|
So we might have the actual time for the vote:quote:Reuters reports that France wants the UN Security Council to vote on a resolution authorising a no-fly zone, according to Gerard Araud, the French ambassador to the UN. I've found previous military interventions like this to be badly implemented and not always to the benefit of the people it's supposed to help, but I honestly can't see another option at this point in time, and the rebels are asking for help. Also, if the vote is passed tonight I'm wondering if it'll lead to anything big happening after Friday prayers tomorrow once the rebels and protesters realise Gaddafi is doomed. Brown Moses fucked around with this message at 16:15 on Mar 17, 2011 |
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 16:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
Sinteres posted:Why would the US want to selflessly promote a new Nasser rather than itself as savior of democracy? Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, what's optimal for the United States has been optimal for the oppressed masses of the world. If this were the Cold War, then the beard-stroking, realpolitik obsessed United States you're describing would still exist and still be seeing the conflict from that framework. The United States of today is not the same United States of 1989. A lot of people still see the United States as this "imperialist Capitalist superpower" that only acts in its self interest and in the interests of global corporations. This false perception of the United States will not go away easily, because it's hard for people to let go. I'm not arguing from an assumption of how the United States used to be - as you're doing. I'm arguing from the realization that United States has been moving in the direction of "benign Superpower" for quite some time now (though we still haven't moved fast enough, and some of the baggage and bureaucratic stupidity from the realpolitik era still lingers). Since 1989, it has always been in America's interest that democracy take hold in the Middle East, even if it meant Islamists came to power. Since the Iraq War, the United States is well aware that it is in our interest if democracy is perceived as being an organic process instead of the byproduct of an invasion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 16:18
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:As smn said earlier the problem the rebels have is they can all the tanks and artillery in the world, but if they can't defend it from air strikes then it'll all rapidly be turned into junk by Gaddafi's forces. It does seem like they have access to heavy vehicles, it's just they can't use them at the moment, so a no fly zone would allow them to fight back using those heavy vehicles. Still, engaging and destroying the Libyan fighter bombers and their airbases would be a more effective way of doing this. Enforcing a NFZ requires constant patrolling of a very large airspace, and Gaddafi would still want to shoot your fighters down. In comparison attacking the airbases is quick, cheap and safe for the attacker.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 16:25
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:Since 1989, it has always been in America's interest that democracy take hold in the Middle East, even if it meant Islamists came to power. Since the Iraq War, the United States is well aware that it is in our interest if democracy is perceived as being an organic process instead of the byproduct of an invasion. This has to be a troll, right? It's in the US's economic interest to get cheap, reliable oil. Democracy and popular revolutions detract from this aim (bear in mind, too, that a democratic Middle East is not automatically one which wants to sell the US cheap oil). This is why the US isn't doing more than making disapproving noises about Bahrain for example. It'd be nice if governments (any governments) were selfless and benevolent. They're not. The US is no exception.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 16:26
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Still, engaging and destroying the Libyan fighter bombers and their airbases would be a more effective way of doing this. Enforcing a NFZ requires constant patrolling of a very large airspace, and Gaddafi would still want to shoot your fighters down. In comparison attacking the airbases is quick, cheap and safe for the attacker. The draft mandate would actually allow for the destruction of the Libyan airforce on the ground, as well as bombing airbases. If they don't change it then they'll have a pretty wide remit to do what they want short of bombing non-military targets. Just take a look at article 10: quote:Authorizes members of the League of Arab States and other States which have notified the Secretary-General, who are acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary General, to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian objects in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 16:33
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:I'm not arguing from an assumption of how the United States used to be - as you're doing. I'm arguing from the realization that United States has been moving in the direction of "benign Superpower" for quite some time now (though we still haven't moved fast enough, and some of the baggage and bureaucratic stupidity from the realpolitik era still lingers). The US is terrified of the possibility of Islamists coming to power. Democracy promotion in Palestine was a big deal until the day Hamas won an election. The Muslim Brotherhood kept its head down in the Egyptian uprising because it knew the US would be much more likely to back Mubarak if it was seen as the alternative. Saudi Arabia seems to be allowed a free hand in Bahrain to suppress the Shia. The US still cares very much about protecting its geopolitical interests in the Middle East; Libya may turn out to be a special case because humanitarian objectives happen to coincide with the removal of an unfriendly regime this time, and it seems likely that this can be done without troops on the ground.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 16:33
|
|
|
More from the Twitter rumour mill:quote:@ChangeInLibya: Some reports that Gaddafi may be collecting bodies in Mitiga so if air defenses are hit he can pretend these were civilian deaths quote:@ChangeInLibya: Confirmed reports that the brave ppl of Misrata killed over 80 Gaddafi soldiers, could climb up to 120+ quote:@ChangeInLibya: Ajdabiya despite the heavy bombardment has not fallen, the revolutionaries there are still surrounding Gaddafi's soldiers quote:@bungdan: last night, #libya state TV said tahuna tribe with Q. Today, hundreds of tahuna members parading benghazi, calling bs on that. quote:@ChangeInLibya: Unconfirmed reports that senior Gaddafi generals are all fleeing the country, prior to NFZ ruling quote:@BaghdadBrian: one local #libya youth suggested that defecting pilots families are under threat & planes being shotdown is ruse for their safety quote:@iyad_elbaghdadi Reports that revolution's military council orders not to take prisoners from Gaddafi troops, "defect and join us, or face death." quote:@iyad_elbaghdadi: There were demonstrations in Benghazi by some Warfalla and Tarhuna, denying claims the tribes are backing quote:@iyad_elbaghdadi: Many calls from the revolution's military council not to air videos of photos from the front lines, because they reveal positions. quote:@BaghdadBrian: Exclusive @alivein Video - 10km from Ajdabiya Rebels Mass Armor #libya ... no international press are this close #libya
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 16:43
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:Since 1989, it has always been in America's interest that democracy take hold in the Middle East, even if it meant Islamists came to power. Someone's a bit naive, eh? Can you cite any examples since 1989 where USA has supported a hostile democratic government over a friendly undemocratic government in the Middle East? By any means, Iran is more democratic (even if by a fraction) than Saudi Arabia, but the Saudis can always rely on unconditional US support as long as they have oil under their toes. Likewise according to international monitorers the 2009 presidential and 2010 parliamentary elections in Afghanistan were rigged, yet USA hailed them as triumphs for democracy. Nothing has changed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 16:44
|
|
|
Bit more about Misurata:quote:@ChangeInLibya: Reports from Misurata that snipers are shooting electricity transformers and anyone that steps out of his home, to spread fear quote:@ChangeInLibya: The snipers are not inside the city however they are occupying tall buildings on the outskirts and Air Academy watchtowers quote:@ChangeInLibya: Almanara reports tht 2 Toyota cruisers full of mercenaries attempting to attack Misrata were blown up by revolutionaries there quote:@ChangeInLibya :Gaddafi is stockpiling bodies of people he kidnapped & executed in Tripoli over last 4 weeks & will try to claim these are NFZ deaths Also from AJE: quote:5:44pm Hopefully we'll have the vote in the next 6 hours. Brown Moses fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Mar 17, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 16:48
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:The US is terrified of the possibility of Islamists coming to power. Democracy promotion in Palestine was a big deal until the day Hamas won an election. The Muslim Brotherhood kept its head down in the Egyptian uprising because it knew the US would be much more likely to back Mubarak if it was seen as the alternative. Saudi Arabia seems to be allowed a free hand in Bahrain to suppress the Shia. The US still cares very much about protecting its geopolitical interests in the Middle East; Libya may turn out to be a special case because humanitarian objectives happen to coincide with the removal of an unfriendly regime this time, and it seems likely that this can be done without troops on the ground. In 2005, Bush twisted Mubarak's arm to allow the Muslim Brotherhood to run (as independents). he also was adamant that Hamas take part in Palestinian Elections. He also met with Turkey's AK party. The problem is that he got "cold feet" (as The Economist put it), and stopped listening to the State Department. Since 1989, the United States drove a genocidal aggressor out of an independent country (Kuwait), fed a starving African nation and tried to remove a genocidal dictator, stopped two genocides against Muslims in the Balkans. Since 2000, the United States has supported an independent Palestine, overthrew the Taliban (which the majority of Afghans still support), removed a genocidal dictator that made Gaddafi look like a saint (the goal of the Iraq War was spreading democracy, but Bush lied because WMD was an easier sell), has taken steps to remove itself from reliance on Saudi Arabia and oil (without the consequences of pulling out too fast and causing a global meltdown). Like I said, we haven't moved fast enough, and we still find ourselves lapsing. But since 1989, the United States has become an entirely different creature with entirely different motives. That we haven't moved fast enough, or have occasionally slid backwards, is still a problem. These are fair criticisms of American foreign policy. But you have to approach it from where the United States actually is, not go around looking for examples to relive the old days of what the United States used to be. In ten years, it should be pretty obvious where the United States stands as a country. These things take time, and every imperfection or relapse, every instance of cold feet, will be jumped on by those who want to believe that nothing has changed, that we are still the same superpower that Zinn and Chomsky wrote about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 16:57
|
|
|
The problem I have with what you're saying is that I think you're buying the public relations efforts as being core interests rather than the cover under which the core interests may be pursued.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:01
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:When this is all over, the narrative will have to be "freedom fighting rebels secure victory from the jaws of defeat against deranged tyrant". Obviously a no-fly zone is needed, and the US airforce should only be a Deus Ex Machina when it is least likely to be noticed. Otherwise, the narrative will be "freedom fighting rebels saved from defeat by American interference". They can always just lie. That happens after every war is over.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:16
|
|
|
Sounds like the vote may happen in about 3 hours time:quote:Reuters :US Mission to UN Security Council says vote on Libya resolution will likely be at 0330 EDT (1930 GMT)
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:19
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:(the goal of the Iraq War was spreading democracy, but Bush lied because WMD was an easier sell) Yeah, calling this guy as a troll. I'm out. :P
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:21
|
|
|
More good news:quote:BBC: Arab League envoy to the UN have confirmed that 2 Arab countries are prepared to participate in enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya I'm wondering if Turkey will be involved as well as it's part of NATO.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:24
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Yeah, calling this guy as a troll. I'm out. :P Either a troll, or just a loving idiot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:27
|
|
|
The 4 New York Times journalists are still missing. No word from them since Tuesday. http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/four-new-york-times-journalists-are-missing-in-libya/
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:28
|
|
|
There's talk that Denmark is preparied to go in on a no-fly zone without a UN mandate. There was talk that one Danish party (the Red Greens) want give the rebels stinger missiles so that they could defend themselves instead of having to rely on western intervention.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:30
|
|
|
On the Arab League: I'm guessing Egypt and Tunisia for the no fly zone and possibly (comedy option) Iraq? If they're actually participating it would seem like you'd want Tunisia or Egypt as a base.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:34
|
|
|
farraday posted:On the Arab League: Egypt is out. Though I'm not sure if this means they won't be dedicating any fighters for a NFZ and let their airbases be used, or if they mean the want to have nothing to do with a NFZ whatsoever. There's not much info, so it really depends on how they define "intervention."
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:46
|
|
|
Narmi posted:Egypt is out. Egypt to the Libyan people: "gently caress you, got mine."
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
I'd imagine Egypt doesn't want to risk having an angry crazy neighbor if things go bad somehow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:04
|
|
|
XK posted:I'd imagine Egypt doesn't want to risk having an angry crazy neighbor if things go bad somehow. I kind of doubt that's it. The last time Ghadaffi tried to mess around with Egypt, it led to a completely one-sided ridiculously embarassing drubbing of the Libyan military, and that was before half his army was blown up by Chadians in pickups. And before Egypt had top of the line American military equipment. And half of what was left of the Libyan army decided they hated him. Slantedfloors fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Mar 17, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:10
|
|
|
XK posted:I'd imagine Egypt doesn't want to risk having an angry crazy neighbor if things go bad somehow. They're taking a pass because they're sorting their own situation out. They've still got to elect a government, after all. Then their economy is still in shambles. This isn't the right time to be pressing a neighboring country with their issues since their ruler likes to kill people without a care. Not to mention they may have a refugee problem in a little bit if everything goes poorly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:10
|
|
|
It's unrealistic to expect Egypt to step in, they've got enough on their plate right now. I'm sure France and whoever else is eager to rattle the saber with Sarkozy if the UN doesn't go for the NFZ are perfectly capable of handling the situation anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:18
|
|
|
So according to an article in the Washington Times, John Kerry has confirmed the US government has frozen $31.5 billion of Mubarak's assets in the form of shares, stocks, bank accounts and some real estate in New York and Los Angeles. $31.5 Billion just in the US... The constitutional referendum is gonna take place 2 days from now on the 19th and there's no clear outcome yet, most polls show a result of 51/49 that switches between Yes/No. Arguments: The "Yes" crowd argue that the country is too unstable to wait for a completely new constitution and say the changes are going to be enough to put the country forward on the path to democracy. After these amendments pass, parliamentary elections are to be held within two months and the democratically elected body can then draft a new constitution within 6 months. This notion is supported by the Muslim Brotherhood and the National Democratic Party (Mubarak's). I remember a week ago some imam in Alexandria told people it was a "divine duty" to vote "Yes" on the referendum but tons of people called him out on that. The "No" crowd argues however that the changes are not enough as they do not take away any of the president's ultimate powers, do not guarantee the independence of the judicial system from the executive one, do not fix the broken down parliamentary system (25% workers, 25% farmers) and that if they pass the country will go through rushed parliamentary elections that the NDP and MB would win as they're the only two established political parties. They're calling for a new constitution to be drafted taking all these issues into consideration and delaying parliamentary elections to give other new parties a chance to organize and recruit members, and they call for presidential elections to be held before parliamentary ones just for this goal. This notion is supported by most opposition parties, lots of popular media figures, non-NDP businessmen (such as Nagib Sawiris) imams and strong presidential candidates and rivals Amr Moussa and Mohamad El Baradei.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:20
|
|
|
Ham how large are concerns over a fraudulent referendum?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:22
|
|
|
IRQ posted:I'm sure France and whoever else is eager to rattle the saber with Sarkozy if the UN doesn't go for the NFZ are perfectly capable of handling the situation anyway. Plus if this happens, we'll get another Ghadaffi speech where he blames the revolt on those filthy Imperialist Danish Pig-Rats for firing hallucenogenic drug-filled rockets at maternity wards and barber shops.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:22
|
|
|
Narmi posted:There's talk that Denmark is preparied to go in on a no-fly zone without a UN mandate. There was talk that one Danish party (the Red Greens) want give the rebels stinger missiles so that they could defend themselves instead of having to rely on western intervention. I can't be the only person to be thinking about the Canadian TV show Red Green. If so, this is exactly the kind of thing I want to see happen in Libya (fix everything with duct tape).
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:24
|
|
|
farraday posted:Ham how large are concerns over a fraudulent referendum? Slim to none. Judges will be overseeing all the voting nd the counting process and they're almost always "fair" as the 2005 parliamentary elections showed, which is why Mubarak removed their authority from these matters in the fraudulent elections in 2010. Also civil organizations and people in general will be recording the whole process, the first democratic vote to be held in Egypt in over 70 years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:30
|
|
|
Ham posted:So according to an article in the Washington Times, John Kerry has confirmed the US government has frozen $31.5 billion of Mubarak's assets in the form of shares, stocks, bank accounts and some real estate in New York and Los Angeles. $31.5 Billion just in the US... The link from Google news to this article now says quote:That story has been removed from the site
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:31
|
|
|
Apparently, Kerry mixed up between Mubarak and Qaddafi and the $31.5 billion figure was actually related to Qaddafi. Way to go! EDIT: How do you make a mistake like this? Is it possible they're covering this up now? Ham fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Mar 17, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:33
|
|
|
Apparently entrepreneurs don´t hold a candle to dictators in the dollar-acquiring game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:35
|
|
|
The Washington Times has never not been a joke.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:38
|
|
|
ChaosSamusX posted:I can't be the only person to be thinking about the Canadian TV show Red Green. If so, this is exactly the kind of thing I want to see happen in Libya (fix everything with duct tape). As a fellow Canadian goon, I had to read it twice to make sure it wasn't what I thought it was. Though they do have a bunch of broken water mains...
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 18:45
|
|
|
This is apparently one of the aircraft shot down today: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68AaMmsaa7k&feature=player_embedded Libya threatens the entire Med: quote:Any foreign attack on Libya will endanger air and maritime traffic in the Mediterranean basin and expose the area to both short and long term risks, the Defence Ministry said in a statement broadcast on Libyan television. The US promises the TNC the vote will pass: quote:Al Jazeera Arabic The USA has given the Transitional National Council of Libya assurances that the UN resolution to impose a no-fly zone will pass and that suitable measures to protect the civilians will be made available
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 19:30
|
|
|
Bit more on the time of the vote:quote:The UN Security Council session has been adjourned until 2200GMT, when ambassadors will go straight into a vote, Benedict Moran, an Al Jazeera producer in New York, reports. And a bit more about the debate: quote:Diplomats have told Al Jazeera that there has been agreement over most of the draft resolution, but there is still concern over one paragraph, reproduced below, which deals with taking "all necessary measures" to protect Libyan civilians, short of an "occupation force".
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 19:33
|
|
|
Gaddafi is also planning to make another mental speech today, for the people of Benghazi. Twitter is also reporting that all the phone lines in the country have been blocked as well. Brown Moses fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Mar 17, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 19:35
|
|
|
There is so much fear mongering and double talk it's hard to follow. Gaddafi is constantly saying the rebels are doing terrible things that he is actually doing. I can't help but think there are people in cities around Libya watching him talk and eating it up. e: He keeps jumping back and forth between "We will liberate the Libyans that have been captured and influenced by the enemy in Benghazi", or "We must show them mercy" and then jumping to "We will eliminate them. We will kill them all" etc. Sivias fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Mar 17, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 19:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
Huge rallies in Benghazi right now on AJE. People singing, shooting in the air, throwing shoes on the screen of Gaddafi, who continues spewing threats; it makes me believe the rebels have a good chance in this. It reminds me of what I saw a month ago, in Egypt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 20:03
|
|