BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 01:13 PM

I'm all for "reason" backed up with "courage." When both fail, armed civil war is the inevitable next step for those who believe in their cause. And historically many such uprisings have been crushed by those in power and their international allies.

Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia would have been deposed in the early 1960's without the direct intervention of U.S. military "trainers." And many a peaceful protest has been brutally suppressed there since, including those focused on the current regime. But one has to search hard to find the reports.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Stringsinger
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 11:53 AM

Anybody read the book or see the movie "Wag the Dog"? A Chief Executive is more powerful as a Commander-in-Chief.

Anyone who thinks women will be liberated in Libya, I have a bridge to sell to you. Reason for this is Islam which veils women.

The only revolution is to overthrow Islam (not to mention the other religions). Not by violence, though. By reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jul 11 - 11:48 AM

Have you examined the figures for "womens emancipation" in Iraq bobad?

I take it you see the irony in that cut and paste?

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: bobad
Date: 23 Jul 11 - 07:12 PM

Libyan women fight for freedom on the home front

By Agence France-Presse
Saturday, July 23rd, 2011 -- 4:26 pm

ZINTAN, Libya — Libyan men have had to reassess how they view the fairer sex since the start of the uprising, and when the dust settles the role of women in the north African country may well have changed for ever.

The women of Libya -- especially in the Nafusa Mountains -- were among the protesters before the fighting started, and since then they have readied their sons and husbands for battle and nursed the wounded.

Meanwhile, they are also fighting for their own emancipation in the new Libya they are helping their men to forge.

Women do not exchange glances on the streets of the conservative Arab city of Zintan at the foot of the Nafusa range in western Libya. Behind walls daubed with graffiti proclaiming a "Free Libya," they move like black phantoms, hidden behind the full veil of the niqab.

At home, the arrival of an unfamiliar male guest sparks panic, and the ladies of the house scatter like bees. In times of war, they spend most of their time cloistered within four walls.

However, the ladies of Libya have felt the winds of change at their backs.

They were chanting "Down with Kadhafi" at the start of the insurrection, alongside the men, calling for veteran strongman Moamer Kadhafi to go.

"I've rallied with plenty of young women, even some pregnant ones. The men were so impressed they fired their Kalashnikovs in our honour! That showed them we were equal, and changed their opinion of us," says Afaf Abusaa, a 20-year-old technology student.

With the men away at the battlefield, the women secure the home front with housework and by providing moral support.

"Men have seen the women nurse the wounded, do volunteer work and cook for the fighters. They've seen mothers tell their sons: 'Go and fight. I will support you.' They hadn't expected that," says Hana Akra, a 24-year-old medical intern.

Women in Libya have come to see the revolution as a route towards their own emancipation, a way to break free from the jobs reserved for them: nurse, secretary or teacher, trades that leave time to take care of the family.

Not they can see a future in which they are not overlooked for a position because a man, albeit a less qualified one, has applied for the same job.

They hope that in the new Libya, their parents will allow them to select their own husbands, that their fathers and brothers will stop bossing them around and forbidding them from actively choosing their own path through life.

"Society is very conservative here," says Najiah Hamza, a 26-year-old medical student. "Women don't really have the chance to control their own destiny. We are always told: 'Don't say this, don't do that.' I hope the revolution helps us."

Forty-year-old Salma Abu Rawi recalls how her parents refused to let her marry her childhood sweetheart because he wasn't from Zintan, while Abusaa would rather not have to wear the veil after she is married.

Akra explains how she has to fight to become a surgeon, a profession reserved for men. "A woman must break the glass ceiling," she says.

"Parents are afraid to let their daughters go out, or work, for fear of gossip. We hope this will change, that men change, that they stop wanting us to be devoted primarily to the house, to the cooking and the children. We also want to be ourselves," says Alazumi Asma, a 22-year-old trainee laboratory assistant.

In the Berber villages of west Libya, women traditionally enjoy more freedom than in other parts of the country.

In Yafran, women do not have to wear the veil in public. They can be seen behind the steering wheels of cars or discussing contraception in front of men. And no one at home can order them around.

Berber ladies feel they have been leading the way towards women's liberation in Libya for some time. "Even under Kadhafi, we wanted to show the way," says Twzeen Ali Abud, a 20-year-old student.

They want to go further still. Women's rights groups are popping up in Zintan, where there is talk of changing the laws on divorce and allowing women to participate in politics.

"The revolution gave us a chance to play a role" in society, says 23-year-old pharmacist Anya Ali Abud.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 23 Jul 11 - 02:49 PM

Bobad-

Nice story and it may even be true. Sometimes that happens in even uncivil wars.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: bobad
Date: 23 Jul 11 - 09:27 AM

Wounded Gaddafi soldier says morale of troops is low
July 23, 2011
Posted in July 2011, News, Week Commencing July 18 | 10:12

MISRATA, Libya (Reuters) – Morale is low among troops fighting for Muammar Gaddafi on the front west of Misrata and many are reluctant to fight back against rebel attacks, a recently-wounded loyalist soldier told Reuters on Friday.

"Most of them are exhausted, especially as we approach the month of Ramadan," said the soldier, who spoke on condition his name and his hometown not be mentioned for fear of reprisals against his family. "They don't want to fight during Ramadan."

"They want everything to settle and we're all Libyan brothers," he added. "We don't want to harm each other."

Muslims observe the month of Ramadan by fasting during daylight hours and praying. It is traditionally a time families spend together. This year's Ramadan promises to be gruelling for Muslims, starting during the hot and dry month of August.

The soldier gave the interview from his bed at Misrata's Al Hikma hospital with no one in the room except Reuters staff, offering a rare insight into the morale in Gaddafi's camp.

The soldier said he was shot in the left thigh two or three days ago by rebel fighters on the front line that has been pushed amid heavy fighting and bombardment to around 40 kilometres (25 miles) west of Misrata.

That puts the front around 6 kilometres east of Zlitan, the largest city remaining between the rebels and the capital Tripoli 160 km away.

Rebel fighters in Misrata frequently say many of the young soldiers they come up against in combat seem reluctant to fight, an impression the young soldier confirmed.

"There is no organisation or planning," he said in a quiet voice. "Most times we withdraw."

TREATING BOTH SIDES

When asked why he had joined the fight against the rebels, the government soldier said he had been lied to at the military college he was attending when the uprising began.

"They didn't allow us to watch media channels," he said. "We were only allowed to watch Libyan (state) television."

"I was told (the rebels) were criminal gangs who mutilated bodies."

The soldier said he had expected to be treated badly when he was wounded and captured.

"I was treated with respect," he said. "I did not expect to be treated this well."

On a visit to the International Medical Corps field hospital behind the western front line on Wednesday, a Reuters team saw three wounded Gaddafi loyalists being treated as well as injured rebel fighters.

The hospital staff appeared to treat the patients according to the seriousness of their injury, not which side they were fighting on.

"We have treated those who were with us and those who were against us," said Faisal Mahmoud, a rebel fighter being treated at the hospital for a head injury and wounds to both arms sustained in a mortar attack this week.

The wounded Gaddafi loyalist said he was operated on before other rebel fighters injured the same day.

Both sides in the war that began with street protests across Libya for greater freedom back in February have accused the other of hiring mercenaries to fight. Rebels commonly refer to fighters from Chad or Algeria among Gaddafi's troops.

But the young soldier said "apart from a few people with strange dialects," he had not seen any sign of mercenaries.

Rebel commanders have also said recently they have encountered land mines ahead of Gaddafi loyalist positions, but the soldier said he was not aware of a major mining operation.

Asked what would happen to him when his wound was healed, the young man said he had been told he would be free to go.

"They told me that when things calm down 'we will send you back to your family and we will treat you well,'" he said.

Source Reuters

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Ron Davies
Date: 22 Jul 11 - 09:26 PM

"invisible assassins".    Ake, you ought to try your hand at pulp fiction--overwrought prose just flows out of you effortlessly, it seems.

And just think, in pulp fiction, facts and logic are just incidental--or not desired at all.   Fits you like a glove.

You might even make some money at it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Jul 11 - 12:45 PM

no he will still be there by the end of july, I will take it, furthermore heres a good bet djokovic to win the us open at two to one

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 22 Jul 11 - 09:47 AM

akenaton-

And some even remain silent about Iran.

And there's hardly a whisper heard nowadays in the international press about Scotland.

So, I've got two beers riding so far on Gadhafi fleeing to Venezuela by the end of July. Any more takers?

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Jul 11 - 04:13 AM

It was always inevitable that the invisible assassins would prevail, but surely what we should be debating, is whether regime change by force, by foreign powers, is morally correct.

Most of us threw up our arm in horror over Iraq...yet most of us remain silent on Libya......does this mean we now give tacit approval to this course of action?

If so, God help us all!

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Ron Davies
Date: 21 Jul 11 - 11:33 PM

"But to keep European..."

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Ron Davies
Date: 21 Jul 11 - 11:32 PM

Hard put to be a European version of Vietnam with no European ground troops. There speaks the typically Pollyanna attitude of our leftist friends, who have always been so supportive.

But to keep it European ground troops out we should sell the rebels all they need--payment from a line of credit, since they have no hard currency now.   It would be an excellent investment.




Really Charlie?    Muammar flees Libya by the end of July?.   Hell, I'd take that bet in a second.

And you condemn yourself to the crime of being sanguine--after all.

Now that the Benghazi council has been recognized by so many Western states as the only legitimate government in Libya, it's only a matter of time til Gaddafi falls.   But it will still be after July.    Maybe by the end of summer (21 Sept)--and that's if Western powers are willing to start the war again after the expected break for Ramadan.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 21 Jul 11 - 08:34 PM

Dick-

It could well be another "Vietnam" but I am detecting momentum on the part of the Rebels.

ABC News this evening had an interview with one media savvy Rebel commander who claimed that new instructions were going out to those in the field not to plunder Gadhafi supporters. Evidently some plundering has been observed by the foreign media.

So, I already owe you one round. How about double or nothing for Gahdafi fleeing the country by the end of July?

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: The Sandman
Date: 21 Jul 11 - 02:19 PM

charley, dont believe the news or propoganda, this could be a european equivalent to vietnam

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 21 Jul 11 - 01:59 PM

More progress by Rebel forces on the battlefield in and around Brega: Click here for report!

The Rebels also report capturing an important Gadhafi general, Abdul Nabih Zayed. While there are mopping up operations continuing in Brega, the bulk of Gadhafi forces appear to be fleeing west.

Minefields and bobby traps remain behind at oil installations to be disarmed.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 Jul 11 - 10:51 AM

So, Ake, because there is corruption in Western democracies, we should leave the Libyans to the tender mercies of the Brother Leader.    You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel in your desperate attempt to justify deserting the rebels now.

I'm sorry to say that the only word to describe the opponents of Western military involvement in Libya now is pathetic.

Though dangerously naive is another description--especially for any of you who think Muammar's threats to bring desolation and terrorism to the West are just harmless bluster.   Above all with the $60 billion in frozen funds you want to hand back to him. You were going to tell us what secret assurances you have from him that he will not use that money to acquire a nuclear bomb or to fund terrorism.

When will you start to think?   We're still waiting.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 16 Jul 11 - 09:59 AM

"after throwing off the tyranny of Great Britain" we "Americans" negotiated an option for the Tory loyalists to be transported by the British to the country of their choice. Our record with regard to the Native Tribes is certainly nothing to brag about, nor is that of Canada's.

I think we might lobby for something similar for the Gadhafi loyalists, the ones who are not already indicted for crimes against humanity. I'm convinced than 10% might want to seek such asylum, although I doubt if Gahdafi will spend a petro-dollar on their behalf.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jul 11 - 08:55 AM

and I admire your blind allegiance to capitalist liberal democracy Mr T, when every day it sinks deeper in the swamp of corruption.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Jul 11 - 08:27 AM

A minor historical detour by way of an a-side:

"Shit, it took us ten years or so after throwing off the tyranny of Great Britain to achieve anything resembling a democracy."

Ehm No - What the English/British Colonists of North America wanted to get rid of was the Government who by honouring their Treaty Obligations with the Native Tribes put shackles on and restrained the rapaciousness of the said Colonists and prevented expansion westwards into the wabash and Ohio Basins.

Rather than being over-taxed at the time the "American Colonists were being subsidised by Britain - They paid one twenty-seventh the taxes being paid by the counterparts in Britain.

"No Taxation without Representation" - Indeed - Complete and utter bullshit"

Back on topic there have been assurances given that there will be no let up in the campaign, Ramadan or no Ramadan. The air effort is to intensify in the run up to the festival.

I admire Akenaton's support of Gaddafi's education programme it comes straight out of "Animal Farm" or the worst of the Marxist Regimes. Tell me Akenaton why was no child in Libya allowed to learn a foreign language?

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jul 11 - 07:02 AM

"I do wish the rebels well"

And what do you wish for the thousands who support the Col and the social policies which he implimented......by all accounts the best in the area on Housing, education and health.

Would you gamble them away on the "romantic notion " of democracy? On the whims of a rag tag band of Islamists,youthful dreamers and foreign activists, supported by rapacious nations who serve only their own interests.

The whole developed world hates people like Gadaffi....they want things tied up nice and tight in the bands of the "democratic" system, it makes people much easier to control.....why do you think we are allowing ourselves to be fucked by the rich and powerful at this time?

Forget Libya and start thinking about what is being perpetrated against our own people......in the name of "liberal democracy"

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 Jul 11 - 12:45 AM

But you're right, Charlie.   The recognition of the rebel government--esp. by the US-- is by far the best thing to happen to them in a long time.   Now some of the frozen funds can start flowing to them.   Hope it's not too late, especially considering Ramadan fast approaching--and what that means to the campaign, as I noted.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 Jul 11 - 12:33 AM

1)    "large numbers of Islamic radicals"---exact quote and source please.

2)   So sorry we can't promise you immediately a perfect democracy when Gaddafi falls.   Please tell us, by the way, where in the world you have found such a democracy.

3)   If you can't tell the difference between Gaddafi and the Benghazi government---( now recognized, as Charlie notes, as the only legitimate government in Libya)--then, for the n'th time, please take off your blinders. (This is a recording.)

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 15 Jul 11 - 11:55 PM

akenaton-

"Democracy" is sometimes not very democratic.
Be very careful what you wish for Charley.

I wish Gadhafi and his family removed but I won't be particularly surprised if the new Rebel government does not live up to anyone's romantic expectations. Shit, it took us ten years or so after throwing off the tyranny of Great Britain to achieve anything resembling a democracy.

But I do wish the Rebels well.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jul 11 - 04:09 PM

Unbelievable!!

And I thought the bankers were robbing bastards.

Apparently.....today's Times reports that an Islamist pary are hot favourites to win Tunisian election

The insurgents in Libya comprise large numbers of Muslim radicals.

Thats Tunisia, Egypt,and in time Libya.....the Islamic axis is taking shape

"Democracy" is sometimes not very democratic.
Be very careful what you wish for Charley.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 15 Jul 11 - 03:10 PM

Importants news from Al Jazeera:

"The US has joined 30 other nations in formally recognising Libya's main opposition group as the country's legitimate government until a new interim authority is created.

Friday's decision, which declared Muammar Gaddafi's government no longer legitimate, will potentially free up money that the rebels fighting the Libyan leader's forces urgently need."

This news has provided a much needed morale boost to the Rebels: click here for report!

It should also provide a substantial financial boost as well.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 15 Jul 11 - 08:26 AM

Ron-

"Sanguine"!

How dare you accuse me of that!!! I propose wet noodles at ten paces at an undisclosed location. Wonder if Terribus would act as my second?

I do remember saying something much much earlier with regard to "romantic expectations in uncivil wars" and that my own were quite modest.

Evidently another strategic town was recaptured by the Rebels yesterday and they now claim they are there for keeps.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Jul 11 - 11:15 PM

But the problem, Charlie, is that only one side knows what it wants:   Gadhafi's side:   

He is clear:   he wants 1) survival and   2) revenge

But his opponents are all over the map--can't agree on anything.   The NATO countries are all resenting more and more the steady financial drain. But they're still unwilling to venture beyond the straitjacket imposed both by the UN and their own unwillingness to risk civilian suffering.   On top of that they are constantly squabbling with each other.   And Gaddafi is also trying to play them off against the rebels--who are also getting exasperated (for good reason) with NATO's dithering.   All he has to do is delay--since time is on his side.

On top of this, we are coming up to Ramadan.   If this--as is likely-- does result in a ceasefire, it will be very difficult for NATO countries to convince their electorates to start the war up again.

So we wind up with a de facto split between east and west Libya.

Then what happens to the frozen funds?    We have to make sure none of them go to Gaddafi--but if there's a ceasefire and a split, how do you do that?

What I'd like to know above all else:   did Italy follow through on its earlier promise of a line of credit to the rebels--or did Berlusconi's recent cold feet scotch that?

It seems likely that no NATO country has come through with a line of credit.   And then the West whines about how the rebels loot captured towns.   How the hell else are they to carry on the campaign?

I have to say, I'm not close to as sanguine as you are about how this is going--or the likely outcome.   Hope I'm wrong.

NATO is trying to make this a cross between a war and a "police action".   That's not the way you win anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 14 Jul 11 - 06:51 PM

bobad-

If that plan's a bluff, it's a good one. Gahdaffi is still a master of manipulating what few pieces he has to play with, and the lives of his supporters are part of his inventory.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: bobad
Date: 14 Jul 11 - 12:00 PM

Gaddafi has 'suicide plan' for capital: Russia envoy

By Agence France-Presse
Thursday, July 14th, 2011 -- 8:09 am

MOSCOW — Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi has a "suicidal plan" to blow up the capital Tripoli if it is taken by rebels, the Kremlin's special envoy to Libya told a Russian newspaper Thursday.

"The Libyan premier told me: if the rebels seize the city, we will cover it with missiles and blow it up," Kremlin envoy Mikhail Margelov said in an interview with the Izvestia daily.

Margelov met Libyan Prime Minister Baghdadi al-Mahmudi last month.

"I imagine that the Kadhafi regime does have such a suicidal plan," he added, saying that Kadhafi still had plentiful supplies of missiles and ammunition.

But Margelov, who has had rare access to senior Libyan officials, questioned reports that Kadhafi could be running out of arms in the drawn-out conflict.

Kadhafi had still not used a single surface-to-surface missile, he argued.

"Tripoli theoretically could lack ammunition for tanks, cartridges for rifles. But the colonel has got plenty of missiles and explosives."

Margelov met the Libyan prime minister on June 16 in Tripoli after holding talks in Benghazi earlier the same month. He has not met Kadhafi himself.

Russia abstained from a vote on a March UN Security Council resolution that opened the way for foreign involvement and has since criticized the campaign -- particularly arms drops by France.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov met US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday for talks on Libya, where Lavrov sought to play down differences between the countries.

However, the Russian foreign ministry said earlier Wednesday that Moscow would not take part in talks on Libya later this week in Turkey, which has also seen itself as a mediator in the conflict.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 12:55 AM

"NATO assassins"---if you want " hysterical", Ake, try looking in the mirror.

One of the main reasons this is dragging on is that NATO is in fact unwilling to assassinate Gadhafi.   As I suggested months ago, this very likely could have been ended long since if NATO (or any opposing force to Gadhafi) had been willing to put a $10 million dollar price on his head.    Too bad this wasn't done---the mercenaries working for him have I'm sure never seen so much money, and they very likely would have ended the whole story for Muammar quite a while ago.


Which would have been better for everybody else in Libya and elsewhere. Lots of lives and money would have been saved.


And, by the way, still waiting for you to tell us how you propose to keep the $60 billion plus from Muammar.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 12:41 AM

A poor post Akenaton??

Care to tell me and everyone else for that matter where anything I have stated is incorrect in any detail?

UN are involved because they were asked to act and the UN Security Council agreed to act.

Arms shipments going to "rebel forces" west of Tripoli? But I thought that, according to Akenaton, the whole of the western part of the country "loved" Colonel Gaddafi, Charley, don't tell me that this extremely unpopular and wholely unsupported rebellion is growing.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 08:39 PM

Score one for Gadhafi's marines. They managed to intercept a shipment of arms to the Rebels from Qatar:

"Libyan officials are claiming to have intercepted two boats carrying a cache of weapons from Qatar, reportedly intended for rebels fighting forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi.

On Monday, Moussa Ibrahim, a government spokesman, said 11 rebels were captured from the boats close to shore near the town of Janzour, just west of Tripoli."

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 06:13 PM

Sorry about the typo Charlie :0)
as·sas·sin   /əˈsæsɪn/ Show Spelled
[uh-sas-in] Show IPA

–noun
1. a murderer, especially one who kills a politically prominent person for fanatical or monetary reasons.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 06:09 PM

Que??

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 05:55 PM

akenaton-

"so the intervention of the Nato assasins(sic)"

Well, that's certainly calling a spade a sawzall.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 04:08 PM

That was a pretty poor post for you Mr T

Surely the point Peter is making, is why the fuck are we taking sides in a civil war in a sovereign nation, when we have no idea how many support Col G and how many are against.
In these sorts of conflicts the "people" tend to support whoever they think will win, so the intervention of the Nato assasins must have affected support substancially?

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 09:50 AM

"I don't see any of the warmongers in this thread explaining what makes the antis better than the pros in Libya's civil war. Surely the truth is that we know very little about the antis except that they do not constitute a cohesive whole and that members of the (so far moderate) Muslim Brotherhood are a leading element." - Peter K (Fionn)

1: The antis have not been running the country as their own kleptocracy for forty years

2: The anti's did not start by killing civilians who dared to protest

As to the anti's not constituting a cohesive whole, well very few countries have an opposition that represents a "cohesive whole" but a number of separate groups that share some common ground. I would be willing to venture however that the anti's have enough support and the right to determine their own future.

What we do know about Gaddafi is that to remain in power he has had to ship in mercenaries to kill all those Libyan civilians who love him so much.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 09:13 AM

"hysterical"    "warmongers".    You will note that those accused of this strongly opposed the Iraq war.    Every situation is different.    Note that we can expect the opponents of Western military involvement in Libya to understand this--or much of anything else.

I note that they still have no clue how we are supposed to keep Gaddafi from the $60 billion plus except by removing him from power.

And as I said, trusting that his threats are just bluster is the stupidest--and most dangerous--attitude one could take.

But after all, not surprising from a group whose mantra is "AWOL:   Common Sense."

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 07:41 AM

Damn! My brillant post last evening got torpedoed. More evidence of an international conspiracy, and it's too early in the morning to recreate it. You'll just have to use your imagination but it was totally crushing!!!

I already owe The Good Soldier a round at the pub of his choice for my overly optimistic prediction that this "crisis" would be resolved by the end of June.

Well, by the end of July, I now predict that the Rebels in the mountains, those in and around Misrata, and those in the East will have advanced close enough to Tripoli to inspire their supporters there to take on Gahdafi's remaining soldiers (those who haven't already defected). Any takers?

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 12:13 PM

Precisely, Ake. I don't see any of the warmongers in this thread explaining what makes the antis better than the pros in Libya's civil war. Surely the truth is that we know very little about the antis except that they do not constitute a cohesive whole and that members of the (so far moderate) Muslim Brotherhood are a leading element.

Neither do I see why Charley Noble and Co get themselves hysterical about Gadaffi. He may be a bit of a tyrant and his style is a bit unorthodox, but that doesn't make him exceptional in a region which, like China for instance, is not ready for western-style democracy. (Watch Israel panic if and when democracy does sweep across the Middle East.)

At any rate, Gadaffi is no Hafez al-Assad, who used extreme brutality to impose stability on what had been a volatile territory. He is not even a Saddam (who used rather less harsh tactics in achieving stability in Iraq).

But then I suppose Charley and Co are still fighting the Vietnam War, to sae us all from the domino effect, ha-ha.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: bobad
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 07:20 AM

"Oh!....and what about the 100,000 Libyans who rallied in his support two days ago?"

They will just have to go along with the majority.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 03:22 AM

Oh!....and what about the 100,000 Libyans who rallied in his support two days ago?

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: bobad
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 08:36 PM

Charley, the offer is conditional:

"As a peaceful solution, we offered that he can resign and order his soldiers to withdraw from their barracks and positions, and then he can decide either to stay in Libya or abroad," rebel leader Mustafa Abdel Jalil said in an interview.

"If he desires to stay in Libya, we will determine the place and it will be under international supervision. And there will be international supervision of all his movements," said Jalil, who heads the rebels' National Transitional Council."

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Charley Noble
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 08:31 PM

It is dangerous to make a deal with the devil, and Gadhafi comes close to that.

I would hope the Rebels don't concede that point.

Gadhafi and his family need to run to Venezuela.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: bobad
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 05:24 PM

"BENGHAZI, Libya (Reuters) - Muammar Gaddafi is welcome to live out his retirement inside Libya as long as he gives up all power, Libya's rebel chief told Reuters on Sunday in the clearest concession the rebels have so far offered."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/07/03/rebels-if-gaddafi-quits-we-will-let-him-stay-in-libya/

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 05:02 PM

I'm not getting into this discussion.

But it was noted early on with the development of nuclear weapons that should one of these devices fall into the hands of a dictator or international criminal—in this case, Gaddafi or bin Laden, for examples—there is little doubt that they would use it.

It's interesting to note that many people are very surprised when the barking dog actually bites.

Why is that, I wonder. . . ?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 11:15 AM

"harmless bluster"---singularly stupid--and dangerous--assumption.   Especially with an angry dictator.

Especially with $60 billion plus to draw on for the purpose.

I note with interest that none of the whiners in favor of Muammar have told us how to prevent his access to this money.

As I recently noted: perfect description of the opponents of Western military action in Libya:    AWOL:    Common Sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 07:50 AM

Yes...I agree with Peter and LH,I would also add that "Regime Change" by force, perpetrated or assisted by a group of powerful nations in their own interests, is many times more dangerous than the "dictatorship" of small tribal nations by grandiose individuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 10:45 PM

Morality never had anything to do with it. They've decided to get rid of Mr Gaddafi for some kind of pragmatic reasons that they are not uttering a peep about in public, and they are doing nothing about the situation in Syria for equally pragmatic reasons.

It's utterly laughable to imagine that Nato is conducting this lengthy campaign against Gaddafi's Libya to protect some elements in the Libyan public. Nato acts to protect the strategic interests of its more powerful members, not to protect Third World citizens from being slaughtered.

But that's not what they'll tell you, because they want the support of their own public, and the only way they can get it is by supposedly protecting either their own public from a dire foreign threat...or by supposedly coming to the aid of some victimized people in some other country.

It's the standard propaganda routine, used many times in the past. You'll see it again and again and again. It's not the real reason for Nato's military actions.

Obama's war is also technically illegal now under the American Constitution, and has been challenged on that basis by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress...among them Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul.

Subject: RE: BS: Bombing of Tripoli March-April, 2011
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 09:12 PM

Ron, maybe you find some words confusing? "Retaliation" is reaction to attack. Gadaffi was threatening what his response might be if he continued to be attacked by Nato. If he meant what he was saying (and you seem to be taking him very seriously indeed) then "sitting back" could not, by definition, lead to "such action" (ie retaliation) since there would be nothing to retaliate against. Can you understand now?

But I think even you, Ron, know that Gadaffi was just spluttering harmless bluster. Remembering that he himself came to power through an army coup, he has ensured that Libya under his regime never had an effective military, which is one of the main reasons why he is such an attractive target for Cameron & Co.

Meanwhile the slaughter continues unabated in Syria, where Assad's regime is well on course to emulate that of his grotesquely brutal father. There is far greater repression in Syria than there has ever been in Gadaffi's Libya, but beyond a few patronising lectures from Hillary Clinton, you will not see the west lifting a finger on that front, for obvious reasons.

Of course, the west is entitled to choose whom to wage war against. But don't pretend morality has anything to do with it.