Libya

[Embattle]

Whatever let's me fill my tank for cheap gets my vote.

No option will allow that.

It should be pointed out that this resolution is probably set to please no one on any side of the debate.

 

[cHodAX]

No, you've misread my point. As for targeting gaddaffi that's been denied, ao as embattle said, it depends whose soundbitea you believe.

So William Hauge didn't say it then?

Libya crisis: Gaddafi compound attacked again amid reports son killed | Herald Sun

While US officials have gone out of their way to stress that Gaddafi is not a target of the bombings, Britain's Foreign Secretary William Hague earlier refused to rule out aiming air strikes at him.

"The targeting that we do on these kind of strikes will always be in accordance with the UN resolution and that of course emphasises the protection of the civilian population," Mr Hague told the BBC.

Pressed on whether Britain had the authority to kill Gaddafi if he attacked his own people, Mr Hague replied, "I'm not going to speculate on the targets ... that depends on the circumstances at the time."

UK Defence Secretary Liam Fox said yesterday he would sanction a "bunker buster" attack on the dictator’s location as long as civilian casualties could be avoided.

Dr Fox vowed to destroy Gaddafi’s entire military infrastructure as senior officials privately admitted they want to engineer regime change.

That isn't a soundbite, it is a direct quote and one with which some generals firmly disagree with. It might be a politicans answer but the Obama administration is singing from the same hymn sheet, they see him as a valid target even though the resolution makes no such mention. As I have said before, a very vague resolution is being abused to force a regeime change. Watch and see.

 

[Embattle]

Technically WH hasn't said yay or nay to the subject in typical politician fashion.

Another selective sound bite which again is taken out of context, it is easy to do as I pointed out a few posts a go when it comes to using quotes all the time to push an opinion. Here is one from a different source:

Gaddafi may become target of air strikes, Liam Fox admits | World news | The Guardian

Speaking on the Politics Show, Fox said: "Mission accomplished would mean the Libyan people free to control their own destiny. This is very clear – the international community wants his regime to end and wants the Libyan people to control for themselves their own country."

He then added: "Regime change is not an objective, but it may come about as a result of what is happening amongst the people of Libya."

He said: "When the dynamic shifts and the equilibrium shifts, we will get a better idea just how much support the Gaddafi regime has and how much the people of Libya genuinely long to be able to control their own country.

"If Colonel Gaddafi went, not every eye would be wet."

Fox said it was possible that allied forces might treat Gaddafi himself as a legitimate target for air strikes.

"There is a difference between someone being a legitimate target and whether we go ahead and target him," he said. "You would have to take into account what would happen to civilians in the area, what might happen in terms of collateral damage. We don't simply with a gung-ho attitude start firing off missiles."

I take all media information with a pinch of salt, no matter which side they push.

 

[cHodAX]

It cannot be denied anymore, there are problems at the top.

A breach within Britain's political and military leadership has opened up as David Cameron argued that the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, may be a legitimate target while the chief of the defence staff, Sir David Richards, said he was "absolutely not".

Is Muammar Gaddafi a target? PM and military split over war aims | World news | The Guardian

 

[cHodAX]

How many people die in Syria before the west considers they have legitimate rights to protect the civilians? Oh wait, they won't try it on again because Russia would not stand by a second time, ahh well looks like the Syrians have carte blanche now.

BBC News - Syria unrest: US condemns 'disproportionate force'

 

[old.Tohtori]

Condemning countries are as useless as people looking at a mugging and going "Isn't it ghastly!"

Do something, don't, or shut the f*ck up.

Another riveting political commentary akin my first post on the matter, you can now continue with the professional tomfoolery

 

[rynnor]

How many people die in Syria before the west considers they have legitimate rights to protect the civilians? Oh wait, they won't try it on again because Russia would not stand by a second time, ahh well looks like the Syrians have carte blanche now.

BBC News - Syria unrest: US condemns 'disproportionate force'

Damned if they do, damned if they dont eh - your arguement seems rather bi-polar so I'm out - have fun.

 

[Job]

Exactly what are they going to do next?
Forever keep the rest of Libya away from the city?
Build a big wall around it?

Post 10,000 troops to protect the citizens for the next twenty years?

Yes you know it.

 

[cHodAX]

Condemning countries are as useless as people looking at a mugging and going "Isn't it ghastly!"

Do something, don't, or shut the f*ck up.

Another riveting political commentary akin my first post on the matter, you can now continue with the professional tomfoolery

Added nothing to the thread. This is a discussion forum and this is a discussion, does the concept allude you?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Added nothing to the thread. This is a discussion forum and this is a discussion, does the concept allude you?

I commented on countries condeming actions being pointless. On topic, your post on the other hand was just a useless flame. Well done ironyman

 

[cHodAX]

Damned if they do, damned if they dont eh - your arguement seems rather bi-polar so I'm out - have fun.

It's not bi-polar I am attacking the hipocracy of the whole situation where we can pass vague U.N. resolutions to protect civilians in one country but not in others when the army/militia is turned on the civilians. Again, East Timor, Rwanda, Dafour, Now Syria and Yemen. No one is pushing for U.N. action there because they either wouldn't get the nod from the other UNSC members or they have governments that co-operate with the west. Hell look at Eygpt, they allow us to rendition suspected terrorists to and from there but also allow us to torture and interogate those suspects on Egyptian soil so why would intervene beyond a few harsh words?

Let us go right back to the beginining, I support a limited no-fly zone in Libya that protects those civilians in the eastern cities from being attacked, I support thier right to rebel even if I don't think it is in the interests of regional stability. If they want to otherthrow Gaddafi then good on them, hell even supply them with equipment if need be but what we are doing is effectively waging war on thier behalf via a vague U.N. resolution that was rushed through and is now being prosecuted with venom before the rest of the world wakes up and sees what is actually going on.

 

[cHodAX]

I commented on countries condeming actions being pointless. On topic, your post on the other hand was just a useless flame. Well done ironyman

Again, adding nothing beyond trolling, how you keep getting away with it is beyond me. Pointing out that we are having a discussion is not a flame, you continually posting trying to exert a reaction though is not good. Please add to the debate or leave, don't derail a thread just to get at me.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Again, adding nothing beyond trolling, how you keep getting away with it is beyond me. Pointing out that we are having a discussion is not a flame, you continually posting trying to exert a reaction though is not good. Please add to the debate or leave, don't derail a thread just to get at me.

Interesting how a "you're contributing nothing" post(that didn't at all comment on what i said) by you, when i commented on part of the discussion as per topic, turns into me trying to "get at you"

 

[old.Tohtori]

But to put it to a 100% rest and on-topic; i wasn't trolling for a reaction, if you felt like it and felt it offended the sanctity of the thread(cough), wasn't intentional.

I i wanted to troll the thread, i'd say something like; why can't countries just leave other countries the f*ck alone and concentrate on their own problems, of which there are several.

 

[cHodAX]

This made me laugh, FOX making the news up again rather than reporting it.

CNN's Nic Robertson Tears Into Fox News For Saying Libyans Used Him As Human Shield (VIDEO)

 

[Wij]

This made me laugh, FOX making the news up again rather than reporting it.

CNN's Nic Robertson Tears Into Fox News For Saying Libyans Used Him As Human Shield (VIDEO)

Fair enough but hardly surprising.

 

[Embattle]

Pointing out that we are having a discussion is not a flame, you continually posting trying to exert a reaction though is not good. Please add to the debate or leave, don't derail a thread just to get at me.

We are...and there was me thinking it must be national quotation week.

 

[Tuthmes]

Top 50 Air Traffic Control Audio Streams | LiveATC.net

Choose: LMML Twr/Radar/ACC

If you wanne follow the radio transmissions.

Flightradar24.com - Live Flight Tracker!

Sometimes shows aircrafts involved.

 

[tierk]

I am finding this a bit hard to fathom but can someone explain to me how a no fly zone being enforced to protect civilians has now changed to a bombing campaign against ground units?

Surely this is an act of war and is in direct contravention of the UN's charter?

I am also wondering what peoples expectations are if Ghaddafi decides that he can attack coalition forces, as a response? A declaration of war or is that point moot seeing as war has been declared unofficially?

Not a flame post btw just curious to see what peoples reactions would be if say he fired a missile at one of the coalition ships patrolling of the coast resulting in high casualties?

 

[rynnor]

I am finding this a bit hard to fathom but can someone explain to me how a no fly zone being enforced to protect civilians has now changed to a bombing campaign against ground units?

Surely this is an act of war and is in direct contravention of the UN's charter?

The wording was to do whatever they like to protect civilians - not just a no fly zone.

Thus if ground forces are used v civilians they can take them out legally.

 

[Raven]

They could end the current problems now by taking out Gadaffi but that isn't the aim.

I imagine in a week or so we will have moved on from bombing tanks and military targets to bridges and infrastructure. It's all about the oil and gaining access to it.

 

[tierk]

I imagine in a week or so we will have moved on from bombing tanks and military targets to bridges and infrastructure. It's all about the oil and gaining access to it.

O dear Raven, it seems you are an idiot, according to some people posting on this thread, for being stupid enough to link the current coalition actions in Libya with oil, which it clearer isn't!!

 

[Embattle]

Yawn.

 

[Ormorof]

Um...Sudan has lots of oil and so does East Timor...

and Sudan has just had a nice referendum splitting the country in two ot create the latest nation on Earth - South Sudan

arguing that its absurd to go into Libya to stop the massacre of civilians just because we havent done it before (well we have, didnt turn out great though) is a bit absurd.

the more relevant question is why are we stopping Gadaffi but not doing the same in Syria, Yemen, Bahrain where the same thing is happening?

Also there are several Rebel strongholds in the east and a "independent" Emirate of Derna (controlled allegedly by Osama Bin Ladens right hand man) in the south, so imposing a no fly zone over only the western end of libya would have been like throwing those guys to the wolves...

the UN resolution was passed, he declared a ceasefire, he broke the ceasefire trying to crush the rebellion before anyone noticed, got caught with his pants down and is now being spanked for it, im guessing the west (and most of the rest of the world) is hoping someone on the inside gets rid of him so this wont turn into a long and protracted conflict (i mean, its the Med! cant have our Summer Holidays ruined by some looney with guns)

oh and Britain sold lots of military and police equipment to Gadaffi, at the start of the uprising there were lots of pics in the papers of his "MADE IN THE UK" armored personel carriers plowing down protesters...

just my 2c

 

[Fafnir]

Well think the biggest reason they are attacking is that hes been pissing of alot of countries since he took power.

 

[cHodAX]

Well think the biggest reason they are attacking is that hes been pissing of alot of countries since he took power.

Yep he was really pissing people off 3 years ago when he signed massive oil and gas deals with the west, renounced all WMD's and let the weapons inspectors have full access. Oh and of course restoring full diplomatic relations with all nations EXCEPT America.

 

[Fafnir]

Yep he was really pissing people off 3 years ago when he signed massive oil and gas deals with the west, renounced all WMD's and let the weapons inspectors have full access. Oh and of course restoring full diplomatic relations with all nations EXCEPT America.

Think stuff like Lockerbie bombing has something to do with it aswell and the training camps etc etc.

 

[tierk]

Think stuff like Lockerbie bombing has something to do with it aswell and the training camps etc etc.

What training camps they all been dismantled yonks ago. I ahve linked a fairly decent article on the whole history of terrorism and the camps.

How Libya Got Off the List - Council on Foreign Relations

As for Lockerbie, they paid out 2.7 billion Dollars as compensation as well as admitting publicly they were responsible for it.

 

[cHodAX]

Syria Troops Open Fire On Protesters, Witness Says

Syria next then? Oh wait, no...

 

[Raven]

Not enough resources to care about.