|
I wonder if somewhere down the line some loyalist minion took Gaddafi's copy of The Art of War and secretly replaced all the pages with a printout of war crimes. Gaddafi unfortunately took it at face value and said to his
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 17:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
Interesting tweet:quote:@FMCNL: PSYOPS is running! USAF EC-130J tail nr 00-1934 callsign STEEL 74 transmitting messages to #Libya on HF freq
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
Um, is there a reason that Misrata isn't being hounded upon by coalition interdiction flights? I'm sure there's a good reason, but it seems odd that the CQ forces didn't get curbstomped by a dozen or so Rafales by now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 17:49
|
|
|
PsychoLordling posted:upper hand know?? Fixed. Switching between writing in English and Swedish really doesn't do your spelling any good. As for the Rafales, it's looking like zero. AA defences are pretty much a non-issue right now and the air force weren't one to begin with. And hey, what's the problem with combining support of a UN resolution with some personal gain?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 17:50
|
|
|
Nuclear Spoon posted:Libyan SUPER SLAM
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 17:52
|
|
|
Stroh M.D. posted:Fixed. Switching between writing in English and Swedish really doesn't do your spelling any good. BBC: # 1648: A French military spokesman tells Reuters that 15 French planes were in action in Libya on Sunday, and that none encountered problems. "...and you can take home one of these beautiful planes for 39,999,999,999, act now, supplies are limited."
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 17:54
|
|
|
Boner Slam posted:He is indeed Rockin' the Casbah.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 17:54
|
|
|
ChaosSamusX posted:Um, is there a reason that Misrata isn't being hounded upon by coalition interdiction flights? I really don't understand this, unless they are waiting for night fall for some reason, but I can't think why. It could be the coalition doesn't believe Misarata is as important as other targets in Libya, or that the situation in Misarata isn't as grave as it appears. They might even be waiting to attack during the night, when the Gaddafi troops are completely helpless and unable to even visually see the aircraft attacking them, to further demorlise them. Today I found out one of my family members is involved with maintaining the NFZ and had a very interesting discussion about various stuff that's going on. Also the BBC has just said Amr Moussa said he was being misquoted about the NFZ, and the Arab League doesn't have a problem with it. Also this: quote:British special forces have been on the ground in Libya for weeks, preparing for possible operations, says German newsmagaine Focus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 17:55
|
|
|
CQ's forces in Misrata are supposedly in the streets and buildings of the city, so air strikes there are probably too risky for now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 17:57
|
|
|
Jamsque posted:CQ's forces in Misrata are supposedly in the streets and buildings of the city, so air strikes there are probably too risky for now. There's also the rather serious question of target identification. On the report of British special forces on the ground, I can't help but feel that's one of those things where everyone would be more surprised if they weren't there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:I really don't understand this, unless they are waiting for night fall for some reason, but I can't think why. It could be the coalition doesn't believe Misarata is as important as other targets in Libya, or that the situation in Misarata isn't as grave as it appears. They might even be waiting to attack during the night, when the Gaddafi troops are completely helpless and unable to even visually see the aircraft attacking them, to further demorlise them. I would imagine that running interdiction in an urban area is worlds apart from doing it in the desert. Misrata is a fluid battlefield with a large civilian presence right on top of the fighting. You could theoretically target armour, providing you have decent recon, but the risk of collateral or blue-on-blue is overwhelming.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:00
|
|
|
There's no way the coalition will attack anything in built up areas, they really don't want to take the risk. That's also why the human shield of Gaddafi supporters in his compound are just wasting their time. Something else I learnt today is that AWACS aircraft are also pretty good at identifying targets on the ground, so the coalition are aware where Gaddafi's vehicle are, and what they are up to.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:00
|
|
|
Anything that can blow up a tank is going to send shrapnel area. There is no real effective way to strike in an urban area without causing casualties other than those intended.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:02
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:There's no way the coalition will attack anything in built up areas, they really don't want to take the risk. That's also why the human shield of Gaddafi supporters in his compound are just wasting their time. I disagree slightly in that I think we will see some attacks in urban areas. The dangers are well established but I expect at some point they're going to feel it's necessary,
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:04
|
|
|
Elgar posted:Anything that can blow up a tank is going to send shrapnel area. There is no real effective way to strike in an urban area without causing casualties other than those intended. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete_bomb ?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:04
|
|
|
farraday posted:I disagree slightly in that I think we will see some attacks in urban areas. The dangers are well established but I expect at some point they're going to feel it's necessary, Well I think in the initial stages when the aim is to demoralise the Gaddafi troops and get them to flee or switch sides you won't see that happening, but things might change in a few weeks time if that plan doesn't work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:10
|
|
|
Stroh M.D. posted:I'm not saying you should take what they write at face value, but a lot of relatively influential modern movements first appeared on the less discriminate parts of the web. For examples, see the birther movement and in extension the Tea Party. Or the wave of xenophobia that is sweeping Europe. Or the anti-vaccination movement. What xenophobia in Europe? As far as my own experience living in state in the Balkans, it's probably more tolerant than ever. If you can provide some sources, that would be great. The Tea Party and birthers are, from an outsiders perspective, an absolutely obvious media misdirect. The Wisconsin protests were(still are?) larger than any Tea party "gatherings" to date and the (American) media largely ignored them. And the autism-vaccine scaremongering has had an effect, I do agree, but the consequences will be incredibly visible and that does have a larger effect on public opinion than twitter quotes. What my point is, people today don't have time to get informed on what everyone else is thinking on a given topic. It's much less time consuming to read the comments and quickly make up your mind, so you don't have to worry about having a wrong opinion for the next work week, which they usually spend worrying about their job, gas prices, health insurance, their children, groceries, taxes...
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:11
|
|
|
Stroh M.D. posted:That's the only explanation for the early recon-flights with Rafales in the hours before the bombing began, if you ask me. The Rafale isn't a recon aircraft. There is no way in hell that they could have gathered intel satellites or drones could not. All modern fighters are capable of recon. It's simply a question of equipping it with some recon pods and off you go.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:11
|
|
|
Another reason Misarata might not be getting much help at the moment is the rebels have started to move westwards, and are getting air support from the coalition, and at the same time the coalition have plans up patrolling, so it might be simply that they don't have enough air power to protect Misarata as well. You'll probably see more attacks on Misarata once those aircraft as freed up though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:12
|
|
|
bringer posted:Oh good, you're back. quote:This isn't a bunch of western nations going "oh hey that looks bad, let us come help" while ignoring other countries. This is the UN responding to a request from a fledgling government. When the Bahraini protesters manage to take control of half the country and begin establishing diplomatic relations with other nations then you can compare the two. The State of Palestine has been asking for help for years and not received it. This is a bunch of Western nations seeking to overthrow CQ's libya following the premature support for what looked to be another flash revolution. Nice way to save face. It will be interesting to see if the UN forces bomb rebel forces once they start moving on civilian areas too. Jut fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Mar 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:13
|
|
|
personaljesus posted:Apologies if this has been addressed in this thread, but I will ask anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:17
|
|
|
Jut posted:The State of Palestine has been asking for help for years and not received it. Sure if we are intervening here we should have been intervening in Sudan/Zimbabwe/NK/Israel etc but you have to work with what you can politically and militarily afford. I think everyone sees the hypocrisy in only intervening in states where there isn't massive opposition from important players but that isn't a reason not to intervene when everyone on the security council is persuaded not to veto action.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:23
|
|
|
Jut, what's your point? I assume you're not of the opinion that there should be no intervention in Libya, so your point is either that the Western nations are hypocritical (in which case you're preaching to the choir) or that there should be an intervention right now in all terrible nations, something I think most people morally agree on but that's not the topic for today.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:25
|
|
|
Jut posted:Over half of the UN nations currently recognise the State of Palestine, yet I don't see anyone going in to stop the Israelis leveling settlements Jut posted:The State of Palestine has been asking for help for years and not received it. Israel/Palestine debates are banned from GBS and the derailment was ended for good reason.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:30
|
|
|
Namarrgon posted:I wonder if somewhere down the line some loyalist minion took Gaddafi's copy of The Art of War and secretly replaced all the pages with a printout of war crimes. Gaddafi unfortunately took it at face value and said to his I think I saw that in an episode of Punk'd.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:32
|
|
|
Tarnek posted:Important report from AJE in Tripoli: Libyan State TV has been showing civilian casualties during the day. AJE correspondent points out that all the bodies appeared to be completely intact, which seems strange after air strikes and cruise missiles. There have been suspicions before the strikes began that bodies would be "borrowed" from previous battlezones. ETA for Green Helmet Guy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:34
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete_bomb ? I was thinking more along the lines of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_AC-130
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:35
|
|
|
I asked right before Operation Greek Strippername started, so it got lost- I'm seeing no-one in the #tahrir chatroom at SynIrc, did it get moved to a more general MidEast chat? Local Lib time, GMT +2, around 1900 or so, from Almanara Media. quote:the youth of the 17th February in Benghazi are detaining the remaining members of Gaddafi’s Revolutionary Committees in the city. This is due to the hostile activities that are being organised by Gaddafi’s committee members in the city.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:38
|
|
SoroScrew
|
AJA via AJE: 7:10pm Armed anti-Gaddafi fighters are agains advancing east from the city of Benghazi, in an attempt to break the siege imposed by Gaddafi's troops on Ajdabiya, Al Jazeera Arabic reports. The route march from Benghazi begins. The importance of the accuracy of coalition IFF procedures rises.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:39
|
|
|
I can't tell you how happy-ish I was to see the news this morning. "America involved in military action in Libya."  "but it's okay, France is participating"  No one can get mad at us if France is involved, surely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:41
|
|
|
Jut posted:Over half of the UN nations currently recognise the State of Palestine, yet I don't see anyone going in to stop the Israelis leveling settlements You know what, I totally agree with you. It's a shame that it has taken western interests aligning with a local rebellion in order for those western powers to act. It's really too bad that they use words like "humanitarian crisis" to provide a cover for their actions while ignoring other humanitarian issues that don't have the same impact. I'm not being sarcastic here, there is no shortage of hypocrisy in international politics. I'm just glad that for once humanitarian interests have aligned with political interests and something is being done. Jut posted:It will be interesting to see if the UN forces bomb rebel forces once they start moving on civilian areas too. Moving != bombarding. Gaddafi's forces have been involved in a weeks-long campaign of collective punishment against the rebelling cities, it is safe to assume that any forces he currently fields within range of civilian centres are a threat and thus a valid target. I don't think the UN mandate will cover an offensive rebel assault against Tripoli against dug in loyalists. The NFZ and related airstrikes are being used to force Gaddafi into a less aggressive stance where his surrender can be negotiated, not in order to support a Northern Alliance style push through to Tripoli against dug in supporters. I've said this several times and you've managed to skip past it each and every time. Why do you think there's going to be this sustained air war against Gaddafi's forces? Why do you think the UN resolution will support that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:42
|
|
|
Namarrgon posted:Jut, what's your point? I assume you're not of the opinion that there should be no intervention in Libya, so your point is either that the Western nations are hypocritical (in which case you're preaching to the choir) or that there should be an intervention right now in all terrible nations, something I think most people morally agree on but that's not the topic for today. Given the Tribal nature of the country, I don't think we have any idea how the rebels will behave if CQ is forced out. It wouldn't surprise me if CQ's tribes become the victim of rebel aggression. We've already seen rebels killing people because they look African. Supporting rebel factions in the past has more often than not came back to bite us in the rear end and I'm not entirely convinced we know who we're about to shack up with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:42
|
|
|
Regarding Misrata is there more information on what Gaddafi forces are there and what they've got control of? I've seen mention of snipers, tanks, and naval vessels interdicting the seaward approaches. I'm thinking that while air strikes into an urban environment would be really risky, UN air- or ship-launched missile strikes against the Gaddafi ships blockading Misrata wouldn't be nearly as problematic. If the rebels hold any of the coastal portions of the city, lifting the sea siege would let them evacuate wounded and civilians, receive humanitarian aid, and reinforce/resupply their own forces. If they can get some decent anti-tank missiles or even some modern RPG ammunition into the city, those loyalist tanks are going to start having a very bad time in such cramped conditions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:47
|
|
|
Pajser posted:What xenophobia in Europe? As far as my own experience living in state in the Balkans, it's probably more tolerant than ever. It's a wave of xenophobia that gained momentum around the time of the recession. Almost all European nations, at least in the EU, have seen parties whose only common trait is a strong hostility towards immigrants, and refugees in particular, being catapulted into parliaments. The Swiss passed a referendum banning minarets quite recently - without having any, I might add. Something that's relevant for the Libyan conflict is this stunt from Le Pen: http://www.smh.com.au/world/europe-is-full-le-pen-tells-migrants-20110315-1bvxi.html She has been quoted as saying that she wants to use the French navy to turn away boat refugees from North Africa. She isn't without support either: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2011/03/17/Marine-Le-Pen-gears-up-for-president-run/UPI-61151300399757/ In Germany, the NPD may take a place in the Sachsen Anhalt state parliament in todays election. They already have several seats in other. This may look off-topic, but it actually has some relevance for the Libyan conflict since people who sympathize with this movement has started to express clear opinions against the intervention. To them, it's simple: they don't deserve our help and it will only result in more refugees.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:48
|
|
|
Jut posted:a UN enforced ceasefire, A blue helmeted peace keeping force on the ground, on the other hand, can only happen if both sides agree to it. We'll see how much it turns into air support for advancing rebel forces. Ideally, the rebels and the air cover will repel Gaddafi's forces from the cities, ending in a stalemate, and then negotiations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:48
|
|
|
Jut posted:
Do you have a source for this as I have haven't heard anything of that nature.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:48
|
|
|
Pajser posted:What xenophobia in Europe? As far as my own experience living in state in the Balkans, it's probably more tolerant than ever. The Swedish neo-nazis, the English Defense League and the BNP in the UK, the Front National in France, Germany's Chancellor Merkel (along with a few other European leaders) claiming multiculturalism has failed to name a few. A lot of European also have the same stance on immigrants from Africa or the Middle-East - they don't want them in their countries. That's not to say that Europe as a whole is racist/xenophobic - of the examples I listed, most can't exactly be called representative of their respective countries, and most countries are actually fairly tolerant from what I understand. But they do exists and there has been a rise in their popularity (as well as the popularity of right-wing parties) in recent years. Narmi fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Mar 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:48
|
|
|
Trump posted:All modern fighters are capable of recon. It's simply a question of equipping it with some recon pods and off you go. True. My point is that I doubt it was necessary, seeing how drones and satellites could do the job in both a safer and more efficient fashion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:49
|
|
|
bringer posted:You know what, I totally agree with you. It's a shame that it has taken western interests aligning with a local rebellion in order for those western powers to act. It's really too bad that they use words like "humanitarian crisis" to provide a cover for their actions while ignoring other humanitarian issues that don't have the same impact. I'm not being sarcastic here, there is no shortage of hypocrisy in international politics. I'm just glad that for once humanitarian interests have aligned with political interests and something is being done. quote:Moving != bombarding. Gaddafi's forces have been involved in a weeks-long campaign of collective punishment against the rebelling cities, it is safe to assume that any forces he currently fields within range of civilian centres are a threat and thus a valid target. I don't think the UN mandate will cover an offensive rebel assault against Tripoli against dug in loyalists. The NFZ and related airstrikes are being used to force Gaddafi into a less aggressive stance where his surrender can be negotiated, not in order to support a Northern Alliance style push through to Tripoli against dug in supporters. If the rebels start taking the fight into other cities, then I would hope the UN forces would prevent this. The best case scenario would be to force both CQ and the rebels to stop continuing this war. Breaking up the fight so to speak and bringing it back to the table.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
Namarrgon posted:Jut, what's your point? I assume you're not of the opinion that there should be no intervention in Libya, so your point is either that the Western nations are hypocritical (in which case you're preaching to the choir) or that there should be an intervention right now in all terrible nations, something I think most people morally agree on but that's not the topic for today. To me the main issue with this is that NATO countries tend to fly around like bumble bees from one conflict to another without any logic into it, having little if any plan how to pull it through, leaving their jobs half-arsed before leaving, and ignoring all the other similar conflicts. There is no desire for creating a universal policy for protecting human rights, so it all depends on whether the Presidents and PM's of certain countries feel like a new war would make their penises look bigger. This, in turn, has no preventative effect on dictators, because they can rely on that the outside world doesn't care what they're doing unless they are extremely unlucky. In Libya, Gaddafi would probably have gotten away with it if the Japanese earthquake had happened a month earlier, drowning out the news from Libya. And you just know that the western diplomats must be currently reassuring Bahraini government that they would never do to them what they have done to Gaddafi. Jut posted:I think a NFZ would have been plenty instead of what is in effect forcing CQ out. What would have been better would have been a UN enforced ceasefire, followed by peace keepers and a return to the table. I doubt that this would have prevented the war from resuming soon after both sides had restocked on arms. And as the Cyrenaica part of the country is smaller by population than Tripolitania, Gaddafi would have an edge there, although it would have also been stopped just as easily as now. But it's also the case that the international community is too hell bent on preserving the post-colonial borders in Africa and Asia. India split into India and Pakistan right after independence, and Pakistan then split into Pakistan and Bangladesh, but somehow it would be impossible to imagine eg. Iraq being divided between Sunnis, Shias and Kurds rather than trying to force the factions to settle their differences in a joint government that nobody wants. Nobody shed any tears when Yugoslavia broke up (except for the people killed in the wars, I suppose) but god help us if Kurds want to have their own country!
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2011 18:54
|
|
