aaaaaaaaand go.
Libya V - The Security Council Strikes Back
Thu, 2011-03-17 21:27
#1
Libya V - The Security Council Strikes Back
Thu, 2011-03-17 21:56
#2
welder
'Bout time...Hopefull it's not to late...
Thu, 2011-03-17 22:17
#3
N.Beltov
The question is: will the "rebels" now be bombed by NATO and Gadaffi alike?
Or, maybe this is "too little too late" as the "rebels" will not be able to hold on to anything and can only, at best, disappear into the sand?
What made the Russians, Chinese, and other members of the Security Council abstain on the vote?
Thu, 2011-03-17 22:26
#4
welder
The question is: will the "rebels" now be bombed by NATO and Gadaffi alike?
Or, maybe this is "too little too late" as the "rebels" will not be able to hold on to anything and can only, at best, disappear into the sand?
What made the Russians, Chinese, and other members of the Security Council abstain on the vote?
Frankly,it's not going to take much to really hurt Khaddaffi's army..It's not that strong because he's decimated it over the years.
Sadly,it might be a little late to stop this...
In my opinion,the Russians and the crypto-Fascist Chinese obstained because they would rather see "The West" wear whatever bad press might come out of this...
Plus,how could either of those countries claim to be standing up for people fighting against a totalitarian government?
Thu, 2011-03-17 22:36
#5
N.Beltov
It looks like those who predicted imminent NATO bombings were correct. Imagine that.
Thu, 2011-03-17 22:43
#6
Well if they didn't have CIA'da before, they will after the bombers and assassination squads are finished in Libya.
Thu, 2011-03-17 22:45
#7
welder
Well if they didn't have CIA'da before, they will after the bombers and assassination squads are finished in Libya.
If we don't stop Col.Khaddaffi now,we will all be dealing with Islamofascists running Libya in the not too distant future...
Not a good scenario with Egypt in a still fragile state...
Thu, 2011-03-17 22:59
#8
If we don't stop Col.Khaddaffi now,we will all be dealing with Islamofascists running Libya in the not too distant future...
That's what happens when you don't wear a mask while welding.
Thu, 2011-03-17 23:01
#9
welder
If we don't stop Col.Khaddaffi now,we will all be dealing with Islamofascists running Libya in the not too distant future...
That's what happens when you don't wear a mask while welding.
And you "Power to the people" silliness is the obfuscating of the misguided...
Are prepared to allow Col.Khaddaffi to over run those fighting for their fredom???
Thu, 2011-03-17 23:02
#10
Time for the NDP to [url=http://www.ndp.ca/press/new-democrat-statement-on-ongoing-protests-in-li... victory[/url]:
“Canada should also be working with its international partners to bring the issue to the UN Security Council and work to establish a no-fly zone in Libya's airspace.
Yeah, Canada's finally getting some recognition! Punching above our weight!
Thu, 2011-03-17 23:21
#11
N.Beltov
Libyan authorities have called the resolution a "threat to the country's unity." The deputy foreign minister of Libya, Khaled Kaim, said the resolution "calls on Libyans to kill each other."
Thu, 2011-03-17 23:23
#12
Islamofascist is soooooo 2004.
Maybe I missed it, but when are France and Germany bombing Saudi Arabia to stop them attacking the pro-democracy protestors?
Perhaps Germany can pull Rommel from his tomb to lead the Bundeswehr triumphantly back into Libya.
If we don't stop Col.Khaddaffi now,we will all be dealing with Islamofascists running Libya in the not too distant future..
Never fear, laddy! I'm sure the US has already vetted several expatriat Libyans, who graduated from Harvard and sat on the board of one oil company or another, to run the country all democratic-like. Just like in Iraq.
Thu, 2011-03-17 23:37
#13
welder
Islamofascist is soooooo 2004.
Maybe I missed it, but when are France and Germany bombing Saudi Arabia to stop them attacking the pro-democracy protestors?
Perhaps Germany can pull Rommel from his tomb to lead the Bundeswehr triumphantly back into Libya.
If we don't stop Col.Khaddaffi now,we will all be dealing with Islamofascists running Libya in the not too distant future..Never fear, laddy! I'm sure the US has already vetted several expatriat Libyans, who graduated from Harvard and sat on the board of one oil company or another, to run the country all democratic-like. Just like in Iraq.
Don't like Islamofascist??
What would prefer??
Wahhabist's??...Theocratic luddites???...How 'bout bloodthirsty murderers??
I like Islamofascist..It's an oldie but a goodie!!!!
The rest is just silly praddle...Oh,I forgot,it's the evil US...Not the ugly side of Islam..
No...That could never happen,right?
Thu, 2011-03-17 23:41
#14
Never fear, laddy! I'm sure the US has already vetted several expatriat Libyans, who graduated from Harvard and sat on the board of one oil company or another, to run the country all democratic-like. Just like in Iraq.
And please don't forget that other rebel freedom fighter - Hamid Karzai - who was a Unocal consultant. Yes, the Libyan people will soon join the grateful Iraqis and Afghans in thanking Europe and Amerika for their freedom!
Thu, 2011-03-17 23:43
#15
"Libya is ready for a ceasefire with the rebels", "we are ready for this decision but we require an interlocutor to discuss how to implement it", "Libya would react positively" and "will prove this willingness", "guarantee protection to civilians"
The Libyan regime has clearly indicated willingness to cease hostilities, protect civilians and comply with UN ceasefire demands. Why is this being ignored?
Thu, 2011-03-17 23:50
#16
You don't seem to understand that it's none of your fucking business what sort of government people on the other side of the globe decide to have as a government or to use as their laws.
Why you fear Islam is puzzling. We have never been threatened by Islam, we've never been attacked by Muslims. However, we are currently killing the shit out of plenty of Muslim people that have never been nor ever could be a threat to us here in our doubledouble stupored land.
Let the Libyans work it out. The Eqyptians did it despite the interferrence or the west. What we are seeing with this war-crime-in-progress of air strikes is a bunch of former Imperialist countries who've never forgiven the dark people for kicking them out of Africa. Good to know that Colonialism still enjoys such broad support among the liberal classes here.
I'll tell you what's gonna happen to all those people you are so desperate to "help": they will be slaughtered. First, since Quaddafi now has nothing to lose, he'll come down very, very hard on whomever he can get his hands on. Then, the "rebels" will counter slaughter whomever they can, just like the KLA did when they had NATO providing their air cover. Then, NATO will slaughter whomever the fuck is unlucky enough to be caught in the open. For years, and years, and years.
Congratulations on your humanitarianism.
Thu, 2011-03-17 23:57
#17
welder
You don't seem to understand that it's none of your fucking business what sort of government people on the other side of the globe decide to have as a government or to use as their laws.
Why you fear Islam is puzzling. We have never been threatened by Islam, we've never been attacked by Muslims. However, we are currently killing the shit out of plenty of Muslim people that have never been nor ever could be a threat to us here in our doubledouble stupored land.
Let the Libyans work it out. The Eqyptians did it despite the interferrence or the west. What we are seeing with this war-crime-in-progress of air strikes is a bunch of former Imperialist countries who've never forgiven the dark people for kicking them out of Africa. Good to know that Colonialism still enjoys such broad support among the liberal classes here.
I'll tell you what's gonna happen to all those people you are so desperate to "help": they will be slaughtered. First, since Quaddafi now has nothing to lose, he'll come down very, very hard on whomever he can get his hands on. Then, the "rebels" will counter slaughter whomever they can, just like the KLA did when they had NATO providing their air cover. Then, NATO will slaughter whomever the fuck is unlucky enough to be caught in the open. For years, and years, and years.
Congratulations on your humanitarianism.
Boo Hoo..
Yes...It's far better to stand back and let Col. Khaddaffi steamroll his own populous...
And then what??
Speaking humanitarianism...
And I'm not afraid of Islam at all...That's why I'm extremely careful to aim my villification at the violent and bloodthirsty elements within Islam.Ya'know...The ones that thrive in a power vacuum???
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:00
#18
Who says the US is even going to be able to determine what kind of gov libya has, I think it will go back to being fairly decentralized territory reflecting more pre colonial patterns.
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:01
#19
welder
"Libya is ready for a ceasefire with the rebels", "we are ready for this decision but we require an interlocutor to discuss how to implement it", "Libya would react positively" and "will prove this willingness", "guarantee protection to civilians"
The Libyan regime has clearly indicated willingness to cease hostilities, protect civilians and comply with UN ceasefire demands. Why is this being ignored?
My guess is that it's because it's only been out there for a few hours..
With this,another likely scenario is a partitioning of Libya perhaps on tribal lines?I do know that the Eastern part of the country is the most virulently anti-Khaddaffi.Not just on political grounds,but on tribal grounds,as well.Perhaps splitting the country in two is the best option??
This,again,will come down to the economics and politics of oil....
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:05
#20
BAR Update: The American Dilemma in Libya: To Bomb, Invade, Partition, Or All Of The Above - by Glen Ford
http://www.blackagendareport.com/content/update-american-dilemma-libya-b...
"The West dearly wishes to appropriate to itself a section of the 'Arab Revolt' so as to bomb an evil 'dictator' on their behalf. The West is clearly considering the 'option' of partitioning Libya.."
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:07
#21
N.Beltov
The only positive thing in this bloodthirsty resolution, in which NATO vultures decide among themselves which part of Libya's body they will take, is that there is as yet no authorization for ground troops to continue the work of any aerial atrocities. But, of course, further Security Council resolutions that rubber stamp the desire of the bloody NATO alliance could change that too.
It's interesting to read the media lies about US "reluctance" to support this resolution while the US military is busy and HAS been busy sending all sorts of ships, bristling with the latest weapons of mass destruction, steaming towards Libyan shores.
From the Hall of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli.. we will kill, kill, kill, ...............
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:13
#22
Bec.De.Corbin
First, since Quaddafi now has nothing to lose, he'll come down very, very hard on whomever he can get his hands on.
I'll tell you what; I'm not happy about this no fly zone soon to turn into a free fire zone but I doubt Gadaffi is going to have anything to come down hard with in a day or two. Seriously, if those guys manning those artillery guns, rocket launchers and tanks are smart, as soon as they heard about the UN resolution, they'll be on there way back to Tripoli in those little pickup tucks of theirs. They do not stand a chance out in the desert like they are in those big assed military vehicles. I've seen first hand and up close what's going to happen to their equipment and them if they stick with it... I hope they all pack up and just leave.
Air defence or not: they just got turned into sitting fucking ducks...
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:19
#23
welder
First, since Quaddafi now has nothing to lose, he'll come down very, very hard on whomever he can get his hands on.
I'll tell you what; I'm not happy about this no fly zone soon to turn into a free fire zone but I doubt Gadaffi is going to have anything to come down hard with in a day or two. Seriously, if those guys manning those artillery guns, rocket launchers and tanks are smart, as soon as they heard about the UN resolution, they'll be on there way back to Tripoli in those little pickup tucks of theirs. They do not stand a chance out in the desert like they are in those big assed military vehicles. I've seen first hand and up close what's going to happen to their equipment and them if they stick with it... I hope they all pack up and just leave.
Air defence or not: they just got turned into sitting fucking ducks...
Totally agree...
You'll note that as soon as the poop hit the fan,Col.Khaddaffi wanted a ceasefire and wants to talk a deal...
Not so tough when he no longer has the biggest gun,is he???
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:20
#24
N.Beltov
According to one report I read, the anti-Gadaffi forces were in serious danger of immediate defeat before this resolution passed.
Hence, perhaps, the speed with which the US and other NATO countries were able to and needed to ram this through the Security Council. However, they MAY be finished already, anyway, in which case this resolution and any action that flows from it may be too late to influence the results of the civil conflict. The NATO countries could DO nothing and yet be SEEN to support the anti-Gadaffi elements. A political objective of sorts.
OTOH, If there is no conflict, will the NATO countries just start bombing anyway, as a way to provoke further conflict, etc. ? A key question would be then will the NATO countries support negotiations between the two sides or will NATO try to impose their own puppet regime?
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:23
#25
N.Beltov
Schoolyard analysis is OK for fights over marbles and chocolate bars. Not for more serioius matters.
Grow up.
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:41
#26
welder
Schoolyard analysis is OK for fights over marbles and chocolate bars. Not for more serioius matters.
Grow up.
Grow up...Really???
I've heared Libya called a virtual prison that has just seen a prison riot.And now,the Warden is cracking down....Cracking down on essentially defenseless inmates...Inmates he has brutally repressed for over 4 decades..
Would you not call that essentially bullying behaviour??
Col.Khaddaffi has bigger guns than the rebels who have tried to fight their way out from under his boot.He,in turn,pulled out the bigger guns out to punish them for what he perceives as insolence and treason...
And now,we are coming with bigger guns...And Col.Khaddaffi runs like a rat,crying for a deal...
Yeah...Bullies all talk tough when they prey on the weak..But when the so called weak get a little back up,the bullies are'nt so tough....
Grow up,indeed...
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:43
#27
IAC: Stop The US War Against Libya
http://www.iacenter.org/nafricamideast/libya011711/
"On March 17, 2011, Washington showed its true intentions by pushing through a UN Security Council Resolution that amounts to a declaration of war on the government and people of Libya. A US attack is the worst possible thing that could happen to the people of Libya. It also puts the unfolding Arab revolutions, which have inspired people across North Africa and Western Africa, in the gravest danger.
In essence, the former colonial powers have begun an armed attack on the Libyan people's government and its people, backing one side of a civil war. It is important that peace-loving people around the world develop a consistent approach opposing ALL US interventions. This is the only way to avoid becoming just another echo of the US State Department and the Pentagon.."
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:44
#28
Catchfire
welder, I'm finding your comments highly problematic if not offensive. "Islamofascist" is not an accteptable term on babble, and your constant focus on the "bloodthirsty" aspects of Islam is troubling. Finally, calling the Chinese "crypto-fascist" is an offensive generalization. Perhaps you should ease up on the posting and do some listening.
Fri, 2011-03-18 00:53
#29
welder
welder, I'm finding your comments highly problematic if not offensive. "Islamofascist" is not an accteptable term on babble, and your constant focus on the "bloodthirsty" aspects of Islam is troubling. Finally, calling the Chinese "crypto-fascist" is an offensive generalization. Perhaps you should ease up on the posting and do some listening.
If Islamofascist is a bad term...
What term would be preferable to that element within Islam that would not only want to slit yours and my throat based on us being the Infidel,but do it with glee to other Muslims who are'nt "Muslim enough" in their eye's?
You may cringe at the term bloodthirsty,however,perhaps you'd prefer a nicer gentler term for the actions of the naughty people above and Col.Khaddaffi?I'm sorry,plain talk is necessary,and to insulate yourself from that plain talk ids to be insular...I'm not PC and I don't ever intend to be...
The Chinese government has embraced freer markets,private property ownership,and still maintians an autocratic political system hellbent on total state control...
Kinda Fascist...
Not exactly the Maoists they used to be,but they pretend to still be part of the Hammer and Sickle crowd...Hence the "crypto" part
Fri, 2011-03-18 01:02
#30
N.Beltov
Bec, my comments were not addressed to you. It was the childish, schoolyard blatherings of the newbie here I was drawing attention to.
Fri, 2011-03-18 01:03
#31
welder
I've heared Libya called a virtual prison that has just seen a prison riot.It's a prison with the highest [url=http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/]human development index[/url] of all African countries. And Libya has oil.
Yes...Well,when battling with the likes of Zimbabwe,that's a tough battle..
Not exactly a ringing endorsement of your boy,Col.Mo,Fidel....
Fri, 2011-03-18 01:04
#32
http://rabble.ca/comment/1227473/5-Reasons-Oppose-No-Fly
Kicking the Intervention Habit - by Prof Richard Falk
"Should talk of intervention in Libya turn into action, it would be illegal, immoral and hypocritical. With respect to Libya, we need to take account of the fact that the Gaddafi government, however distasteful on humanitarian grounds, remains the lawful diplomatic representative of a sovereign state, and any international use of force, even by the UN, much less a state or group of states, would constitute an unlawful intervention in the internal affairs of a sovereign state, prohibited by Article 2 (7) of the UN Charter...
Beyond this, there is no assurance that an intervention, if undertaken, would lessen the suffering of the Libyan people or bring to power a regime more respectful of human rights and dedicated to democratic participation.."
Fri, 2011-03-18 01:04
#33
welder
Bec, my comments were not addressed to you. It was the childish, schoolyard blatherings of the newbie here I was drawing attention to.
And you got a response in kind...
Fri, 2011-03-18 01:08
#34
I've heared Libya called a virtual prison that has just seen a prison riot.
It's a prison with the highest [url=http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/]human development index[/url] of all African countries. And Libya has oil.
Fri, 2011-03-18 01:10
#35
N.Beltov
If you keep up your juvenile tone, violating babble standards and such, being a disruptive know-it-all, then the result is completely predictable. You're gonna get your ass kicked by the mods and some of us are going to enjoy, tremendously, that eventuality.
Try to put more thought into your contributions, welder. Repeating the prejudices overheard in the mainstream media doesn't cut it here. Most of us are here because we can't stomach that crap. There's nothing wrong with waiting to make a contribution and ... making none if you have nothing much new or original to add.
Fri, 2011-03-18 01:12
#36
#147 previous thread2.We assisted Al Quaeda while trying to fight the Soviets...I'm not sticking up for US foreign policy..Clearly a mistake.The blowback was/is apparent!
No not a mistake. US whistelblowers saying al-Qaeda = al-CIA'da and ongoing. There is no such thing as al-Qaeda. It's just a continuation of cold war maneuvering in Central Asia and now destabilizing a new swath of countries from Africa and "Middle East" to the ongoing US taxpayer funded Talibanization of Pakistan and Afghanistan. "Blowback" is CIA baloney.
The very corrupt US Government is hiding from the public identities of an entire organizational layer of al-Qaeda there in the U.S. according to Sibel Edmonds and US Government whistleblowers. It's corrupt to the core. Far worse than the former USSR by 1989 and even the total corruption of the perestroika years. It's imploding.
Fri, 2011-03-18 01:33
#37
welder
If you keep up your juvenile tone, violating babble standards and such, being a disruptive know-it-all, then the result is completely predictable. You're gonna get your ass kicked by the mods and some of us are going to enjoy, tremendously, that eventuality.
Try to put more thought into your contributions, welder. Repeating the prejudices overheard in the mainstream media doesn't cut it here. Most of us are here because we can't stomach that crap. There's nothing wrong with waiting to make a contribution and ... making none if you have nothing much new or original to add.
I forgot...
You're "progressive"...
I suppose it's "Progressive" to stand by and let innocent people get slaughtered?
I suppose it's "juvenile" to pointout the inconsistency in that arguement?
And let me guess...It's "Islamophobic" to point out the obvious...That there is a certan element within that faith that wants to turn things back to a medieval period,civilizationally speaking,of course??
And I guess,it's "progressive" to gve in to conspiracy theories about some imperialist attack on Libya?
Progressive...As opposed to what??
Regressive??or not willing to buy the standard leftist line hook,line,and,sinker??
Fri, 2011-03-18 01:35
#38
welder
#147 previous thread2.We assisted Al Quaeda while trying to fight the Soviets...I'm not sticking up for US foreign policy..Clearly a mistake.The blowback was/is apparent!
No not a mistake. US whistelblowers saying al-Qaeda = al-CIA'da and ongoing. There is no such thing as al-Qaeda. It's just a continuation of cold war maneuvering in Central Asia and now destabilizing a new swath of countries from Africa and "Middle East" to the ongoing US taxpayer funded Talibanization of Pakistan and Afghanistan. "Blowback" is CIA baloney.
The very corrupt US Government is hiding from the public identities of an entire organizational layer of al-Qaeda there in the U.S. according to Sibel Edmonds and US Government whistleblowers. It's corrupt to the core. Far worse than the former USSR by 1989 and even the total corruption of the perestroika years. It's imploding.
Whatever you say...
(by the way,I don't dispute that fact that "empire" America is begining to see it's death throes...I just don't se how this relates to the immediacy of what's going on in Libya)
This has to do with your buddy,Col. Mo,how???
Fri, 2011-03-18 01:57
#39
Well you slid-in that thin slice of no-name baloney wrt CIA theories for "blowback" in the last thread and thought I would reply to it. I'm just saying there are US and other governments' officials saying al-Qaeda is baloney. So if al-Qaeda is baloney, then that means the CIA has been lying all along about "blowback". They've said, in so many words, that
Yes we helped Osama bin Laden and mujahideen fight against communism. But then he, and they, went against us.
There is no real evidence that Elvis bin Laden is even alive much less that he orchestrated 9/11. It's amazing how many "al-Qaeda" agents end up working for the CIA. Omar Khadr's brother was and perhaps still is on the CIA payroll. Ali Mohammed's is a very interesting story, and so is freedom fighter and 9/11 patsy Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Just replying to your point numero deux, is all.[/drift]
We now return you to the discussion concerning oil-rich Libya and the blood-for-oil hound's security resolution. Deja Mo'?
Fri, 2011-03-18 02:04
#40
I'll tell you what; I'm not happy about this no fly zone soon to turn into a free fire zone but I doubt Gadaffi is going to have anything to come down hard with in a day or two. Seriously, if those guys manning those artillery guns, rocket launchers and tanks are smart, as soon as they heard about the UN resolution, they'll be on there way back to Tripoli in those little pickup tucks of theirs. They do not stand a chance out in the desert like they are in those big assed military vehicles. I've seen first hand and up close what's going to happen to their equipment and them if they stick with it... I hope they all pack up and just leave.
Air defence or not: they just got turned into sitting fucking ducks...
Here's where Gadhafi will change his tactics - if he hasn't already.
If his forces are close enough to Benghazi, they aren't going to need the artillery. They will only be a liability because if used, they will be just as much a threat to his own troops as well as to the Libertarias.
He will send his artillery to the protection of the nearest (government forces) captured town. His forces will enter Benghazi and attempt to take the town.
Now the U.S./E.U./NATO face the same problem Gadhafi's artillery faced.
That is, should we attack ground targets, we are going to end up killing Libertarias, the very people our Western governments are claiming to protect. If we do not want to end up killing the people we are supposed to protect, then we won't launch airstrikes over Benghazi.
Thus the no-fly zone is a lose-lose scenario for the U.S./E.U./NATO.
Fri, 2011-03-18 02:05
#41
But according to Muammar G, that's the whole protester problem in Libya: 'Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda'...or maybe they're just all working for the CIA?
The Benghazi Bubble: It's Sure to Burst - by Justin Raimondo
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/03/17/the-benghazi-bubble/
"What began as a limited military operation will evolve rather rapidly into a full-scale ground war. At that point, the President of the United States will have to decide whether be wants to fight a war in order to hand the Middle East over to the Saudis - even as they shoot down protesters in the streets of Bahrain. The Benghazi bubble - the high expectations of the rebels and the Libyan public - is going to burst. It's only a question of when..."
Fri, 2011-03-18 02:15
#42
welder
Well you slid-in that thin slice of no-name baloney wrt CIA theories for "blowback" in the last thread and thought I would reply to it. I'm just saying there are US and other governments' officials saying al-Qaeda is baloney. So if al-Qaeda is baloney, then that means the CIA has been lying all along about "blowback". They've said, in so many words, that
Yes we helped Osama bin Laden and mujahideen fight against communism. But then he, and they, went against us.
There is no real evidence that Elvis bin Laden is even alive much less that he orchestrated 9/11. It's amazing how many "al-Qaeda" agents end up working for the CIA. Omar Khadr's brother was and perhaps still is on the CIA payroll. Ali Mohammed's is a very interesting story, and so is freedom fighter and 9/11 patsy Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Just replying to your point numero deux, is all.[/drift]
We now return you to the discussion concerning oil-rich Libya and the blood-for-oil hound's security resolution. Deja Mo'?
Elvis Bin Laden???
LMAO....
He's a hunka hunka burnin' hijab???
Fri, 2011-03-18 02:18
#43
welder
I'll tell you what; I'm not happy about this no fly zone soon to turn into a free fire zone but I doubt Gadaffi is going to have anything to come down hard with in a day or two. Seriously, if those guys manning those artillery guns, rocket launchers and tanks are smart, as soon as they heard about the UN resolution, they'll be on there way back to Tripoli in those little pickup tucks of theirs. They do not stand a chance out in the desert like they are in those big assed military vehicles. I've seen first hand and up close what's going to happen to their equipment and them if they stick with it... I hope they all pack up and just leave.
Air defence or not: they just got turned into sitting fucking ducks...
Here's where Gadhafi will change his tactics - if he hasn't already.
If his forces are close enough to Benghazi, they aren't going to need the artillery. They will only be a liability because if used, they will be just as much a threat to his own troops as well as to the Libertarias.
He will send his artillery to the protection of the nearest (government forces) captured town. His forces will enter Benghazi and attempt to take the town.
Now the U.S./E.U./NATO face the same problem Gadhafi's artillery faced.
That is, should we attack ground targets, we are going to end up killing Libertarias, the very people our Western governments are claiming to protect. If we do not want to end up killing the people we are supposed to protect, then we won't launch airstrikes over Benghazi.
Thus the no-fly zone is a lose-lose scenario for the U.S./E.U./NATO.
That's the likely scenario because he'll never be able to go head to head...
However,I wonder if this has been acounted for and there is a plan to draw him out??
It also does'nt preclude startegic missile and air stikes on military installations including,airstrips,naval docks,bases etc...
And important infrastructure targets in gov't controlled areas...
Fri, 2011-03-18 02:20
#44
welder
But according to Muammar G, that's the whole protester problem in Libya: 'Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda'...or maybe they're just all working for the CIA?
The Benghazi Bubble: It's Sure to Burst - by Justin Raimondo
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/03/17/the-benghazi-bubble/
"What began as a limited military operation will evolve rather rapidly into a full-scale ground war. At that point, the President of the United States will have to decide whether be wants to fight a war in order to hand the Middle East over to the Saudis - even as they shoot down protesters in the streets of Bahrain. The Benghazi bubble - the high expectations of the rebels and the Libyan public - is going to burst. It's only a question of when..."
Actually...
First he said it was Al Qaeda...Then he said it was hallucinogen induced druggies...Then he said it was traitors and rats...
I'm not certain Mo's all there...
Fri, 2011-03-18 02:29
#45
How do they just dispense with the fact that the present official answer/position of his government, publicly stated, is to acquiesce to the will of the UNSC, NATO, the Lords of War, and the other gangsters, agree to a ceasefire, await further instructions on its implementation, including protection of civilians etc etc.
Having declared publicly his willingness to comply with their terms - will they just pretend this isn't the case and whack away anyway? We know they're the real mad dog killers around these parts, but surely the optics of this even for these wolves would be a bit much.
And if they intend to murder this sitting head of state, anyway, why invade when you can do it with a couple of cruises or a predator drone? Unless the game has always been about occupation? Right?
Fri, 2011-03-18 02:35
#46
That's the likely scenario because he'll never be able to go head to head...
However,I wonder if this has been acounted for and there is a plan to draw him out??
It also does'nt preclude startegic missile and air stikes on military installations including,airstrips,naval docks,bases etc...
And important infrastructure targets in gov't controlled areas...
That can't work.
As I described it, FIBUA - Fighting In Built Up Areas - in this case, cities, precludes strategic missile and air strikes because you are going to end up killing both Gadhafi forces as well as Libertarias. Military installations in Benghazi are useless.
The only way to fight FIBUA is with foot soldiers fighting a meat grinding hand-to-hand combat in every sewer, basement, room, floor, attic, rooftop of every building on every street on every block in the city.
The best example of FIBUA is the Battle of Stalingrad.
A city is far easier to defend than attack.
FIBUA favors the defenders by odds of 10 to 1.
If the U.S./E.U./NATO are going to interfere in the Battle of Benghazi, then they are going to have to send in ground forces. They probably won't be able to get U.S./E.U./NATO ground forces to Benghazi on time.
Fri, 2011-03-18 02:53
#47
But according to Muammar G, that's the whole protester problem in Libya: 'Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda'...or maybe they're just all working for the CIA?
The Benghazi Bubble: It's Sure to Burst - by Justin Raimondo
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/03/17/the-benghazi-bubble/
"What began as a limited military operation will evolve rather rapidly into a full-scale ground war. At that point, the President of the United States will have to decide whether be wants to fight a war in order to hand the Middle East over to the Saudis - even as they shoot down protesters in the streets of Bahrain. The Benghazi bubble - the high expectations of the rebels and the Libyan public - is going to burst. It's only a question of when..."
Actually...
First he said it was Al Qaeda...Then he said it was hallucinogen induced druggies...Then he said it was traitors and rats...
That's right. Only the gladio gang should use the false threat of "al-Qaeda" as an excuse for attacking people living in oil-rich countries, or countries designated for gas pipeline construction to benefit US and British corporations. Even though Gadhafi agreed to participate in the phony global war on terror, he can not now use the same phony threat of al-CIA'da once the vicious empire smells oil, I mean, blood.
It was the rebels themselves who said Gadhafi was bringing in mercenaries from sub-Sahara.
Anyway, it's gotten so as anyone who even mentions CIA'da has lost all credibility. al-Qaeda does not now nor has it ever existed. And so therefore, why even mention it? The only people who believe in invisible armies of darkness led by Elvis bin Laden are either US Guvmint guys or people who read tabloids. lol
Fri, 2011-03-18 02:57
#48
Here is the UNSC Resolution - to which Muammar Ghaddafi's government has already agreed to be bound "Libya is ready for a ceasefire with the rebels", "we are ready for this decision but we require an interlocutor to discuss how to implement it" and agree to "all necessary measures", will "react positively and will prove this willingness" "guarantee protection to civilians" etc etc
UN Security Council Resolution 1973 (201) on Libya
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/17/un-security-council-resolution
"full text of the resolution passed at UN headquarters in favour of a no-fly zone and air strikes against Muammar Gaddafi.."
Fri, 2011-03-18 03:36
#49
Recalling the condemnation by the League of Arab States, the African Union, and the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference of the serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law that have been and are being committed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,...
That's a terrible irony considering that US proxies Rwanda and Uganda have slaughtered 5 million human beings in the very natural resource rich Congo since 1998.
Fri, 2011-03-18 03:42
#50
N.Beltov
Regressive??or not willing to buy the standard leftist line hook,line,and,sinker??
Thanks for that. I figured you were just some right wing loser, fishing for conflict, trolling, etc. and you just gave it away. Why would anyone come to a left wing site, like rabble.ca, and ridicule "the standard leftist line" unless ... they were a right wing troll?
lol.
Fri, 2011-03-18 04:09
#51
NDPPRecalling the condemnation by the League of Arab States, the African Union, and the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference of the serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law that have been and are being committed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,...That's a terrible irony considering that US proxies Rwanda and Uganda have slaughtered 5 million human beings in the very natural resource rich Congo since 1998.
I was under the impression that the AU didn't support a no-fly zone. Actually the number of slaughtered in DRC according to Keith Harmon Snow is now 10 million - alas what's 5 Mil either way to a wilfully blind West.