Libya X

'West Owns Libya Opposition' : interview with Ralph Schoenman

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/172011.html

"The CIA with the help of the Egyptian military took control of Libya's opposition forces, arming and funding them against the forces of Libya's long time ruler Muammar Gaddafi. It now appears that since some Libyan army generals, joined the CIA run opposition, a new US-friendly regime could be coming to power soon.."

Qatar Recognizes Libyan Opposition

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/172016.html

"Qatar has recognized Libya's opposition council as the legitimate representative of the North African state, says a Qatari foreign ministry official. 'This recognition comes from a conviction that the council has become, practically, a representative of Libya and its brotherly people,' the Qatar News Agency quoted the official as saying on Monday.."

Northern Shoveler wrote:

So Ghaddafi supporters can be mowed down in the streets because their guy is evil.  Air strikes against this city the size of Naniamo or Sudbury or Moncton should soften up the people who support a regime that has given them the highest living standards in the region and make them compliant for their new neo-con rulers

Well um...,

it cuts both ways.

Resolution 1973 states that "civilians and civilian centers are to be protected by all means necessary."

"All means necessary" would be by the aircraft patrolling and enforcing the no-fly zone.

Now, although this never happened(?), it is not too great a stretch of the imagination to posit a scenario where, HAD Gadhafi's forces attacked Benghazi in force, THEN French, U.S., U.K. fighter/attack aircraft would have bombed, strafed and fired missiles and rockets into the city and thus (given the close order fighting characteristic of urban area warfare) would have inevitably resulted in casualties among the very people we are supposed to be defending.

This would have been acting in a "legal" manner - staying within the limits imposed by U.N. Resolution 1973.

As it is, we have illegally imposed a no-fly zone over all of Libya's airspace and have consequently illegally attacked (from the air) Tripoli.

Are there still any lingering doubts as to why the FCM has either not published any or has ludicrously downplayed/under-reported civilian casualties in Tripoli?

Could be more of those moments coming right up - looks like the Benghazi boys aren't wanted here...

Gadhafi Opposition Runs Into Resistance

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2011/03/22/darlington.libya.u...

Here's a good, big-overview piece by William Engdahl:

Part II: Creative Destruction, Libya in Washington's Greater Middle East

http://en.m4.cn/archives/6673.html

"...Eight years earlier to the day, the Bush administration began its Operation Shock and Awe, the military destruction and occupation of Iraq, allegedly to prevent a threat of weapons of mass destruction which never existed as was later confirmed. The Iraqi invasion followed more than a decade of illegal No Fly Zone operations over Iraqi airspace by the same trio - USA, Britain and France.

Far more important than any possible numerology games a superstitious Pentagon might or might not be playing, is the ultimate agenda behind the domino series of regime change destabilitizations that Washington has ignited under the banner of democracy and human rights across the Islamic world since December 2010.

With Washington's exerting of enormous pressure on other NATO member states to take formal command of the US-led bombing of Libya, no matter under what name, in order to give Washington a fig leaf that would shift attention away from the Pentagon's central role via AFRICOM in coordinating the military operations,  the entire upheaval sweeping across North Africa and Middle East Islamic countries is looking, at this writing, more like the early onset of a World War III, one that some NATO members hint is expected to last decades.

As with WWII and WWI, this one as well would be launched to expand what David Rockefeller called 'a new world order'

Gaddafi's real 'crime'..."

Why The Attack On Libya Is Illegal   -  by Curtis Doebbler

http://www.counterpunch.org/doebbler03282011.html

"On March 19, 2011, Western nations started the third international armed conflict against a Muslim country in the last decade. They went to great pains to claim that the use of force against Libya was legal, but an application of international law to the facts indicates that in fact the use of force is illegal.

This brief commentary evaluates the use of force against Libya, starting with UN Security Council Resolution 1973 that allegedly authorises it and the eventual attack on the people of Libya...

Perhaps the most fundamental principle of international law is that no state shall use force against another state. This principle is expressly stated in Article 2, paragraph 4 of the UN Charter. No state can violate this principle of international law..."

oh yeah? Just watch us...

In A Rebel Prison Any African Is A Mercenary  -  by Graeme Smith

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/in-a-rebel-pris...

"They accused us of crimes we did not commit,' said Santiago Keita, 24, who arrived at a Benghazi jail with a deep cut on his forehead. A video circulated among rebels showed the corpse of a dark-skinned man hanging from a meat hook, allegedly an African mercenary killed by angry locals. Human rights groups ahve warned that such accusations are frequently wrong, endangering people with the wrong complexions..."

Canadians Coordinate Libyan Attacks

http://cfjctv.com/story.php?id=1933

"The Canadian military has co-ordinated coalition air raids over Libya involving more than 20 warplanes. In one of the most recent, Canadian CF-18s destroyed an ammunition depot south of the embattled city of Misrata. The increased planning responsibility reflects Ottawa's deeper involvement in the crisis following the appointment of Canadian Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard as NATO Task Force Commander for the Libya campaign.."

IPO: 'All Necessary Means': United Nations Vs Libyan Arab Jamahiriya - Humanitarian Intervention Or Colonial War?  - Dr Hans Kochler

http://i-p-o.org/IPO-nr-UN-Libya-28Mar.htm

" It is obvious that the delegation of virtually unlimited authority to interested parties and regional groups - as has become customary since the Gulf War resolutions of 1990/1991 - is not only incompatible with the United Nations Charter, but with the international rule of law as such...

To 'authorize' states to use 'all necessary means' in the enforcement of a legally binding resolution is an invitation to an arbitrary and arrogant exercise of power, and makes the commitment of the United Nations Organization to the international rule of law void of any meaning..."

[url=http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/ali290311.html]Libya: A Squalid Protectorate That the West Is Going to Create
by Tariq Ali[/url]

Quote:

The US-Nato intervention in Libya, with United Nations security council cover, is part of an orchestrated response to show support for the movement against one dictator in particular and by so doing to bring the Arab rebellions to an end by asserting western control, confiscating their impetus and spontaneity and trying to restore the status quo ante.

Tariq Ali wrote:

All this with active US support. The despot in Yemen, loathed by a majority of his people continues to kill them every day. Not even an arms embargo, let alone a "no-fly zone" has been imposed on him. Libya is yet another case of selective vigilantism by the US and its attack dogs in the west.

They can rely on the French as well. Sarkozy was desperate to do something. Unable to save his friend Ben Ali in Tunisia, he's decided to help get rid of Gaddafi. The British always oblige and in this case, having shored up the Libyan regime for the last two decades, they're making sure they're on the right side so as not to miss out on the division of the spoils. What might they get?

A new Karzai stooge is on the way.

Civilian Casualties Mount in US-led Air War Against Libya   -  by Barrie Grey

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/mar2011/liby-m29.shtml

"As delegates from 40 countries and international organizations gather in London today to coordinate the US-NATO war against Libya, carried out in the name of protecting civilians, the toll of Libyans killed and injured by US, British, [Canadian] and French bombs and missiles continues to mount. The Libyan government puts the number of civilians killed in the airwar at well over 100. There have been no reports on the number of Libyan government soldiers killed. The US governent and its counterparts in Europe dismiss Libyan government reports of casualties as lies while refusing to give any estimate of their own...

The rebel forces, which are led militarily and politically by ex-Gaddafi officials and former exiles with ties to the CIA and other Western intelligence agencies, have stalled some 60 miles east of Sirte in the face of a sizable pro-government military force in the area surrounding the city. The total dependence of the rebels on air attacks by the US and its allies were summed up in a statement quoted in Monday's Telegraph newspaper: 'There are tanks dug into a river bed up ahead and we cannot continue until they have been destroyed by the French or the British' said Benissa Feroj, a rebel..

Kinte Mohammed, a Sirte University lecturer, accused NATO of deliberately targeting innocent civilians and supporting 'mercenaries and terrorists' in the east. On Khartoum Street, where one of the dead men lived, a woman could be heard wailing inconsolably as grim faced relatives arrived to pay their respects. 'We are just civilians, there is nothing military here, only fishing boats and ordinary people,' complained Ahmed al-Hashe whose nephew Faraj died in the same attack. 'Our grandfathers fought Mussolini and we will fight and live free in our land,' he said.

Hatred for the Benghazi rebels has been fuelled by an incident on Sunday when pro-Gaddafi loyalists taking part in a peace march were confronted near Bin Jawd and three of them reportedly shot and killed despite carrying white flags and olive branches..

It is not possible to conceal the reality of a brutal colonial style war aimed at installing a puppet regime, plundering Libya's rich oil wealth and establishing a beachhead to suppress the wave of revolutionary struggles sweeping North Africa and the Middle East."

NATO Chief Opens The Door to Libya Ground Troops

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/03/nato-chief-opens-the-door-to-lib...

"...so welcome to a new possible 'endgame' for Libya - Western troops patrolling Libya's cities during a shaky transition after Moammar Gadhafi's regime has fallen...During a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Sen. jack Reed of Rhode Island asked Admiral James Stavridis about NATO putting forces into 'post Gadhafi' Libya to make sure the country doesn't fall apart. Stavridis said he 'wouldn't say NATO's considering it yet.' But because of NATO's history of putting peacekeepers in the Balkans - 'the possibility of a stabilization regime exists..

Stavridis told Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma that he saw 'flickers of intelligence' indicating 'al-Qaeda and Hezbollah' have fighters among the Libyan rebels. The Supreme Commander of NATO noted that the leadership of the rebels are 'responsible men and women struggling against Col Gadhafi and couldn't say if the terrorist element in the opposition is 'significant'. But the US knows precious little about who the Libyan rebels are.."

AFRICOM And the Libyan War  - by Emile Schepers

http://peoplesworld.org/africom-and-the-libya-war/

"US participation in the war in Libya appears to be coordinated out of a former French Foreign Legion base in Djibouti, a tiny country of a half million souls at the very tip of the Horn of Africa. This is the forward base of AFRICOM, the unified command for African actions set up by George W Bush and his Secretary of Defense Robert Gates who has continued in that post under President Barack Obama. Why the US has set up such a special African operation, and what this portends, bears examination.

Commentators have raised the issue of oil. In 2009 Gadaffi started suggesting that he might nationalize the remaining oil assets in Libya and he has renewed that threat since the NATO intervention began last month..."

Wow that Was Fast!: Libya Rebels' New Central Bank of Libya

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/wow-that-was-fast-libyan-reb...

"The rebels in Libya are in the middle of a life or death civil war and Moammar Gadhafi is still in power and yet somehow the Libyan rebels have had enough time to establish a new Central Bank of Libya and form a new national oil company.

According to Bloomberg, the Transitional National Council has 'designated the central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and the appointment of a governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.' Apparently someone felt that it was very important to get pesky matters such as control of the banks and control of the money supply out of the way even before the new government is formed.

Of course it is probably safe to assume that the new Central Bank of Libya will be 100% owned and controlled by the newly liberated people of Libya, isnt't it?..."

Quote:

 

Muammar Gaddafi's better armed and organized troops reversed the westward charge of Libyan rebels as world powers gathered in London on Tuesday to plot the country's future without the "brother leader."

It took five days of allied air strikes to pulverize Libyan government tanks around the town of Ajdabiyah before Gaddafi's troops fled and the rebels rushed in and began their 300-km (200-mile), two-day dash across the desert to within 80 km (50 miles) of the Gaddafi loyalist stronghold of Sirte.

But the rebel pick-up truck cavalcade was first ambushed, then outflanked by Gaddafi's troops. The advance stopped and government forces retook the small town of Nawfaliyah, 120 km (75 miles) east of Sirte.

"The Gaddafi guys hit us with Grads (rockets) and they came round our flanks," Ashraf Mohammed, a 28-year-old rebel wearing a bandolier of bullets, told a Reuters reporter at the front.

More details here: REBELS ON THE RUN

The sporadic thud of heavy weapons could be heard as dozens of civilian cars sped eastwards away from the fight.

One man stopped his car to berate the rebels.

"Get your selves up there and stop posing for pictures," he shouted, but met little response.

Later, a hail of machinegun and rocket fire hit rebel positions. As the onslaught began, rebels took cover behind sand dunes to fire back but gave up after a few minutes, jumped into their pick-up trucks and sped off back down the road to the town of Bin Jawad. Shells landed near the road as they retreated.

Without air strikes it appears the rebels are not able to hold ground or make advances. The battle around Sirte, Gaddafi's birthplace, will show if the rebels have reached their limit.

Here's the doubt that's been nagging me:

IF these fighters who are rebelling against the government are Al Qaeda insurgents who've fought in Iraq, Yemen, Somalia and (possibly) Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere,

THEN why aren't they fighting like professional soldiers when it comes to conventional warfare

OR fighting like combat experienced insurgents when it comes to guerrilla warfare?

No, it looks like the majority of fighters seem to be anarchic, ill disciplined, unprofessional and are motivated by their hearts rather than their heads. Their actions seem to be dictated by a spontaneous desire to "grab a gun and kill a fascist "Por Libertad!"", rather than based on military tactical planning.

All of which are the hallmarks of a People's Revolutionary or Libertarias Army rather than (semi-) professional combat experienced Al Qaeda veterans.

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

It would appear for now the rebel citizens "Rat Patrol" army has advanced has far as it can and is stopped at Sirte. Even if they by-passed Sirte the logistics of supporting them past there is beyond the rebels current capability. It would take some very direct western meddling in the form of logistical (supplies) support to get them rolling past Sirte.

[Below is speculation on my part...]

Supposedly there are several Libyan generals who have defected to the rebel side whom are currently organizing the defected Libyan army units into a conventional fighting force in the Benghazi area. I'm thinking this might be the force that's now getting armed by the west, via Egypt. The reason it's taking them a long time to get organized is because they have to train on the new weapons systems they are now getting. In the past most Libyan regular army units had older Soviet era weapons; I suspect the weapons you'll see them using in the future (if this is true) will be modern western type weapons. Perhaps this is the "CIA proxy Army of Darkness" you guys are talking about, we'll see.

But for now it will take a modernized conventional force to carry the rebel fight past Sirte and right now the rebels don't have such a force.  

Is it possible for the Libertarias to reclaim their Revolution, wean themselves away from foreign military interference/"assistance" and to win solely through THEIR own efforts?

The answer is "YES!"

Here's how:

Given the distances and the nature of the climate and terrain of Libya, logistics and supply are a crucial factor.

What the Libertarias could and should do to reclaim their Revolution is to switch from fighting a conventional war to insurgent warfare.

Fight in small bands and units. Form alliances with the local tribes who are not loyal to Gadhafi from whom one may get much needed supplies. Have a secure source and supplyline of weapons and ammunition from (a) local smalltime arms dealer(s). Using guerrilla hit-and-run tactics, constantly attack Gadhafi force's supply lines. Try and capture as many weapons, ammunition and supplies as possible for one's own use. Destroy anything that is of no use, thus denying its future use to Gadhafi forces.

In this way, if Sirte (or any city) is too difficult to capture outright by conventional means, bipass it. Concentrate on capturing "soft" targets. Leave only enough forces to prevent a breakout from the besieged cities and to keep up continous pressure on the surrounded forces in the city to wear them down over time.

Once all the "soft" targets have been captured and the routes connecting these cities and towns and the supply routes are secured, then concentrate on capturing the strategic cities and strongpoints.

Any city or strongpoint that is not vital to the capture of Tripoli, keep it surrounded and besieged but do not attempt to capture it - the vital effort and resources can best be used for the capture of Tripoli.

Capture Tripoli and the Revolution will be won. And the other cities will be yours.

ov wrote:

I was saying just a few weeks ago that the Libyan Central Bank would be one of the first things that would be changed.  Here in Canada our Central Bank is held in trust to the Queen of England. I wonder who the new "owners" will be in Libya; bet you dollars to navy beans that it won't be the Libyans.

I'll bet the new central banker will almost certainly be appointed, male, and with rubberstamp of approval by the western banking cartel. They will want to throw the country down a debt hole with compound interest piling on and skimming off the oil revenues while human development in the country plummets like a stone, like Iraq and every other country they've "democratized" over the last 50 years.

Libya rebels flee oil town under Gaddafi bombardment

Gadaffi troops keep up the counter attack...

Quote:

Libyan rebels fled in headlong retreat from the superior firepower and tactics of Muammar Gaddafi's troops on Wednesday, highlighting their weakness without Western air strikes to tip the scales in their favor.

The rapid reverse comes just two days after the rebels raced westwards along the all-important coastal road in hot pursuit of the government army whose tanks and artillery were demolished in five days of aerial bombardment in the town of Ajdabiyah.

Gaddafi's army first ambushed the insurgents' convoy of pick-up trucks outside the "brother leader's" hometown of Sirte, then outflanked them through the desert, a maneuver requiring the sort of discipline entirely lacking in the rag-tag rebel force.

The towns of Nawfaliyah, Bin Jawad and Ras Lanuf fell in quick succession to the lightning government counter-strike.

"They are coming from the desert," yelled one fighter among a group of a dozen rebels 10-15 km (6-8 miles) west of Brega training their guns south into the Sahara. Wisps of dust could be seen rising in the distance.

Scores of rebel pick-ups and cars streamed past them in a chaotic caravan east toward Brega.

In town after town, Gaddafi force's have unleashed a fierce bombardment from tanks, artillery and truck-launched Grad rockets which has usually forced rebels to swiftly flee.

"These are our weapons," said rebel fighter Mohammed, pointing to his assault rifle. "We can't fight Grads with them," he said before joining the rush toward Brega.

If all Libyans hate Gaddafi who is fighting so fiercely on his side?  His son must be quite the warrior to  be defeating the "people" all by himself.  This is a civil war and NATO is taking sides. 

Starting to loot the countries wealth before even winning the war or a fig leaf election like in Iraqi is a new stage in NATO's imperial strategy.

One more update for today... 

Libyan rebels scatter, world mulls sending arms

So, according to this article and as evidenced by what's happening on the ground right now it would appear the west is not "really" arming the rebels (yet).

Quote:

British Prime Minister David Cameron refused Wednesday to rule out arming the rebels after French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said at a London conference the previous day that France is prepared to hold discussions on the issue.

Asked in parliament what Britain's policy was on arming the rebels, given the existence of a United Nations arms embargo on Libya, Cameron replied: "We do not rule it out but we have not taken the decision to do so."

Also... stretching UN Security Council resolution 1973 just a little bit more...

Quote:

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that although UN sanctions prohibit the delivery of arms to Libya, the ban no longer applies.

"It is our interpretation that (UN Security Council resolution) 1973 amended or overrode the absolute prohibition on arms to anyone in Libya, so that there could be a legitimate transfer of arms if a country should choose to do that," she said.

A spokesman for the rebel Transitional National Council, Mustafa Ghuriani, told reporters in the Benghazi "it would be naive to think we are not arming ourselves" to match the weaponry deployed by Kadhafi loyalists.

But he declined to confirm or deny that France and the United States were offering to supply arms, saying only that unspecified "friendly nations" were backing the rebels.

As I've said before, airstrikes weren't really kicking their asses on the battlefield, artillery and tanks were. The no fly zone isn't helping them out on the desert roads where there's no "civilians" to be endangered by those tanks and artillery. I kind 'a figured this was going to happen, I also don't see any evidence that any arm shipments they have gotten are helping them on the battlefield as of yet. Not to say that could change in the future... 

The 'Mercs For Libyan Rebels' Drumbeat Begins

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/03/the-mercs-for-libyan-rebels-drum...

"Deane Peter Baker, a private security expert and professor at Annapolis, fears the same 'stalemate' that Adm. James Stavridis warned about in Senate testimony on Wednesday. And if NATO ground troops are off the table, it's time to outsource the problem, he writes in a new Baltimore Sun op-ed.

The US should 'provide the necessary funding for the rebels to secure the services of one or more of the private companies that could supply the necessary expertise and logistical support to turn the rebel rabble into a genuine fighting force,'...

Egypt Said to Arm Libya Rebels

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870436040457620699283527090...

"Egypt military has begun shipping arms over the border to Libya rebels with Washington's knowledge, US and Libyan rebel officials said. The White House has been relectant to back calls from leaders in Congress for arming Libya's rebels directly, arguing that the US must first fully assess who the fighters are and what policies they will pursue if they succeed in toppling Col. Gadhafi. US officials believe the opposition includes some Islamist elements. They fear that Islamist groups hostile to the US could try to hijack the opposition...

The Egyptian weapons transfers began 'a few days ago' and are ongoing, according to senior US officials.."

US Congressmen: Libya Attack Illegal

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/172328.html

"Two US Republican Congressmen have submitted a draft bill that seeks to put an end to the US military intervention in Libya before the operations receive authorization by the Congress. 'Constitutionally, it is indisputable that Congress must be consulted prior to an act of war unless there is an imminent threat against this country. The President has not done so,' said Rep Timothy Johnson of Illinois. Obama has also declared that he is considering plans to supply arms to Libyan opposition forces in their fight against Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.."

'Libya Hijacked by Imperial Powers' Interview with Human Rights Activist: Ahmad Dyraki

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/172326.html

"If they want they can finish Gaddafi in less than 24 hours, these NATO forces - compared to Gaddafi forces. In fact they do not want this. They want to keep the situation as it is. It's a kind of equality of power between the revolutionists and Gaddafi. In this way they exploit Libya more and more until the revolutionists ask for a direct military intervention in Libya. Turkey has offered support for an army that may be on the land of Libya. This would mean a direct intervention.."

Uganda Would Offer Gaddafi Asylum If Asked

http://www.worldbulletin.net/?aType=haber&ArticleID=71861

"Uganda would welcome Muammar Gaddafi if he requested asylum, Al Arabiya reported on Wednesday after some states suggested the Libyan leader should go into exile to end the conflict in his country. Uganda is a member of the African Union ad hoc committee trying to mediate a resolution of the Libya conflict after the United Nations authorized air strikes to protect Libyan civilians from forces loyal to Gaddafi.."

The funny pages of the New York Times are in fine form these days:

Quote:

Gene A. Cretz, the American ambassador to Libya, said last week that he was impressed by the democratic instincts of the opposition leaders and that he did not believe that they were dominated by extremists. But he acknowledged that there was no way to know if they were "100 percent kosher, so to speak."

Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk

I like this bit, too:

Quote:

On a day when Libyan forces counterattacked, fears about the rebels surfaced publicly on Capitol Hill on Tuesday when the military commander of NATO, Adm. James G. Stavridis, told a Senate hearing that there were "flickers" in intelligence reports about the presence of Qaeda and Hezbollah members among the anti-Qaddafi forces.

While I doubt if Hassan Nasrallah has sent Hezbollah members to fight (advise, maybe) in Libya, wouldn't it be something if the Great Satan were finally doing the right thing and bombing Hezbollah's enemies for a change?

Libya: Mousa Khousa, Gaddafi's Foreign Minister, Defects to UK

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/31/libya-mousa-kousa-gaddafi-fo...

"Muammar Gaddafi's authority inside Libya suffered a significant blow when his foreign minister quit and fled to the UK in a specially arranged flight organised by the British Intelligence Services. Mousa Kousa, who was one of the Libyan leader's closest allies, arrived on a chartered plane from Tunisia and said he was 'no longer willing' to represent the dictator's regime.

Kousa's defection will be seen as a vindication of the coalition's efforts to intimidate key members of the regime by warning them that if they do not defect they will be taken to the international court to face war crimes trials. Kousa's decision to abandon the regime came as it emerged that Barack Obama had signed a secret government order authorising covert US help to the Libya rebels via such organisations as the CIA..

Concern is deepening in the coalition about the  rebels' fragile morale and lack of military experience to mount a sustained challenge to the regime..."

Exclusive: Qaddafi Picks Sandanista Official To Represent Him At UN

http://turtlebay.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/30/qaddafi_picks_nicara...

"....But Susan E Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, questioned D'Escoto's right to take up the Libyan seat at the United Nations, noting that Kusa, the man who informed the UN of the Nicaraguan's appointment, defected today and was no longer in the Libyan government. 'The first question is whether he has actually been appointed in any legitimate fashion that anybody needs to consider at this stage,' Rice told reporters outside the UN Security Council this evening.

Rice also noted that D'Escoto, who was born in Las Angelas but recounced his US citizenship, arrived in the US recently on a tourist visa. 'A tourist visa does not allow you to represent any country, Nicaragua, Libya or any other at the United Nations,' she said. 'Should he wish and should in fact the Libyan regime seek to renominate him by some legitimate representative of the Libyan government, which itself is questionable in its legitimacy, to be the putative Permanent Representative here, that person, if he were to be Mr. D'Escoto, needs to leave the United States and apply for an appropriate G1 visa.

If he purports to be or act like a representative of a foreign government on a tourist visa, he will find that his visa status will be reviewed.' D'Escoto has scheduled a press conference at UN headquarters for tomorrow morning, providing a first test of his ability to represent Qaddafi.."

Susan Rice is an asshole

NDPP wrote:

Libya: Mousa Khousa, Gaddafi's Foreign Minister, Defects to UK

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/31/libya-mousa-kousa-gaddafi-fo...

I bet Khaddafi tried to squash all reports of this defection.

NDPP wrote:

Susan Rice is an asshole

Susan Rice was part of the troika of female "valkyries" or "harpies" - Hillary Clinton and Samantha Power being the other two - who were allegedly behind the U.N. Security Council meeting, drafting, ratifying Resolution 1973 and persuading President Obama to commit the U.S.A. to militarily interfere in Libya.

Remember, it was Hillary Clinton who advised State Department officials to spy and gather personal information on U.N. officials, including U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, when wikileaks released the diplomatic cables?

Yes, they are scary prowar assholes, no doubt.

The Euro-US War On Libya: Official Lies And Misconceptions of Critics  - by James Petras and Robin Eastman

http://dissidentvoice.org/2011/03/the-euro-us-war-on-libya-official-lies...

"Following the lead of their imperial powers, most of what passes for the Left in the US and Europe, ranging from Social Democrats, Marxists, Trotskyists, Green and other assorted progressives, claim they see and support a revolutionary mass uprising of the Libyan people, and not a few have called for military intervention by the imperial powers, or the same thing, the UN, to help the 'Libyan revolutionaries' defeat the Gaddafi dictatorship.

These arguments are without foundation..."

Slumberjack wrote:

The similarity with both systems is that they are quite innacurate, requiring saturation targeting of an area to ensure any chance of actually hitting what is being aimed at.  It requires the expenditure of a dreadful amount of ammunition to sustain artillery support with these systems, and under the current climate, we could take a good guess as to which side stands the better chance of being resupplied from external sources.  The fact that Gadaffi appears to have more launchers on his truck mounted systems means that he's more rapidly using up his existing stocks, with no guarantee of replenishment shipments from arms dealers arriving anytime soon.

Yes, some good points and you could look at it that way, sure. But right now that isn't how it's panning out on the battlefield. Gadaffi's troops have the training, fire control and know how to properly use those launchers and its showing. I'm sure they also have the fire discipline to realize how much ammo they have both on hand and stored in ammo dumps, and use it to its best effect without wasting it. (Weapons range also plays a big role in this as well but that's a bunch of technical stuff I won't bore you with.)

Today's ground report...

Rebels fight Gaddafi's forces for east Libyan town

The lines have settled outside of Brega for now with Gadaffi forces occupying that town.

Quote:

Rebels fought on Thursday for control of the eastern Libyan oil town of Brega, a day after troops loyal to Muammar Gaddafi drove them back along a coastal strip under a hail of rocket fire.

Some rebel forces had fallen back on Wednesday as far as the strategic town of Ajdabiyah, the gateway to the east and about 150 km (90 miles) south of the rebel stronghold of Benghazi. Ajdabiyah was still in rebel hands on Thursday.

Rebels and Gaddafi's forces have fought to-and-fro across a strip of land between Ajdabiyah and Bin Jawad for several weeks. The superior firepower of Gaddafi's army has been damaged, but not destroyed, by Western-led air strikes.

"There were clashes with Gaddafi's forces around Brega at dawn," said rebel fighter Rabia Ezela, waiting about 10 km (6 miles) outside Brega, where scores of vehicles had massed.

Rebels advancing closer to Brega came under rocket and mortar fire from Gaddafi's better-equipped army, prompting insurgents to pull back some kilometers before regrouping and moving forward again, a witness said.

Sporadic explosions could be heard in the direction of Brega and plumes of black some rose into the sky. Despite the massing by rebels of pick-up trucks with machineguns outside Brega, the front line did not move substantially on Thursday.

Brega is one of several oil towns along the fiercely contested coastal strip. Ras Lanuf and Es Sider, west of Brega, have both been retaken by Gaddafi's forces. Zueitina, east of Brega, is still in rebel hands.

Also: Gadaffi's troops have switched tactics to adapt to the coalition airstrikes; they have left most of their armor and heavy artillery at Surt and are using pickup truck and SUV "gun trucks" along with truck mounted rocket launchers. While both forces facing each other around Brega are now pretty much  equipped the same Gadaffis forces have the advantage of military training and discipline; the rebels not so much. They also have those truck mounted rocket launchers that have been the bane of the rebel forces since this started.  For now, as long as they don't shoot them at towns they seem to be safe from coalition air strikes and are using them to scatter the rebels when they mass for an attack or defence out in the desert.

GADDAFI'S ROCKETS

Quote:

Many rebels repeated their call for more and better weapons from the West or any country willing to offer them arms.

"We will take them from any country. Anyone who wants to help us, we have no problem with it, even Chad," said Ziad al-Kheifasy, a rebel fighter at a checkpoint leading up to Brega. Gaddafi's Libya fought with Chad in the 1980s.

Rebels complain that Gaddafi's rockets, fired from Grad multiple rocket launchers, have a range that far outstrips anything they can throw back.

"Some of our rockets are from 1968 and Gaddafi has modern tanks," rebel fighter Khaled al-Farjani said.

Many rebels blamed powerful rocket salvoes for this week's rapid retreat from Bin Jawad, the town that marks roughly the furthest west point reached by rebels in recent weeks. Bin Jawad is about 525 km (330 miles) east of Tripoli.

"With Grad we could make it to Tripoli in a matter of days," said rebel Ahmed Ali. Others echoed his appeal for rockets.

Even some rebels have said their forces, largely made up of enthusiastic but poorly trained fighters, need better command and discipline as well as better equipment. Their forces have often been out-maneuvered and out-gunned.

Colonel Ahmad Bani, a rebel spokesman, told a news conference in Benghazi on Wednesday Gaddafi could deploy heavy weapons such as artillery, tanks and rocket launchers.

"We need weapons that can destroy such weapons. We are trying to gather whatever we can," he said. "No matter how enthusiastic or courageous an individual may be, a Kalashnikov (AK-47) has no chance against such equipment."

Just so you get the idea of what they are talking about here's a comparison of the equipment:

Here's what Gadaffi's guys have and use... the BM21 Grad. The rebels have captured a few of them and used them but not in mass like Gadaffi's troops use them.

Below is more what the rebels have scattered among their troops. It's a lighter and smaller version of the Grad, with much less range of course. They are usually fired individually by independent crews that manage to find a target. (found a better picture)

 As you can see there's quite a difference... and quite an advantage for Gadaffi. A no fly zone is of no help in this situation.