/FLASH// US Navy attacks and destroys Libyan Warships

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Snag is...what if the rebels can't make progress even with Allied air support? They've been bounced from Sirte, Misrata and Bin Jawad, if they can't do it with what they have, then you just know that the US will start giving them weapons to do it with, and if that doesn't work, then it'll be time for boots on the ground.

Aye that...but I'm beginning to feel a little uneasy and wondering if the coalition are going beyond the terms of the UN resolution

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Aye that...but I'm beginning to feel a little uneasy and wondering if the coalition are going beyond the terms of the UN resolution

The beauty of it is though that UN resolution 1973 is worded so that the Coalition forces can do pretty much anything they want to Gadaffi except putting boots on the ground.

It's not under the No-Fly Zone of the resolution, it's under the 'Protection of civilians' section. Furthermore it has, and I quote: "to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding Paragraph Nine of resolution 1970 (2011) to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack".
Paragraph 9 on Resolution 1970 deals with the banning of arms shipments to Libya. So that's a nice little loop hole to give arms to the rebels there.

I think we could expect a repeat of the No Fly Zone over Iraq, I mean that was in force for what...ten years or more? Meanwhile we'll arm the rebels and train them and eventually they might win.

[Molon Labe]

So when is the Navy going to release the P-3's IR camera footage?????

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

So when is the Navy going to release the P-3's IR camera footage?????

So far the only FLIR footage I've seen from Libya is from the RAF.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Oberon

TI quote: "to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding Paragraph Nine of resolution 1970 (2011) to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack".

Did you deliberately not copy the rest of the sentence "while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory"

And if so, why?


These comments by President Obama about arming the rebels not only goes against resolution 1973 and 1970 where it clearly states that no member country can import arms to Libya (the rebels are in Libya)

Also, President Obama needs to read Chapter 40 of the UN Charter. The purpose of UNSCR action is to maintain the peace, not to take sides.

President Obama is walking a fine and dangerous line. I fear that Congress will give him authority to take unilateral action.

Not that the United States has ever been especially concerned with following/not following UNSCRs.

I am only one citizen in this Republic, but I don't like where we are going in this.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Did you deliberately not copy the rest of the sentence "while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory"

And if so, why?

Primarily because I stated that they can basically do whatever they like without putting boots on the ground, ie an occupation force. So there was no need, but in regards to bombing Gadaffi to pieces and giving the rebels all the guns they can get their hands on, it's wide open there.
Although that being said, looking at the words there, you could theoretically put boots on the ground as 'technical advisers' particularly when you start arming the rebels. Worked for the Russians back in 'Nam.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Although that being said, looking at the words there, you could theoretically put boots on the ground as 'technical advisers' particularly when you start arming the rebels. Worked for the Russians back in 'Nam.

Worked for us also in Viet Nam.

We know that CIA is already in place, and of course Combat Controllers, I am still waiting for President Obama to announce the deployment of "advisers" or "trainers".