The Libyan uprising

OS119

opinion guy wrote: »

I completely disagree with you here. They went in to Iraq under the manufacturedd pretext of destroying WMD's. WMD's that didn't exist and were essentially manufactured to justify Bush finishing the job his Daddy started. In this case there is a very clear mandate to protect the citizens by any means necessary from Gadaffi and his forces. If gadaffi and his cronies were to step down/ be defeated then job done.

thats not what Manic means - he means that, in private at least, there was a very clear and measurable objective and the will (if not neccessarily the means or the wit) to get to that objective. while the headline of this operation may look clear and unambiguous, the reality is that it isn't - there's no timescale, no parameter that says 'X is so big it requires action, but Y is so small that it can be left alone as one of the sh1t things that happens in the world', there's no guidence as to what happens if Gaddafi retreats into an enclave but the opposition land forces don't have the combat power to destroy him - resulting in a festering 'two state unsolution', there's no 'Plan B' if either airstrikes don't work or the enemy morphs from a coherant land force that can be targetted to an irregular, much more incoerant and indescriminant that undertakes hit and run attacks on any opposition town or even relief collumns and that is much more difficult to target and interdict from the air.

i'm in favour, but there are real difficulties, and it may well go tits up - and what happens if the opposition win, set up a provisional government and start rounding up anyone who had any role in the gaddafi society and putting them in mass graves - that can't be interdicted from the air, it needs a ground force.

what happens then?

Jonny7

OS119 wrote: »

thats not what Manic means - he means that, in private at least, there was a very clear and measurable objective and the will (if not neccessarily the means or the wit) to get to that objective. while the headline of this operation may look clear and unambiguous, the reality is that it isn't - there's no timescale, no parameter that says 'X is so big it requires action, but Y is so small that it can be left alone as one of the sh1t things that happens in the world', there's no guidence as to what happens if Gaddafi retreats into an enclave but the opposition land forces don't have the combat power to destroy him - resulting in a festering 'two state unsolution', there's no 'Plan B' if either airstrikes don't work or the enemy morphs from a coherant land force that can be targetted to an irregular, much more incoerant and indescriminant that undertakes hit and run attacks on any opposition town or even relief collumns and that is much more difficult to target and interdict from the air.

i'm in favour, but there are real difficulties, and it may well go tits up - and what happens if the opposition win, set up a provisional government and start rounding up anyone who had any role in the gaddafi society and putting them in mass graves - that can't be interdicted from the air, it needs a ground force.

what happens then?

Can you make a suggestion to how they could be doing it?

opinion guy

OS119 wrote: »

thats not what Manic means - he means that, in private at least, there was a very clear and measurable objective and the will (if not neccessarily the means or the wit) to get to that objective. while the headline of this operation may look clear and unambiguous, the reality is that it isn't - there's no timescale, no parameter that says 'X is so big it requires action, but Y is so small that it can be left alone as one of the sh1t things that happens in the world', there's no guidence as to what happens if Gaddafi retreats into an enclave but the opposition land forces don't have the combat power to destroy him - resulting in a festering 'two state unsolution', there's no 'Plan B' if either airstrikes don't work or the enemy morphs from a coherant land force that can be targetted to an irregular, much more incoerant and indescriminant that undertakes hit and run attacks on any opposition town or even relief collumns and that is much more difficult to target and interdict from the air.

i'm in favour, but there are real difficulties, and it may well go tits up - and what happens if the opposition win, set up a provisional government and start rounding up anyone who had any role in the gaddafi society and putting them in mass graves - that can't be interdicted from the air, it needs a ground force.

what happens then?

But this is a bit of a moot point really. These are problems with every kind of military action. There is never surety of an outcome, there is never a guarantee that when you achieve X you can withdraw. Actually I think wording it to exclude a ground force is possibly a mistake.

Euroland

Jonny7 wrote: »

Saddam vs the Kurds slaughter part 2 takes place in Benghazi

Saddam’s “slaughter of Kurds” is nothing relatively to the slaughter of Iraqis by Americans and their allies.

Euroland

gurramok wrote: »

Its happening. The UN resolution to 'protect civilians in Lbya' is passed http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12781009

Operation “Libyan Oil” gets its official backing. France, UK, and the US are ready to re-distribute Libyan Oil in favour of their private interests.

Euroland

Min wrote: »

Time for Muammar Gaddafi to be brought to justice for his multiple crimes against humanity.
It is beyond belief what he is doing to his own people, basically a mad man, a crazed dictator has gone to war with the people he brutally rules.

Which crimes? How about the crimes conducted by Americans and their allies in Iraq? How about hundreds of Egyptian and Tunisian mercenaries killing Libyan solders and pretending to be "the Libyan rebels" in Libya right now?

OS119

opinion guy wrote: »

But this is a bit of a moot point really. These are problems with every kind of military action. There is never surety of an outcome, there is never a guarantee that when you achieve X you can withdraw. Actually I think wording it to exclude a ground force is possibly a mistake.

the uncertainties inherant in any military action aren't the problem, its that the headline looks clear but the small print isn't - there's no certainty in what the resolution actually wants to acheive as its endgame.

the most fundamental question is 'what do i want to acheive - what will the facts on the ground be that determine whether i've finished or not?'.

is Gaddafi as Mayor of Tripoli acceptable?

if he is reduced to being in control of one city and is only able to be a bastard to 100,000 people does that mean 'enough', or is this the total, absolute eradication of any form of bastardry in Libya forevermore?

because the resolution does't mention either its unclear as to what it wants to achieve - and therefore its not clear if decapitation strikes, rather than C3 strikes are acceptable.

with regards to ground forces - ruling out any form of threat is just daft, you may well decide that while you are happy to expend bombs and avgas you won't be risking IED's, but not telling your enemy what you will or won't do in the future puts more pressure on him.

Jonny7

Euroland wrote: »

Saddam’s “slaughter of Kurds” is nothing relatively to the slaughter of Iraqis by Americans and their allies.

What about the slaughter of Germans by the Brits in 1944 and 1945?

yes, that's right - its called 'context'

I was and still am utterly against the hideous botch job that was Iraq.

Jonny7

Euroland wrote: »

Which crimes? How about the crimes conducted by Americans and their allies in Iraq? How about hundreds of Egyptian and Tunisian mercenaries killing Libyan solders and pretending to be "the Libyan rebels" in Libya right now?

Ridiculous - okay, how about we never intervene in any situation ever until all the butthurt people about Iraq (myself included) get a microphone and get to tell the world

a) we were right
and
b) USA and UK do evil things

then can we intervene? or do we have to keep dragging this bitterness into every single situation and conflict no matter how black and white

What if tomorrow in Bahrain they start systematically rounding everyone up and putting them into concentration camps and start gassing them.. can we intervene then without the Iraq oil Bush rant? oh no maybe we need to hear about during the Boer war that the British invented concentration camps and the world has to know that?

If you were a normal intelligent Libyan student and knew all about all the atrocities committed by US and UK in Iraq you would be kissing Camerons shoes in absolute sheer genuine thanks right now for this No Fly Zone

jaysus

Euroland

Jonny7 wrote: »

What about the slaughter of Germans by the Brits in 1944 and 1945?

If you’re talking about Dresden bombing? That was genocide.

Euroland

Jonny7 wrote: »

What if tomorrow in Bahrain they start systematically rounding everyone up and putting them into concentration camps and start gassing them.. can we intervene then without the Iraq oil Bush rant? oh no maybe we need to hear about during the Boer war that the British invented concentration camps and the world has to know that?

If tomorrow people get gassed in Bahrain, US and their western Allies would be happy to see it and would fully back up that genocide, as they backed Saddam’s actions against Shias and Kurds in Iraq a few decades ago and provided him with chemical weapons. Gaddafi is not their ally, so they want to punish him and steal Libyan oil.

B.t.w., 6 people already have been killed in Bahrain, but no Western power threatened to Bahrain with any act of retaliation. Why Western powers don’t back up the uprising in Bahrain?

Euroland

Jonny7 wrote: »

If you were a normal intelligent Libyan student and knew all about all the atrocities committed by US and UK in Iraq you would be kissing Camerons shoes in absolute sheer genuine thanks right now for this No Fly Zone

Intelligent Libyan Student first of all should remember what mess and poverty was in Libya before the Gaddafi, and, second, remember who made the redistribution of wealth in Libya in favor of impoverished population, making education realistic for Libyan kids, who before the Gaddafi were dying on the streets from malnutrition and lack of medical treatment. During the Gaddafi rule life expectancy in Libya increased by over 25 years and average disposable income by tenfold. But what would happen if Gaddafi would be removed from power? In 5-10 years Libya will go back to the pre-Gaddafi poverty, life expectancy would decline by 20-30 years, and many people would die from hunger and lack of medical treatment. Do you want this for Libya again?

Euroland

Euroland wrote: »

Intelligent Libyan Student first of all should remember what mess and poverty was in Libya before the Gaddafi, and, second, remember who made the redistribution of wealth in Libya in favor of impoverished population, making education realistic for Libyan kids, who before the Gaddafi were dying on the streets from malnutrition and lack of medical treatment. During the Gaddafi rule life expectancy in Libya increased by over 25 years and average disposable income by tenfold. But what would happen if Gaddafi would be removed from power? In 5-10 years Libya will go back to the pre-Gaddafi poverty, life expectancy would decline by 20-30 years, and many people would die from hunger and lack of medical treatment. Do you want this for Libya again?

Rubbish.
You can't compare the future with something that went on 40 years ago.
Most of those people are dead.

gurramok

Euroland wrote: »

Which crimes? How about the crimes conducted by Americans and their allies in Iraq? How about hundreds of Egyptian and Tunisian mercenaries killing Libyan solders and pretending to be "the Libyan rebels" in Libya right now?

Any source for this? First time i've seen such an allegation.

I wonder is Yemen on the list next for intervention considering a good few killed there today by govt supporters??http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12783585

Yemen President wrote:

He has said he will not seek another term in office in 2013 but has vowed to defend his regime "with every drop of blood".

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Mervyn Crawford

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/mar2011/liby-m18.shtml

The justifications given for the Libyan intervention are full of grotesque contradictions. Washington, which professes to be outraged over the killing of Libyan civilians and bent on saving lives, is itself responsible for the slaughter of hundreds of thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan and, on the very eve of the UN vote, carried out the cold-blooded murder of some 40 civilians in a drone attack in Pakistan.
The US and its allies have shown no inclination to seek a resolution authorizing the use of military force in the Ivory Coast, where a conflict comparable to that in Libya is unfolding. The obvious explanation is that cacao is not considered to have the same strategic importance as oil.

Gadaffi has not gained ground in recent days because of military prowess. Rather, the revolutionary upsurge itself has stalled, being led by former elements of the regime. The requirement for the Libyan masses to seize power and create a socialist government is the over-riding question.

ei.sdraob

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I dont think so, in the lead up to Iraq there was months of spin on TV and lies upon lies. With US and Britain sidestepping the UN.

In this case it seems the people of a country have rebelled against their corrupt authoritarian dictator. Anything that would help them sort out the mess themselves is not a bad thing.

Fair play to them, while here we have people dying for more freedoms and the ability to live their life to its full potential, we in the west are slowly bit by bit are loosing liberties.

mike65

Quadaffy Duck has announced a cease fire, that wouldn't have happened yesterday Euroland

Euroland

gurramok wrote: »

Any source for this? First time i've seen such an allegation.

It was on Sky News couple of weeks ago, a very late night interview with a couple of “rebels”. One of them said that he was Egyptian, and then added “There are hundreds of Tunisians and Egyptians here; we came to help our Libyan brothers to liberate Libya from Gaddafi”.

Euroland

gurramok wrote: »

I wonder is Yemen on the list next for intervention considering a good few killed there today by govt supporters??http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12783585

Yemen won’t be on the list as it has little oil now.

Euroland

Deleted User wrote: »

Rubbish.

It is not rubbish, its true.

Euroland

hmmm wrote: »

If we don't I'll be shocked. Gadaffi's army is only 120km from Benghazi.

From a political point of view France's role is interesting. The previous foreign minister alliot marie made a hash of the uprisings in Tunisia & Egypt. France sees this as their backyard and she made several wrong calls, most of all appearing to support Ben Ali. Juppe is only in the door and already France is taking a forceful lead on Libya - and seeing crowds in Benghazi on Al Jazeera cheering for Sarkozy tonight is doing it a world of good.

It looks like Sarkozy just forgot about Gaddafi financing his election campaign.

nacho libre

gurramok wrote: »

Any source for this? First time i've seen such an allegation.

I wonder is Yemen on the list next for intervention considering a good few killed there today by govt supporters??http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12783585

No. Saleh is a US ally. So there will continue to be calls for restraint and respect peoples right to protest peacefully.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12787015
Meanwhile there doesn't seem to be any immediate sign of a UN resolution against Gbagbo in the Ivory Coast. Could it be the killing of civilians in a country without strategic interests for the West isn't as serious a crime?

Jonny7

Euroland wrote: »

If tomorrow people get gassed in Bahrain, US and their western Allies would be happy to see it and would fully back up that genocide, as they backed Saddam’s actions against Shias and Kurds in Iraq a few decades ago and provided him with chemical weapons. Gaddafi is not their ally, so they want to punish him and steal Libyan oil.

B.t.w., 6 people already have been killed in Bahrain, but no Western power threatened to Bahrain with any act of retaliation. Why Western powers don’t back up the uprising in Bahrain?

wow.. just wow.. very extreme statement

The chem weapons came from Germany and France actually, but anyway

Look I know a lot of people, myself included, became 'affected' with this new found 'shock' post 911, at the hypocrisy of UK/US/Western allies and our new found source of info the internet and

the documentaries

yeah I've seen them all

But the above statement is so utterly ridiculous
It could've been written by a 16yr old who's just watching 8 hours of Iraq documentaries.

Anyway, here is the truth for you, more than 6 have died in Bahrain, thats absolutely no incentive in any book for intervention, many more died in Tunisia, again, no proper reason, 365 killed in Egypt, but again no intervention, why?

because its too risky, let the country sort it out themselves

BUT

crazed dictator starts killing his own people with T72 tanks - very very different and very nasty

This is something your statements convey that you possibly don't grasp this

blind blinkered hatred of US/UK/Allied thing is a spinoff from the frustration of Iraq 03 (its never) - spinoff of trawling through Guerilla News Network all day and actually believing the half truths with "filled in" parts - watching all those Iraq documentaries, which are mainly very true, but overly elaborate, etc, etc and so on

In fact I am guessing the thread will be full of these people adding such nuggets as yes the civilised world wants to see people being gassed because they-they- gave gas to saddam, it said so in the documentary, especially to gas his own people, so he'd stay in power so they could do deals with him and blah blah blah

Lets stay on topic and stay within reality

Jonny7

nacho libre wrote: »

No. Saleh is a US ally. So there will continue to be calls for restraint and respect peoples right to protest peacefully.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12787015
Meanwhile there doesn't seem to be any immediate sign of a UN resolution against Gbagbo in the Ivory Coast. Could it be the killing of civilians in a country without strategic interests for the West isn't as serious a crime?

Gbagbo is pretty much unstoppable, unless they start sanctioning assassination

Very different situation to Libya, from every single standpoint.

I mean imagine putting a no fly zone down there, laughable

I am starting to notice people are lumping situations into the same category a lot in this thread, when they are extremely diverse. No one has mentioned Congo yet, when the place is far worse than anything mentioned so far

Euroland

Jonny7 wrote: »

Lets stay on topic and stay within reality

The reality is that Libya has a lot of Oil and still is not a colony/ally to the West.

Jonny7

Euroland wrote: »

The reality is that Libya has a lot of Oil and still is not a colony/ally to the West.

Its been a bloody ally since 2003!!


updates
Belgium will supply some fighter aircraft
Italy, who have v close ties with Libya will close emb. in Tripoli and allow use of their airfields
Canada will send aircraft

Jaysus I am getting no work done today, gonna have to tear myself away from 24 hour news feeds and get drunk

Dirk Gently

Jonny7 wrote: »

Belgium will supply some fighter aircraft

must be the french speaking pilots so. I wonder if they've informed the Dutch speaking lads.

recedite

mike65 wrote: »

Once again everyone has to wait until uncle Sam deems somthing worth their while. Still better late then never. Interesting that China and Russia decided to sit this vote out. Thats basicly code for "go ahead anyway".

Germans didn't fancy a return to Tobruk either....:D
Remember Lockerbie now Gadaffy you Quack.

Euroland

I won’t be surprised if at the end the number of dead from French-British-American “peaceful” mission would be thousand-fold higher than the number of dead from the actions of “dictator” Gaddafi.