the Potential Use of Depleted Uranium in Libya

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/396.html

"ICBUW is concerned that the current use of US Marine Corps AV-8B Harrier ground attack aircraft could lead to DU contamination should their cannon be deployed against ground targets. ICBUW is also concerned that the potential for contamination may increase significantly as the conflict develops if US Airforce A-10 Thunderbolt ground attack aircraft are deployed.."

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

duncan cameron wrote:

I have written about this here:

http://rabble.ca/columnists/2011/03/five-principles-driving-war-propagan...

 

Good write-up Duncan, thanks and keep it up!

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Too bad Duncan couldn't be bothered to actually take a position on the key question of whether imperialist forces should be involved in this war, and more particularly, to call for Canadian forces to be withdrawn. 

NDPP

A-APRP: Call For Action Against the Bombing of Libya

http://a-aprp-gc.org/?p=2130

"The following organizations and governments have issued statements against the bombing of Libya..."

duncan cameron

By pointing out how the military operation was being run according to the principles of war propaganda, I thought my position was quite clear. To further clarify, I oppose Western intervention, and want to see the bombing end right now.

Personally i was sorry to hear the NDP supported Harper and the Liberals on the issue. I see --supported by the recorded comments of senior Americans -- that Gaddafi did not bomb his own people, and conclude he did not plan to massacre civilians in Eastern Libya with his tanks. Rather, he wanted to engage with the armed insurgency.

 

Unionist

M. Spector wrote:

Too bad Duncan couldn't be bothered to actually take a position on the key question of whether imperialist forces should be involved in this war, and more particularly, to call for Canadian forces to be withdrawn. 

I guess we were reading two different articles, M.

 

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

I like your 5 points Duncan but I also like what was written in another RT story - that the well-being of Libyans came (a distant) second to the more important NATO priorities of (a) disabling Libya's ability to defend itself from air attack and (b) getting the tribal elements in Libya to fight among themselves and thereby make the appropriation of that country's oil wealth that much easier.

Edited to add: Furthermore, if this sort of analysis is correct, then we can expect to see such tribal conflict followed by "humanitarian" NATO arguments about the necessity of their intervention (using ground troops, natch) to keep the conflicting side apart. yadda yadda. We've seen this script before, of course, ...

 

A_J

NDPP wrote:

A-APRP: Call For Action Against the Bombing of Libya

http://a-aprp-gc.org/?p=2130

"The following organizations and governments have issued statements against the bombing of Libya..."

That's the first time I've seen anything like this - not only do they oppose intervention (understandable, naturally), but they also state their opposition to the rebels themselves:

Quote:

The A-APRP (GC) also declares its uncompromising and un-categorical opposition to the following and similar groups:

  1. Libyan Republic Interim Transitional National Council
  2. Libyan People's Army
  3. Free Libyan Air Force
  4. Libyan Youth Movement
  5. Committee for Libyan National Action in Europe
  6. National Conference for the Libyan Opposition (Libyan Constitutional Union; National Front for the Salvation of Libya; Libyan League for Human Rights and Libyan Tmazight Congress)
  7. Libya Watanona
  8. Libya Islamic Group (Muslim Brotherhood)
  9. Libya Islamic Fighting Group (al-Qaeda)

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

At least it's only "un-categorical" opposition! Tongue out

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Would it be fair to describe the Muslim Brotherhood as a front for the Saudi princes? I think it was the Angry Arab who made a statement to that effect.

Snert Snert's picture

Similarly, the Libyan People's Army is just a front for the Libyan people.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

The Angry Arab wrote:
The New York Times reported that Saudi editors--all of them--were summoned to receive orders at the feet of the Saudi king. The orders are clear from the Saudi propaganda coverage: basically, treat Arab protests as directed against republics only, and promote the notion that all the monarchies are safe because they are virtuous models of governance. I kid you not.

This is the sort of Arab regime that supports the current NATO bombing campaign. In the case of Saudi Arabia, we have a Wahhabist, polygamist, Canadian-torturing monarchy that is so reactionary that even the Israeli apartheid regime loves it and forgives it its disgusting anti-Semitism.

 

NDPP

Some interesting statements appended too:

Iraq-Palestine Committee: A Call To Defend Libya's Unity, Sovereignty and from Imperial Aggression

http://ipcommittee.net/id10.html

Peoples Of The World

After the partially successful popular Arab revolts against puppet regimes in Tunisia and Egypt, Western imperialism and Zionism are now on the counter-offensive. It was only to be expected that imperialism would not stand idle while their global system of fragmentation, domination, and exploitation was being shaken to its foundations by the will of the Arab nation. Imperialism has chosen Libya as its next, but not final, stage for counter-attack. Libya was chosen for the following reasons:

West Coast Greeny

I don't think Russian State Television is all that much better a source to go to than Libyan State Television. 

NDPP

Which is why one should read widely from as many sources as possible.  Have you watched Libyan State Television? Worse than CBC?

RT: Bombardment With Social Expenditures (and vid)

http://rt.com/news/libya-dollars-us-war/

"The reported cost of a single Tomahawk missile launched into Lybia is from 1.1 to 1.5 Million dollars. It has only been a few days into operation Odyssey Dawn and already the cost of the bombardment from sea to air is skyrocketing. The price of one day alone was $100 million dollars. 'Within the first two hours they fired 110 Cruise missiles, so right there, thousands of teachers of course could be paid for,' said Sara Flounders, a co-founder of the International Action Center in New York

Frmrsldr

A_J wrote:

That's the first time I've seen anything like this - not only do they oppose intervention (understandable, naturally), but they also state their opposition to the rebels themselves:

Quote:

The A-APRP (GC) also declares its uncompromising and un-categorical opposition to the following and similar groups:

  1. Libyan Republic Interim Transitional National Council
  2. Libyan People's Army
  3. Free Libyan Air Force
  4. Libyan Youth Movement
  5. Committee for Libyan National Action in Europe
  6. National Conference for the Libyan Opposition (Libyan Constitutional Union; National Front for the Salvation of Libya; Libyan League for Human Rights and Libyan Tmazight Congress)
  7. Libya Watanona
  8. Libya Islamic Group (Muslim Brotherhood)
  9. Libya Islamic Fighting Group (al-Qaeda)

Who do they support?

Or do they take an entirely neutral position and equally not support all factions involved, supporting only peace and non-violent negotiation?

 

Pages

Topic locked