Libyan No-Fly Zone res. passed by UN

[HunterICX]

Would love to see the UN action result into another failure.

Lybia's rebellion was not our business to begin with.
and in respect of ''protecting the civilians'' the UN has proven not to give a crap about civilian lives in the past and I don't expect them to do that any time soon.

HunterICX

[Type941]

Originally Posted by STEED

And now...



http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20110320/...i-3fd0ae9.html

When they said they want to have a no-fly zone, in my mind, back few weeks ago already, this meant:
1) destruction of AA defences
2) destruction of armed forced attacking rebel strongholds
3) destruction of airfields
4) destruction of aircraft on the ground capable of mounting challenge to the allied craft

Now. Where's the surprise? Wtf do people expect or think no-fly zone means?! Of course they're gonna do all of the above and during night.

And OF COURSE Duffy will wage an information war because that is the ONLY war he has a chance of winning if he does the following:
1) show pictures of people in hospital
2) show pictures of dead people
3) preferably show pictures of wounded or dead women and children
4) deploy fanatcis as human shields
5) continuously run this on TV and hope that:

a) people in west become outraged (with usual fundamental liberalism it won't take long)
b) Arab nations start freaking out (already working)

SO it's quite predictable how it's developing. Question is does UN force know how to handle this? I guess NO. hence' the way this is looking like it's a stalemate and won't end anywhere.

I think the point is to really really put pressure on Duffy - enough to make his entourage get desperate enough to throw him under the buss - the Mubarak move.


BUT, the TIMING of this is as bad as it can be. We're barely out of global recession, have to deal with Japan's fallout concequences and supply chain damage and now we go ahead and throw rockets under soft belly of old Europe. Sucky timing indeed.

[Skybird]

Arab League.





I again say that while regime chnage in Egypt was not in Europe's interest, becasue Mubarak kept the fundamentalists in check and showed to be a solid partner for Europe, Gaddafi never was a solid oartner but an attacker aginst Europe, untrustworthy to the max, anbd we do not know what the rebels stand for. Opposition in Egypt most likely will allow fundamentalists to come to power sooner or later, butg in Libya'S case we cannot be so sure of that. This uncertainty holds our chnace for getting something better than Gaddafi. And that is why we should make sure that both sides can fight it out on equal terms. At worts we get what we already havbe had. And best we get something better.


The other reasoin why we must have an interest in Libya is to disrupt Gazprom'S flanking manouver to paralyse Europe'S attempt to become more independent from Russian gas deliveries. And this second reason maybe is even more important for us than the first.


No gro7und intervention, just keeping the window of opportunity open, to have a chance to see regime change there.

That's why we are bombing Gaddafi's airforce and air defence. To see if the uncertai8nty we have about the rebel's nature and intention can turn out to be something showing as being beneficial for us. That'S why we do not allow Gaddafi'S airforce and heavy weapons to smash the rebels.


Butr further we shall not go. No ground intervention, no weapon deliveries. At best airbomb the rebels a path to Lybian weapon depots.


To me, these reasons make a hole lot more sense to get militarily engaged (earlier!) than the Kosovo war, the Gulf war 1993, the Gulf war 2003 or the Afghanistan war.


Sarkozy is being overestimated by some people here. For him, it is just an opüportunity to outmanouver the great internal Euroopena rival, Germany, and to profilate himself as one of the great leaders of Europe (under a French flag). Do not read too much into this. States of power or who have had an imperial past, tend to claim spheres of influence. For the US, that is Middle America and Wetsern Europe and the Gulf region. For the Russians, it is for example the Balkans. And for France it traditioinally is it's former colonies, so it is Algeria, Libya, Chad, and in general the Western part of the Mediterranean. When Sarkozy says "European", he always means "French". Never forget that.

[Bilge_Rat]

The French Air Force announced they had 15+ aircraft over Libya on sunday. They all appear to be flying interdiction missions brewing up Libyan AFVs on the roads to Benghazi (photo below). However, I think they are also including support aircraft and do not have more strike aircraft than the 6-8 Rafales and 4 Mirage 2000s they were using yesterday.

They are also reporting their aircraft were engaged by Libyan air defences on saturday, although none were shot down, but that the Libyan air defences are inactive today.







http://www.lefigaro.fr/international...-coalition.php

http://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/articl...ens_id=1481986

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

Also, clearly you think dictatorship is grounds enough for overthrow by the forces of democracy. It is a position to be held, certainly. If this is US policy, you'll be busy for the next few decades.

Yes, I do. We are way past a point in history where regions of people should be held hostage by a non-democratic dictator. Western powers should not allow it. Let the people decide, and if they elect another Hitler, we deal with that when the time comes.


Incidentally, what actually defines dictatorship in your opinion? Is any non-democratic system a dictatorship? Yes.

Or is a dictator only a generalissimo like Gaddafi rather than absolute hereditary monarchies? Absolute hereditary monarchies? Thise still exist? Remind me again what millenium this is? No region of people should be subject to a leader or govt that they had no say in setting up. That's an absolute. That includes the Saudi dictators as well.

Are democratically elected figures that hold an anti-US stance also dictators? No, just nations who are hostile to the US's interests. At least the people made their choice and can be accountable for the consequences.

PS: I apologize for messing up your original reply, I hit EDIT instead of REPLY, very sorry.

[Jimbuna]

Just been talking to someone on another forum who watched two separate flights (5 Typhoons and 1 VC-10 tanker in each) take off for deployment to the Med a little while ago....they were in 11 Sqdn markings.

There is still a niggling part in me that marvels at how selective governments are when deciding what civilians to protect. Definitely seems like you have more chance of 'protection' if your country has oil.

Places like Zimbabwe for example certainly don't.

[Schroeder]

I believe it's the baptism of fire for the Typhoon.

I'm still divided about the decision to go there. I have a bad feeling that this might just blow up into our faces.

[Freiwillige]

Boy this is getting sloppier than three pigs fighting over a trough! France says regime change, The US says hold on a minute we never said that and the Arab's say we were behind you until the bombs fell but now you have gone too far!

Operation (not to well thought out) should be the name of this one.

Let's recap at H +4-days: a coalition of Western democracies use a UN resolution where one-third of the Security Counsel abstained allowing employment of military force to facilitate the removal of an oil-rich despot for doing violence to his own people. Or at any rate more violence than has been the norm for some forty years past.

What could possibly go wrong?

[Bilge_Rat]

photos from the front.

apparently the result of french air strikes around Benghazi:









http://www.lefigaro.fr/international...-un-succes.php

[Jimbuna]

I forgot to mention @#201 that the Typhoons and tankers took off from RAF Brize Norton

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

photos from the front.

apparently the result of french air strikes around Benghazi:









http://www.lefigaro.fr/international...-un-succes.php

Looks like SP Guns. Nice shooting ALA.

[Bilge_Rat]

short video of the Rafales of the Armee de l'Air Francaise taking off for Libya yesterday:


http://www.leparisien.fr/diaporama-v...ub=par:www:une

[Type941]

makes good TV those images.
But that was the point, i don't understand what the Arab league was thinking UN would do.


Btw, if you read Russian newspapers, you'd be led to believe this is a NATO operation. for real.

[Bilge_Rat]

Le Monde is reporting Libyan AA has opened up over Tripoli. Dont know who is over there now, the RAF?

It seems the coalition divided up the territory. The French in the east around benghazi and the British around Tripoli. Anyone have any info on that?

Found this map, the red stars on the top map are coalition airstrikes: