The Libyan uprising

Euroland

Just recently I was watching the Sky News and heard Bill Clinton saying: “Mr. Kaddafi, it’s time to leave now, leave the Oil to Libyan people.” I was laughing seeing Bill Clinton so desperate for Libyan Oil.

AlekSmart

Nodin wrote: »

Out of a crowd supporting the Colonel, there will be undoubtedly genuine supporters. There will also be people there out of fear. Others will back him because they think he's the winning horse and others again because they fear being held accountable for what they did for his regime. How exactly the crowd is divided amongst those groups, I don't think anyone could answer.

Oddly enough the exact same thought crossed my mind.whilst thumbing through a book on 20th C Ireland earlier in Easons...

There were a series of photo`s of a young Eamon DeValera addresssing some form of election meeting and the facial expressions of the folks looking on matched accurately the descriptions given above by Nodin.

I suspect that`s true of Libya too...it`s probably just like here...choose your horse carefully and always be ready to jump off if necessary.

phosphate

Well.....

Any man who eats bread and butter obviously has some issues with Mr Bale....I can't speak for him of course.

Utrinque Paratus

350 UK Special Forces Soldiers in Libya

In total it is understood that just under 250 UK special forces soldiers and their support have been in Libya since before the launch of air strikes to enforce the no-fly zone against Gaddafi’s forces.

The troops in Libya were drawn from a squadron of SAS and SBS personnel, some who have been in the country for a month and are being re-supplied with water, food and ammunition via airdrops from Cyprus.

Those numbers were further boosted by nearly 100 this week when paratroopers from the Special Forces Support Group (SFSG) were sent to Libya as coalition commanders prepare to increase the tempo of operations.

A further 800 Royal Marines are on five days’ notice to deploy to the Mediterranean to support humanitarian relief and aid operations.

The beefing up of the Special Forces contingent comes as commanders switch attacks against command and control centres to low-level attacks against Gaddafi’s tanks.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1HfBZHNfv

AlekSmart

Utrinque Paratus wrote: »

350 UK Special Forces Soldiers in Libya

In total it is understood that just under 250 UK special forces soldiers and their support have been in Libya since before the launch of air strikes to enforce the no-fly zone against Gaddafi’s forces.

The troops in Libya were drawn from a squadron of SAS and SBS personnel, some who have been in the country for a month and are being re-supplied with water, food and ammunition via airdrops from Cyprus.

Those numbers were further boosted by nearly 100 this week when paratroopers from the Special Forces Support Group (SFSG) were sent to Libya as coalition commanders prepare to increase the tempo of operations.

A further 800 Royal Marines are on five days’ notice to deploy to the Mediterranean to support humanitarian relief and aid operations.

The beefing up of the Special Forces contingent comes as commanders switch attacks against command and control centres to low-level attacks against Gaddafi’s tanks.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1HfBZHNfv

At this stage I`m preparing for the Victory Parade in Tripoli with serried ranks of Cuirassier and Household Cavalry with lances held aloft passing the reviewing stand upon which will stand the French Prez and perhaps even HM t Q...?

Sigh......brings back memories of the days when such actions sent strong messages throughout the colonies.

The ever increasing deployments of ground forces,albeit commando units,indicates to me that disentangling from Lybia will neither be easy or swift and with no guarantee the the NEW!,IMPROVED!! Libyan leader will be much different to our Colonel ?

nacho libre

I bet the colonel is sorry he gave up his nuke ambitions now. The lesson other dictators will take from this is to not do the same.

Anyway here is an interesting interview with one of the rebels:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html

AlekSmart

nacho libre wrote: »

I bet the colonel is sorry he gave up his nuke ambitions now. The lesson other dictators will take from this is to not do the same.

Anyway here is an interesting interview with one of the rebels:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html

Interesting indeed Nacho libre.

I suppose in the local context it`s a bit like the career criminals with triple digit rap-sheets being given the "benefit of the Probation act" in our Courts each day.

If the cultured French,American,British or any other Western contributors to this misguided adventure believe for a moment that Abdel-Hakim al H is going to metamorphasize into a paragon of democratic Libyan enlightment they reeally are sucking hard on that hubble-bubble in their tents.

At the end of the day in this nasty-little-war It may well turn out that the "Coalition" would have been better served supporting the Libyan Government (Yes,Colonel Ghadaffi`s one :eek: ) and doing a tad more on-the-ground reconnaisance before lettin rip ?

gurramok

Did anyone see that on the news about the woman who claims she was raped by the journo's minders and they wouldn't let her talk by shouting at and intimidating her?

It was quite disturbing and the scene was filmed by a few camera crews and the minders chased a few of them throwing kicks and punches at the crews to prevent the footage getting out. That's Gadaffi's true face of terror, the minders would not let her talk. The footage was smuggled out and it exposes Gadaffi's cruel regime. The woman was taken away for 'interrogation' and later they said for 'her own protection', yeh right Gadaffi!

Also on Libyan tv, they claimed the anti-cuts protest in London was a march against Britain's involvement in the uprising, hilarious stuff.

Euroland

nacho libre wrote: »

I bet the colonel is sorry he gave up his nuke ambitions now. The lesson other dictators will take from this is to not do the same.

Yes, that was a mistake. A few hundred nukes and long distance deployment capabilities would change the situation a lot. I wish he would have them now.

Euroland

gurramok wrote: »

Did anyone see that on the news about the woman who claims she was raped by the journo's minders and they wouldn't let her talk by shouting at and intimidating her?

It was quite disturbing and the scene was filmed by a few camera crews and the minders chased a few of them throwing kicks and punches at the crews to prevent the footage getting out. That's Gadaffi's true face of terror, the minders would not let her talk. The footage was smuggled out and it exposes Gadaffi's cruel regime. The woman was taken away for 'interrogation' and later they said for 'her own protection', yeh right Gadaffi!

I have no doubts it was staged

Euroland

nacho libre wrote: »

Anyway here is an interesting interview with one of the rebels:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html

Extremely Greedy Americans, British and French in their War for Libyan Oil are ready to side with any evil, including the Al-Qaeda militants.

johngalway

gurramok wrote: »

Did anyone see that on the news about the woman who claims she was raped by the journo's minders and they wouldn't let her talk by shouting at and intimidating her?

It was quite disturbing and the scene was filmed by a few camera crews and the minders chased a few of them throwing kicks and punches at the crews to prevent the footage getting out. That's Gadaffi's true face of terror, the minders would not let her talk. The footage was smuggled out and it exposes Gadaffi's cruel regime. The woman was taken away for 'interrogation' and later they said for 'her own protection', yeh right Gadaffi!

Also on Libyan tv, they claimed the anti-cuts protest in London was a march against Britain's involvement in the uprising, hilarious stuff.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Sky-News-Sees-A-Woman-Bundled-Away-By-Minders-From-Tripoli-Hotel-After-Allegedly-Being-Raped/Article/201103415960663?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_2&lid=ARTICLE_15960663_Sky_News_Sees_A_Woman_Bundled_Away_By_Minders_From_Tripoli_Hotel_After_Allegedly_Being_Raped

gurramok

Euroland wrote: »

I have no doubts it was staged

I hope that smiley is not a disdain for women rights.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/26/libya-woman-silenced-accusing-gaddafi-forces-rape

Poccington

Euroland wrote: »

I have no doubts it was staged

A female, oil hungry, CIA agent no doubt.

:rolleyes:

AlekSmart

Poccington wrote: »

A female, oil hungry, CIA agent no doubt.

:rolleyes:

A strong piece of footage and no doubt.

However,It begins by describing the person as an "unknown woman",yet at 01:37 the reporter uses a name when detailing her allegations ?

Nasty as it may be,it still does not match the early allegations of mass civilian murder being levelled at Gadaffi.

Cork24

You wish he had his nukes. That great he hit England and we get some of the energy waves sure I wouldn't mind getting cancer.

Euroland

Cork24 wrote: »

You wish he had his nukes. That great he hit England and we get some of the energy waves sure I wouldn't mind getting cancer.

He wouldn’t use them, just for the balance of power. Only complete idiots use the nukes.

Manic Moran

Logic flaw there, Euroland. The point of a deterrent is that you're willing to use them. If"only idiots"are willing to use nukes, and assuming Gaddafi isn't an idiot (though his appearances recently make one wonder) then by your argument his having nukes would be completely irrelevant as no nation would need to worry about them because he wouldn't use them.

NTM

Stev_o

At this stage it's a matter of when the rebels enter Tripoli and the blood really starts being spilled.

Of course there are dozens of possibilities of what will happen once they get near there. But what if the they use captured artillery against the city?

Also has the "National Government" publicly come out and say once they come to power general elections will be held or are they assuming power as a coup and we just have the same situation as before. If there are elections what will be the UN stance if it finds that they are tampered with like Afghanistan?

Jonny7

Stev_o wrote: »

At this stage it's a matter of when the rebels enter Tripoli and the blood really starts being spilled.

Of course there are dozens of possibilities of what will happen once they get near there. But what if the they use captured artillery against the city?

Also has the "National Government" publicly come out and say once they come to power general elections will be held or are they assuming power as a coup and we just have the same situation as before. If there are elections what will be the UN stance if it finds that they are tampered with like Afghanistan?

What is this speculation based on?

Hypothetically the rebels could start slaughtering everyone in their path, but are they?

Are the rebels attacking the civilians in the towns they are taking now? the answer is no.

We all know the only person who would turn Tripoli into a bloodbath is the deeply unpopular leader of that country.

For those with an axe to grind with US/UK - fine, fair enough - but if Norway, Germany, Japan, whoever formed a coalition and formed a no-fly zone, then there would be an eery silence from them

For the genuine cynics, there are genuine concerns, but the rebels making such progress is very good psychologically to 'break' the regime.

If Mubarak had had the same control over military, killed those who opposed, and used mercenaries then he could still be in power

Overheal

Stev_o wrote: »

Also has the "National Government" publicly come out and say once they come to power general elections will be held or are they assuming power as a coup and we just have the same situation as before. If there are elections what will be the UN stance if it finds that they are tampered with like Afghanistan?

Thats the internal matter portion of this. I suppose thats entirely up to the Libyans.

Offy

What does it matter, in the end we have no say in what goes on so whats the point in any of this? We can talk till we are blue in the face and nothing will change. That nut job will be replaced by another nut job. In the end there will be two side, only one can win. We dont get to pick sides so why give out about any of it? Gadaffi likes to kill people, so does China, USA, England, Russia, etc. Such is the human race. We vote FF and look what happens so we vote FG and within days the same things are going on. We are just slaves really.

AlekSmart

Offy wrote: »

What does it matter, in the end we have no say in what goes on so whats the point in any of this? We can talk till we are blue in the face and nothing will change. That nut job will be replaced by another nut job. In the end there will be two side, only one can win. We dont get to pick sides so why give out about any of it? Gadaffi likes to kill people, so does China, USA, England, Russia, etc. Such is the human race. We vote FF and look what happens so we vote FG and within days the same things are going on. We are just slaves really.

Spot-on Offy.

I`d have no real problem with any of this sabre rattling IF the coalitionist`s were upfront about it.

What sticks in my gullet is the pretence of some deeply held concern for the "People of Libya" to the extent of having very- serious people draft and pass very-serious UN relolutions to somehow dress this mannequin in good looking clobber.

Libya is now a fractious and tribal place,in common with so much of the region.

Over and over we hear of the Sunni vs Shi`ite dislocation which is the long-term illness of Islam and one which,as yet, has no cure and for sure not any cure delivered by a coalition of Western medicine-men.

Yet we now have a major Western military action,which is apparently expanding exponentially with each hour.

Right now,the protagonists main intent seems to be the ousting of Gadaffi and his Government in order to replace them with somebody from the opposite branch of Islam.

This will neatly allow for a simple 180 degree turn around in the type of Libyan whose well being we need to be concerned about.

To the Victor,the spoils ?

RandomName2

AlekSmart wrote: »

Spot-on Offy.

I`d have no real problem with any of this sabre rattling IF the coalitionist`s were upfront about it.

What sticks in my gullet is the pretence of some deeply held concern for the "People of Libya" to the extent of having very- serious people draft and pass very-serious UN relolutions to somehow dress this mannequin in good looking clobber.

Libya is now a fractious and tribal place,in common with so much of the region.

Over and over we hear of the Sunni vs Shi`ite dislocation which is the long-term illness of Islam and one which,as yet, has no cure and for sure not any cure delivered by a coalition of Western medicine-men.

Yet we now have a major Western military action,which is apparently expanding exponentially with each hour.

Right now,the protagonists main intent seems to be the ousting of Gadaffi and his Government in order to replace them with somebody from the opposite branch of Islam.

This will neatly allow for a simple 180 degree turn around in the type of Libyan whose well being we need to be concerned about.

To the Victor,the spoils ?

+ 1

Even if it is morally completely justified, when did the term
'No fly zone'

equate to the terms

'No Gadaffi zone' or 'no Gadaffi armed forces zone?'

Whilst the UN intervention is ostensibly intended to enforce a ceasefire (which Gadaffi broke as soon as he declared it) in reality the last thing the coalition wants is an armistice/ stalemate, but rather the collapse of the Gadaffi regime (albeit from within).

If they were just honest about that it would be easier to move on to the more pressing questions of 1) How can the rebels win and 2) How do we prevent the rebels becoming as bad if not worse than Gadaffi if they do.

RandomName2

Manic Moran wrote: »

Logic flaw there, Euroland. The point of a deterrent is that you're willing to use them. If"only idiots"are willing to use nukes, and assuming Gaddafi isn't an idiot (though his appearances recently make one wonder) then by your argument his having nukes would be completely irrelevant as no nation would need to worry about them because he wouldn't use them.

NTM

A case in point might be Saddam where, when push came to shove, he was not willing to use WMDs against the UN forces. :pac:

mike65

The insurgents/rebels/terrorists are making rapid headway west reaching Ben Jawad heading toward Surt, looks like the final stand of the current regime could be upon us pretty quickly.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/27/libya-rebels-advance-gaddafi-home-town

Unless a deal can be struck of course.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/27/libya-turkey-mediators-prime-minister

nacho libre

RandomName2 wrote: »

+ 1

Even if it is morally completely justified, when did the term
'No fly zone'

equate to the terms

'No Gadaffi zone' or 'no Gadaffi armed forces zone?'
:

possibly it's due to the precise wording of the resolution-" to protect civilians by all means necessary" this leave a lot of scope for going beyond imposing a no fly zone such as we see.

Overheal

nacho libre wrote: »

possibly it's due to the precise wording of the resolution-" to protect civilians by all mean necessary" this leave a lot of scope for going beyond imposing a no fly zone such as we see.

I suppose taken to the extreme the resolution can view Ghadaffi as a threat to civilian safety.

Dont get me wrong, I have questions about the actions too: but im wane to jump the gun on anything.

Jonny7

Offy wrote: »

What does it matter, in the end we have no say in what goes on so whats the point in any of this? We can talk till we are blue in the face and nothing will change. That nut job will be replaced by another nut job. In the end there will be two side, only one can win. We dont get to pick sides so why give out about any of it? Gadaffi likes to kill people, so does China, USA, England, Russia, etc. Such is the human race. We vote FF and look what happens so we vote FG and within days the same things are going on. We are just slaves really.

Last I checked, we all live in fairly peaceful countries without dictators. So something did obviously change.

How about when the Berlin wall came down? were all the dictators and Russian puppets just 'replaced' with other nutters?

This isn't FF to FG we're talking about here, its massive change - Europe has een through this vital change - now the middle east + north Africa is having a stab at it

Think about it, is Finland ever going to attack France as long as you live? We live in a stable continent, and we just get to moan about taxes, instead of brutal dictators, not a bad deal in comparison

The quicker the world rids itself of these ****ty ruthless leaders and systems the better for everyone.

Offy

Jonny7 wrote: »

Last I checked, we all live in fairly peaceful countries without dictators. So something did obviously change.

How about when the Berlin wall came down? were all the dictators and Russian puppets just 'replaced' with other nutters?

This isn't FF to FG we're talking about here, its massive change - Europe has een through this vital change - now the middle east + north Africa is having a stab at it

Think about it, is Finland ever going to attack France as long as you live? We live in a stable continent, and we just get to moan about taxes, instead of brutal dictators, not a bad deal in comparison

The quicker the world rids itself of these ****ty ruthless leaders and systems the better for everyone.

Which leaders exactly are you talking about?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX7hMj2NKTc