# Turmoil in Libya (2011) and post-Gaddafi blowback



## willellis

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12517327

A link to the BBC report and vid. Scary stuff.


----------



## Journeyman

willellis said:
			
		

> A link to the BBC report and vid. Scary stuff.


Why "scary"?


----------



## GAP

I don't see it being scary.....did we all think there would be no pushback from some of the regimes...?

In fact, I'm amazed there hasn't been more severe pushback....as in roundups during the night, assassinations, outright blasting away to send a clear message. I'm still waiting for it....


----------



## willellis

200 people killed by their government. Open gunfire in the streets. A funeral being shot up. Scary stuff in my books. Not to mention this only ads to the already unstable regions of the Middle East.  This is old news so to speak, but the story is just another reminder as to how terrible that part of the world is right now.


----------



## Journeyman

Yes, what GAP said.

Gaddafi isn't Ben Ali or Mubarak; he has never displayed qualms about using force against his opponents. Given recent events in Tunisia and Egypt it would be stupid to expect Gaddafi to hesitate in quelling any protests or dispersing large gatherings with deadly force.....no matter what some agitator tells you on Twitter.


----------



## aesop081

willellis said:
			
		

> as to how terrible that part of the world is *right now*.



Right now ??

Its been like this for decades...........and then some.


----------



## willellis

Yeah, and right now it is terrible. I never said it's only bad now.


----------



## aesop081

willellis said:
			
		

> Nice contribution to the topic...



humm....ok......

I do not find this scary either and i as well find it rather expected. I wont be surprised if there is more puchback in other countries.


----------



## willellis

Yeah, sorry bout that. I edited my comment.


----------



## 57Chevy

Libya warplanes bombing Tripoli: Resident

LONDON - Libyan warplanes were bombing indiscriminately across Tripoli on Monday, a resident of the Libyan capital told al Jazeera television in a live broadcast. 

"What we are witnessing today is unimaginable. Warplanes and helicopters are indiscriminately bombing one area after another. There are many, many dead," Adel Mohamed Saleh said. Saleh, who called himself a political activist, said the bombings had initially targeted a funeral procession. "Our people are dying. It is the policy of scorched earth." he said. "Every 20 minutes they are bombing." 

Asked if the attacks were still happening he said: "It is continuing, it is continuing. Anyone who moves, even if they are in their car they will hit you." 

There was no independent verification of the report but Fathi al-Warfali, the Libyan activist who heads the Swiss-based Libyan Committee for Truth and Justice, who was taking part in a protest outside UN European headquarters in Geneva said he had heard the same reports. 

"Military planes are attacking civilians, protesters in Tripoli now. The civilians are frightened. Where is the United Nations, where is Amnesty International?" al-Warfali told Reuters. 
                           (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)
Photo:
A Libyan airforce pilot walks next to his Mirage F1 fighter jet after landing at Malta International Airport outside Valletta February 21, 2011. Two Libyan fighter jets and two civilian helicopters landed unexpectedly in Malta on Monday, witnesses said. The office of Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi said it was not clear whether the two fighter pilots intended to ask for asylum. They initially had asked to refuel, it said.
Photograph by: Darrin Zammit Lupi, Reuters


----------



## willellis

Wow. I wonder what kind of response this is going to call for from the UN.


----------



## Journeyman

willellis said:
			
		

> Wow. I wonder what kind of response this is going to call for from the UN.


I wonder too.    :nod:


----------



## Fishbone Jones

willellis said:
			
		

> Wow. I wonder what kind of response this is going to call for from the UN.



 :  :facepalm:

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/98663/post-1020306.html#new

Start at post #228.


----------



## brihard

Looks like ground to air rocket pods slung under the wings. That lends some potential credence to the claims of being ordered to bomb protesters...


----------



## willellis

recceguy said:
			
		

> :  :facepalm:
> 
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/98663/post-1020306.html#new
> 
> Start at post #228.



Thanks for the link.


----------



## Journeyman

Brihard said:
			
		

> Looks like ground to air air-to-ground rocket pods slung under the wings. That lends some potential credence to the claims of being ordered to bomb protesters...



Or, it leads credence to an earlier BBC report (sorry, I don't have access to the link here) saying "Moammar Gadhafi has ordered the Libyan air force to fire on other military installations in order to ensure that the weaponry inside the installations does not fall into the hands of protesters."

Conversely, it also leads credence a view that there is a growing split within Libya's armed forces, with one faction supporting Gaddafi son Seif al-Islam (heard giving a rambling speech last night on al Jazeera) and the other faction supporting another brother, and National Security Adviser, Mutaasim. The fighter-bomber attacks and naval gunfire - not reported here - are potentially one military faction firing upon another.


Personally, I'm hesitant to make _any_ sweeping judgments based on early reporting of a crisis -- more so, when the two sources quoted by name are self-identified as "a political activist" and a "Libyan activist ...taking part in a protest outside UN European headquarters in Geneva [who] _said he had heard the same reports_."


----------



## 57Chevy

Tripoli <----link
Modified version from the Ethiopian News and Opinion Journal
Military planes fire at civilian protesters in Libya
see full article at link
---
---
* In signs of disagreement inside Libya’s ruling elite, the justice minister resigned in protest at the “excessive use of violence” against protesters. In India, Libya’s ambassador said he was resigning in protest at the violent crackdown.

* An international coalition of 70 rights groups today urged world powers and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to suspend Libya from its membership on the UN Human Rights Council, and to convene the UN Security Council to protect Libyan civilians from “crimes against humanity.” 

The joint statement says that the widespread atrocities committed by Libya against its own people are “particularly odious” actions that amount to “crimes against humanity,” requiring member states to take action through the Security Council under the responsibility to protect doctrine. The letter was sent today to UN chief Ban Ki-moon; EU foreign minister Catherine Ashton; the Security Council representatives from the US, France, and the UK; and to the Human Rights Council delegates from the US and Hungary, which chairs the European Union.

The appeal calls for an emergency session of the Human Rights Council to suspend Libya’s membership, and to dispatch an urgent fact-finding team to the country.

“The muted response of the US and the EU to the Libyan atrocities is not only a let-down to the many Libyans risking their lives for freedom, but a shirking of their obligations, as members of the Security Council and the Human Rights Council, to protect peace and human rights, and to prevent war crimes,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, and an international lawyer who represents Libyan torture victims.

“Baroness Ashton’s call for Libyan forces to exercise ‘restraint’ is entirely inappropriate. We’re dealing with the deliberate murder and massacre of hundreds of peaceful protesters. By signaling diplomatic caution in the face of a bloodbath — instead of urgency and action — the EU is failing the victims. It’s time for basic human rights to come before oil,” said Neuer.

“The EU should also urge the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross to send urgently-needed medical supplies into Libya, particularly for hospitals in Benghazi. Ashton should attempt to visit Libya after her trip to Cairo tomorrow.” Attempts were made from Egypt to send urgent medical supplies to Libya, but the international community needs to step in, said Neuer.

Urgent Appeal to Stop Atrocities in Libya

We, the undersigned non-governmental, human rights, and humanitarian organizations, urge you to mobilize the United Nations and the international community and take immediate action to halt the mass atrocities now being perpetrated by the Libyan government against its own people. The inexcusable silence cannot continue.

As you know, in the past several days, Colonel Moammar Gadhafi’s forces are estimated to have deliberately killed hundreds of peaceful protesters and innocent bystanders across the country. In the city of Benghazi alone, one doctor reported seeing at least 200 dead bodies. Witnesses report that a mixture of special commandos, foreign mercenaries and regime loyalists have attacked demonstrators with knives, assault rifles and heavy-caliber weapons. 

Snipers are shooting peaceful protesters. Artillery and helicopter gunships have been used against crowds of demonstrators. Thugs armed with hammers and swords attacked families in their homes. Hospital officials report numerous victims shot in the head and chest, and one struck on the head by an anti-aircraft missile. Tanks are reported to be on the streets and crushing innocent bystanders. Witnesses report that mercenaries are shooting indiscriminately from helicopters and from the top of roofs. Women and children were seen jumping off Giuliana Bridge in Benghazi to escape. Many of them were killed by the impact of hitting the water, while others were drowned. The Libyan regime is seeking to hide all of these crimes by shutting off contact with the outside world. Foreign journalists have been refused entry. Internet and phone lines have been cut or disrupted.

There is no question here about intent. The government media has published open threats, promising that demonstrators would meet a “violent and thunderous response.”

Accordingly, the government of Libya is committing gross and systematic violations of the right to life as guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Citizens seeking to exercise their rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly are being massacred by the government.

Moreover, the government of Libya is committing crimes against humanity, as defined by the Explanatory Memorandum to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The Libyan government’s mass killing of innocent civilians amount to particularly odious offences which constitute a serious attack on human dignity. As confirmed by numerous oral and video testimonies gathered by human rights organizations and news agencies, the Libyan government’s assault on its civilian population are not isolated or sporadic events. Rather, these actions constitute a widespread and systematic policy and practice of atrocities, intentionally committed, including murder, political persecution and other inhumane acts which reach the threshold of crimes against humanity.

Responsibility to Protect

Under the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document, you have a clear and unambiguous responsibility to protect the people of Libya. The international community, through the United Nations, has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter, to help to protect the Libyan population. Because the Libyan national authorities are manifestly failing to protect their population from crimes against humanity, should peaceful means be inadequate, member states are obliged to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security Council, in accordance with the UN Charter, including Chapter VII.

In addition, we urge you to convene an emergency Special Session of the UN Human Rights Council, whose members have a duty, under UNGA Resolution 60/251, to address situations of gross and systematic violations of violations of human rights. The session should: 

Call for the General Assembly to suspend Libya’s Council membership, pursuant to Article 8 of Resolution 60/251, which applies to member states that commit gross and systematic violations of human rights.

Strongly condemn, and demand an immediate end to, Libya’s massacre of its own citizens.
Dispatch immediately an international mission of independent experts to collect relevant facts and document violations of international human rights law and crimes against humanity, in order to end the impunity of the Libyan government. The mission should include an independent medical investigation into the deaths, and an investigation of the unlawful interference by the Libyan government with the access to and treatment of wounded.
Call on the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights and the Council’s relevant Special Procedures to closely monitor the situation and take action as needed.
Call on the Council to remain seized of the matter and address the Libyan situation at its upcoming 16th regular session in March.
Member states and high officials of the United Nations have a responsibility to protect the people of Libya from what are preventable crimes. We urge you to use all available measures and levers to end atrocities throughout the country.

We urge you to send a clear message that, collectively, the international community, the Security Council and the Human Rights Council will not be bystanders to these mass atrocities. The credibility of the United Nations — and many innocent lives — are at stake.

(list of signatures at link)
                                (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)


----------



## brihard

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Or, it leads credence to an earlier BBC report (sorry, I don't have access to the link here) saying "Moammar Gadhafi has ordered the Libyan air force to fire on other military installations in order to ensure that the weaponry inside the installations does not fall into the hands of protesters."
> 
> Conversely, it also leads credence a view that there is a growing split within Libya's armed forces, with one faction supporting Gaddafi son Seif al-Islam (heard giving a rambling speech last night on al Jazeera) and the other faction supporting another brother, and National Security Adviser, Mutaasim. The fighter-bomber attacks and naval gunfire - not reported here - are potentially one military faction firing upon another.
> 
> 
> Personally, I'm hesitant to make _any_ sweeping judgments based on early reporting of a crisis -- more so, when the two sources quoted by name are self-identified as "a political activist" and a "Libyan activist ...taking part in a protest outside UN European headquarters in Geneva [who] _said he had heard the same reports_."



Blech. Ground to air. That's what I meant.

Anywya, there's no reason that any of the three possibilities - attacking protests, attacking military facilities that are overrun, or a split within the military - are necessarily contradictory. It could well be that some elements of the military are attacking civilians (that seems pretty much settled ot be the case), others are refusing and actively resisting, and some military facilities/equipment have been taken by protesters. There are other accounts of potential executions of military force who refuse to engage civilians.

Obviously much of this is subjective RUMINT and remains unclear... but most rumors in these cases have at least some basis in truth.

In any case, I'm very concerned, and paying close attention to all this. STRATFOR's been reporting on the possibility of Egypt sending forces in to evacuate its nationals, South Korea has apparently dispatched an 'emergency task force' to protect/evac some of its citiens, and Austria of all nations is declaring airspace over Tripoli to be closed.

It's night over there now... By later tonight our time we should see how the day there is shaping up.


----------



## 57Chevy

Harper ‘vigorously condemns’ violence in Libya
Prime Minister Stephen Harper stepped up his government’s condemnation of Moammar Gadhafi’s Libyan regime Monday following reports it had fired on its own people in a bid to cling to power.
---
---

One expert said Canada may have been more cautious in its initial response to the situation in Libya because of "relentless" criticism from opposition parties and diplomats. 

Aurel Braun, a University of Toronto international relations professor, said the federal government faced criticism after losing its bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council in the fall, with some saying it had been too assertive in its support of Israel.

He said that may be prompting the government now to choose its words more carefully on the world stage.

"We have stood at the forefront of fighting for freedom, for the dignity of people around the world . . . unfortunately, our stance has been perhaps more cautious, not because of business interests, but because this government has been relentlessly criticized," he said.

"I think this may be at the heart of the reluctancy now," he said.
full article at link
                      (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act


----------



## brihard

There are some ugly photos circulating now of some protesters blown into chunks by what is clearly heavier ordnance that simply small arms. Clearly some forms of heavy military equipment are being used against protesters, if the photos are indeed what they purport to be.


----------



## willellis

"LONDON - Libyan warplanes were bombing indiscriminately across Tripoli on Monday, a resident of the Libyan capital told al Jazeera television in a live broadcast. "

Wouldn't be surprised if that is what your referring to. Also there was a post above from 57chev that mentioned the witnesses have seen attack choppers, artillery, and high cal guns being used on personnel. 

I will refer back to my initial post on this thread and say again, scary stuff.


----------



## The Bread Guy

According to USA Today and CNN, Moammar Gadhafi is on TV saying he's in Tripoli, not Venezuela.

Canada's Foreign Minister's latest statement:


> Canada strongly condemns the violent crackdowns on innocent protesters that have resulted in many injured and killed. We call on the Libyan security forces to respect the human rights of demonstrators and uphold their commitment to freedom of speech and the right to assembly. The Libyan authorities must show restraint and stop the use of lethal force against protesters.
> 
> “The Government of Canada advises against non-essential travel to Libya because of civil unrest and demonstrations and the potential threat of terrorism in the country. Demonstrations are taking place, particularly in the eastern part of the country, including the cities of Benghazi, Derna, Baida and Tobruk.
> 
> “Canadians are advised to avoid all gatherings and demonstrations and to stay away from places where they may occur, because they may turn violent without warning. Canadians should monitor local news reports, take appropriate steps to increase their personal security and contact the Canadian embassy in Tripoli for assistance.
> 
> “Friends and relatives in Canada seeking information on Canadian citizens believed to be affected by the unrest in Libya should contact the Emergency Operations Centre at Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada by calling, toll-free, 1-800-387-3124, or by sending an email to sos@international.gc.ca ....



Meanwhile, here's what Italy _was_ saying about Libyan fracas, versus what Italy is NOW saying.

Why Italy's worried (1) and  why Italy's worried (2).

One of the things Italy's doing (note ITA DefMin "did not rule out "the presence of special forces onboard" ").  More information on the ITA naval ship headed to Libya.


----------



## aesop081

willellis said:
			
		

> Wow. I wonder what kind of response this is going to call for from the UN.



"Stop or we'll say stop, again"


----------



## OldSolduer

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> "Stop or we'll say stop, again"



And then we will continue to say stop til you appease us!! (what movie?)


----------



## aesop081

I get a kick at "vigorously condemn"........does it work like this ?


"We condemn your actions"

"We don't care"

"No no....you don't understand, we *vigorously* condemn your actions"

"oh...well in that case we shall stop forthwith"


----------



## OldSolduer

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I get a kick at "vigorously condemn"........does it work like this ?
> 
> 
> "We condemn your actions"
> 
> "We don't care"
> 
> "No no....you don't understand, we vigorously condemn your actions"
> 
> "oh...well in that case we shall stop forthwith"




If I am Dictator Bob.....after you, the UN, vigorously condemn my actions,,,,I still don't care and in fact get worse!!


----------



## willellis

I wish you were wrong.....

Good read on the Italians and CR. I had no idea that the Italians were that tight with the Libyans.


----------



## willellis

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I get a kick at "vigorously condemn"........does it work like this ?
> 
> 
> "We condemn your actions"
> 
> "We don't care"
> 
> "No no....you don't understand, we *vigorously* condemn your actions"
> 
> "oh...well in that case we shall stop forthwith"


 
  Just the way things work above our pay grade I suppose.


----------



## chrisf

Ever meet any Libyans? They have a very strange accent, at least in English... the couple I know sound like a cross between a stereo-typical arab, and a stereo-typical mafia don.


----------



## willellis

a Sig Op said:
			
		

> Ever meet any Libyans? They have a very strange accent, at least in English... the couple I know sound like a cross between a stereo-typical arab, and a stereo-typical mafia don.


 
 ;D


I have actually. Never really listened to their accent though. I imagine that it's the same with any country. Accent it regional. Your pals with must be from Little Italy.


----------



## daftandbarmy

willellis said:
			
		

> I wish you were wrong.....
> 
> Good read on the Italians and CR. I had no idea that the Italians were that tight with the Libyans.



They were once ruled by them:

"On 3 October 1911 the Italians attacked Tripoli, claiming somewhat disingenuously to be liberating Libya from Ottoman rule. Despite a major revolt by the Libyans, the Ottoman sultan ceded Libya to the Italians by signing the 1912 Treaty of Lausanne.

Tripoli was largely under Italian control by 1914,[6] but both Cyrenaica and the Fezzan were home to strivers led by the Senussis. Only in the late 1920s the Italians were able to take control of all Libya. Meanwhile 150,000 Italians settled in Libya between 1920 ad 1940, greatly developing Italian Libya in all areas."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Libya


----------



## willellis

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> They were once ruled by them:
> 
> "On 3 October 1911 the Italians attacked Tripoli, claiming somewhat disingenuously to be liberating Libya from Ottoman rule. Despite a major revolt by the Libyans, the Ottoman sultan ceded Libya to the Italians by signing the 1912 Treaty of Lausanne.
> 
> Tripoli was largely under Italian control by 1914,[6] but both Cyrenaica and the Fezzan were home to strivers led by the Senussis. Only in the late 1920s the Italians were able to take control of all Libya. Meanwhile 150,000 Italians settled in Libya between 1920 ad 1940, greatly developing Italian Libya in all areas."
> 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Libya




Cool intel. That seems to be a relationship more one-sided than anything though. The way the story reads on the BBC News Network is that the Italians and Libyans were in economic and financial league with one-another. Also the Americans and the UK having so recently shown forgiveness for years of a tyrannical dictatorship, in order to sign oil trade agreements, looks like a  poor choice now. I suppose they made their millions, so what ever.  :


----------



## The Bread Guy

This from Reuters:


> African mercenaries are being used by Libya to crush protests, prompting some army troops to switch sides to the opposition, Libya's ambassador to India, who resigned in the wake of the crackdown, said on Tuesday.
> 
> "They are from Africa, and speak French and other languages," Ali al-Essawi told Reuters in an interview, adding that he was receiving information from sources within the OPEC-member country.
> 
> Essawi, who has left the embassy since he resigned on Monday to protest the violent crackdown and is now staying at a hotel in New Delhi, said he had been told there had been army defections.
> 
> "They (troops) are Libyans and they cannot see foreigners killing Libyans so they moved beside the people," Essawi said, looking nervous and agitated ....



From Al Arabiya:


> Libya recruited hundreds of mercenaries from Sub-Saharan Africa to help quell a popular uprising that is threatening to unseat veteran leader Muammar Gaddafi after more than 41 years in office, witness told Al Arabiya from the eastern city of Benghazi on Sunday.
> 
> The witnesses said protesters in Benghazi caught some "African mercenaries" who spoke French and who admitted that they were ordered by Muammar Gaddafi's son, Khamis Gaddafi, to fire live ammunition at demonstrators.
> 
> The witnesses, who refused to be named for security reasons, added that they saw four airplanes carrying "African mercenaries" land in Benina International Airport near the city of Benghazi, the second largest city in the country.
> 
> UK-based Libyan website www.jeel-libya.net (Libya's generation) reported earlier that a number of airplanes carrying "African mercenaries" had landed in Mitiga military airport, 11 km east of the capital Tripoli, and they were dressed in Libyan army uniform. The website added that some of those "mercenaries" were sent to hot spots in the eastern region were deployed in Tripoli ....



Libya is denying the claims - this from Khaled Gaeem, under-secretary of Libya's foreign ministry, via Al Jazeera English:


> .... I am ready - not only to resign from my post - but also set myself on fire in the Green Square - if it is confirmed that there were mercenaries from African states coming by planes and if it is confirmed that there was aerial bombardment ....


----------



## The Bread Guy

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> "We condemn your actions"
> 
> "We don't care"
> 
> "No no....you don't understand, we *vigorously* condemn your actions"
> 
> "oh...well in that case we shall stop forthwith"


Good one - highlights below mine.
18 Feb 11, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay - "The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on Friday *condemned* as illegal and excessively heavy-handed the response of a number of governments in the Middle East and North Africa to the legitimate demands of their people .... Pillay *expressed deep regret* for the deaths in recent weeks of protestors in Algeria, Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Libya and Yemen, adding that she was particularly troubled by targeted attacks by security forces on certain professions .... Pillay *condemned* the use of live ammunition in recent days against peaceful protestors in Libya, the use of electric tasers and batons in Yemen, and the use of military-grade shotguns in Bahrain.  She *expressed serious concern* at recent remarks made by some parliamentarians in Iran calling for the execution of opposition leaders. Pillay said dialogue with political opponents is far more effective than their arbitrary detention in creating a stable society ...."

20 Feb 11, comments attributed to U.N. SecGen - "The Secretary-General has been closely following the developments in North Africa and the Middle East, including Bahrain, Libya, Yemen and other countries, and *remains very concerned* about reports of escalating violence and bloodshed.  The Secretary-General reiterates his call for the non-use of force and respect for basic freedoms. Stressing that utmost restraint must be exercised by all concerned, he wishes to *reaffirm his conviction* that this is the time for broad-based dialogue and for genuine social and political reform ...."

21 Feb 11, comments attributed to U.N. SecGen - "The Secretary-General *is outraged* at press reports that the Libyan authorities have been firing at demonstrators from war planes and helicopters.  Such attacks against civilians, if confirmed, would constitute a serious violation of international humanitarian law and would be condemned by the Secretary-General in the strongest terms.  He once again calls for an immediate end to the violence.  The Secretary-General has been in close touch with key member states about the developing situation."


----------



## The Bread Guy

And what civil unrest would be complete without the de rigeur "I'm not leaving, I'm dying here" speech?

From the BBC:


> Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi has refused to stand down amid widespread anti-government protests which he said had tarnished the image of the country.
> 
> In his first major speech since unrest began last week, Col Gaddafi said the whole world looked up to Libya and that protests were "serving the devil".
> 
> Reading from the country's constitution, he said enemies of Libya would be executed.
> 
> Rights groups say nearly 300 have been killed in the violence so far.
> 
> A defiant and angry Col Gaddafi said that he had brought glory to Libya. As he had no official position in Libya from which to resign, he would remain the head of the revolution, he said.
> 
> He blamed the unrest on "cowards and traitors" who were seeking to portray Libya as a place of chaos and to "humiliate" Libyans.
> Civil war threat
> 
> The protesters had been given drink and drugs, he said, frequently shouting and banging his fist on the table as the address continued.
> 
> He called on "those who love Muammar Gaddafi" to come on to the streets in support of him, telling them not to be afraid of the "gangs".
> 
> "Come out of your homes, attack them in their dens. Withdraw your children from the streets. They are drugging your children, they are making your children drunk and sending them to hell," he said.
> 
> "If matters require, we will use force, according to international law and the Libyan constitution," and warned that the country could descend into civil war or be occupied by the US if protests continued ....



The _Times of Malta_ seems to have a decent summary, compiled during the speech (although not verbatim), shared in accordance with the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the _Copyright  Act_:


> *Gaddafi: 'I will not give up', 'we will chase the cockroaches'*
> 
> Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in a long, fighting and disjointed speech on state television this afternoon promised that he would not give up, as other leaders had done.
> 
> He said that 'cowards' were trying to distort the truth and giving a wrong picture of what was happening in Libya. Libyans, he said, were being shown as being 'bad people'.
> 
> The Libyan people, he said, should hold their heads high against the leaders of the world who were conspiring against them and wanted to tarnish the reputation of the people and the country.
> 
> Gaddafi said he would not give up and would resist to the end of his life because this was his country, watered by the Libyan people's blood.
> 
> The Libyan people, he said, would defy the tyranny of the United States and other countries.
> 
> "I am a warrior" Col Gaddafi said. He was fighting to give dignity to the country against a bunch of rats who were paid to disfigure the country.
> 
> "I am not going to leave this land, and I will die here as a martyr'.
> 
> The enemies, he said, knew that Col Gaddafi was not an ordinary person. His house had been bombed, his children had been killed. And the rats were with the United States.
> 
> But the Libyan people would not give up, Africa would not give up. Libya had defeated the colonialist Italy, the US and Britain, and would remain defiant.
> 
> Col Gaddafi said innocent people had been attacked in their homes and the streets by youths who had been manipulated. Such crimes, he said, would be investigated and the people would be defended.
> 
> This, he said, was a small, paid group used by others who stayed at home.
> 
> Col Gaddafi recalled how he, as the head of the revolution, had liberated Benghazi and Tobruk, ousting the American and British bases. The current generation should remember the high price which their fathers had paid for Libyan liberation, and their honour would not be tarnished.
> 
> The administration of the country, Col Gaddafi said, was in the hands of the people through their committees and congresses. He was calling on the people to administer the oil resources of the country through new municipal committees.
> 
> Referring to Benghazi (which is in protesters' hands), Col Gaddafi said he was calling on the people to liberate and purify that part of Libya and let it be run by its own people, not others. The young people in Benghazi should know that they had been duped and did not know what they were doing.
> 
> Tripoli, he said, was free and should be administered by its people.
> 
> The masses, he said, should take to the streets and form new committees and municipalities for local administration.
> 
> Those who sided with Gaddafi and the revolution should secure the streets and remember the evacuation of the Americans and the return of oil assets to the Libyan people, he added.
> 
> Force, he said, woudl be used according to Libyan and international law.
> 
> Col Gaddafi said that since he was not president, since he had no position, he would not resign. But he had his gun and he would fight for Libya.
> 
> The people should not let their young get drunk and be misled, he said. The gangs, like cockroaches, did not represent anyone, they were nothing, just a handful trying to imitate what had happened in Egypt and Tunisia after being drugged.
> 
> From tomorrow, he said, the police and the army would impose security. If these cockroaches were allowed to prevail, Libya would slide into darkness and lose its oil.
> 
> He had rebuilt Benghazi but they had destroyed it. They had also destroyed its airport. Other cities such as Derna had also been attacked.
> 
> But they had to be repulsed and the US should not be allowed to occupy Libya like Afghanistan. The enemy had to be chased and the terrorists had to be hanged. Anybody who took arms against Libya would be executed. Those who waged war against Libya would be put to death. Those who facilitated entry of the enemy into Libya or handed over Libyan cities would be executed.
> 
> Reading from a law book, Gaddafi said that all those who used force against the people would be punished by death. The same applied for those who took part in or instigated civil war,
> 
> Col Gaddafi said he had not ordered anyone to start firing yet, because had he done so, everything would be set ablaze and Libya would end up like Somalia.
> 
> He said the millions of Libyans should restore order, take back their oil assets and do what they liked with it.
> 
> Rebellion in Waco in the US , the coup in the Soviet Union and in Tiananmen Square had been repulsed with tanks because unity was more important, he said. Libya would also do whatever it takes not to allow part of the country (Benghazi and Derna) to be taken away.
> 
> After a number of long pauses, during which he read from sheets of paper, Col Gaddafi called on opponents to give up their weapons, their drugs and their ring leaders, and said that shops should reopen as normal.
> 
> It was unacceptable, he said, for the country to be torn apart or handed to the crazy people who did not know their history.
> 
> The speech, which lasted for more than an hour, ended at 6.06 p.m. At its end Col Gaddafi was hugged by an army officer.



So, is the pool now being set up in rows saying "Muhamar G. killed" or "Muhamar G. escapes" and columns guessing when it'll happen?


----------



## brihard

Made from the bombed out basement of his old house, no less.



I say just loiter a B2 right offshore tonight and wait for PID.


----------



## aesop081

Brihard said:
			
		

> I say just loiter a B2 right offshore tonight and wait for PID.



Why ?

Is there some kind of reason we should intervene in the internal affairs of a sovereign country ?


----------



## brihard

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Why ?
> 
> Is there some kind of reason we should intervene in the internal affairs of a sovereign country ?



Yes. He's ordering the wholesale murder, by his armed forces, of his own citizens. This 'internal affairs of a sovereign country' bullshit has allowed any number of atrocities to occur over the past decades as the United Nations and other impotentt bodies wring their hands and write increasingly terse and angsty notes. He has lost all moral mandate to be in any position of governance, is committing undeniable crimes against humanity, and is a clear and present danger in the most immediate sense to the lives of the citizens of Libya.

If we can get a positive location on Gadhafi, drop a JDAM on him. It may not make things much better, but it will eliminate one factor that continues to make things worse. While we're at it, whack his sons who are cheerleading his massacres.

Don't get me wrong- if we can get our hands on him instead and put him on trial in the international criminal court, I'm fine with that too. But not if it means one additional person will die while we wait for the grab.

There are times where the precise, unapologetic, unannounced application of lethal force by an external actor is exactly what a given situation merits. This is one of them.


----------



## 57Chevy

On UN/Libya:
As the violence increases, so does the reaction from the international community. A spokesman for UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said Monday that the UN chief had had "extensive" telephone conversations with Gadhafi in which he had expressed his "deep concern at the escalating scale of violence and emphasized that it must stop immediately."

In Berlin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel was quoted by her spokesman as being "shocked"

Harper 'vigorously condemns' violence in Libya

US President Barack Obama is "considering all appropriate actions" on Libya

Cameron condemned the "completely appalling" violent response of the Libyan regime

Finland's Foreign Minister Alexander Stubb said EU sanctions against Gaddafi were warranted.

Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini was far more guarded in his criticism than his northern colleagues. 
"We should not give the wrong impression of wanting to interfere"

Other such well selected words and phrases have been noted such as:

"outraged", "genocide", "strongly condemning",  "unacceptable bloodshed",
"very disturbing and shocking scenes", "appalling", "unacceptable use of force",  
"serious violation of international humanitarian law", "most vicious form of repression",  
 "mass atrocities now being perpetrated by the Libyan government against its own people" 

That last one is attributed to the only ones who have enough balls to speak the truth
24 rights groups urge US and EU to confront Libyan massacres...

Lip service
I can probably find the responses made by the many world leaders and other dignitaries regarding Libya all over the internet.
I would not be surprised to find that they all typically employ some form of worded phrase that has been manufactured
with the help of an inventory of personnel. I would surely suspect, of course, that there would no doubt be an emphasis made
on condemning the actions that their government has taken toward their people. 
I would even begin to believe that their words are sincere, or at least I would hope that they are.
But words without action are puffs of hot air. Lip service, useless nonsense floored from some imaginary moral high ground. 
The UN Charter is clear on these matters, quote, "should peaceful means be inadequate, member states are obliged to take 
collective action in a timely and decisive manner."

In this case UN/Libya you are quite right. The UN that we have so faithfully implemented, deals in very little physical action even
where existing policies call for it to do so.
It is well known that all things begin in purity but over time become corrupt. So then this internally so-called great body
of bla bla has inadvertently met its uselessness. But we continue to oil substantially its non-functionality.
We even try to secure ourselves a seat inside that prestigious body to do as much of nothing as possible. And when we attempt to try to do even the least, we are quickly and abruptly vetoed. So then, what is it there for ?
A stumbling block ? A weigher of words ? A creator of illusions ? A worldwide fantasy ? A manipulator of agendas ?

What a disgrace. 

Nations that boast themselves as being so far advanced over other nations should be aware that they are also exceedingly far advanced in national debt like uncountable trillions. Ironic as it may seem, those ever so advanced nations are also on the brink of bankruptcy. And we all know very well that some have already fallen victim. 
So what do we do to rid ourselves of our self inflicted ever so heavier burden ?  
What does a country do after considering, implementing and then finally exhausting all the possibilities we make available to ourselves ? 
What window of opportunity is left when nearly all of the GNP goes to pay the debt ?
The answer to that in not the hardest one to find is it now. It is not like it sits in a labyrinth of endless possibilities but it sure does open up a medusa of cans of worms. And the most important aspect that you likely count upon is that it will perhaps offer some sort of economic growth.
Wow ! 

As we are so reluctant and arrogant to not even try to learn from our past baggage of stupidity and ignorance, that we quicken ourselves to add more dead weight to it.
Perhaps someone in future-land will be able to determine where we went wrong.
Because we don't want to know. Nor do we even care to know. We are just so tied up into loving ourselves that there is just no room for anything else, including other peoples and oh !, perhaps not even our own children. Why should we give a hoot ?  
Hey ! Lest we forget, It was our forefathers who made those great sacrifices to ensure our freedom. They had a heart. And that is not all they had, they had enough guts to stand up for what is right. By their blood, sweat, tears, commitment and perseverance they earned there place to be remembered. We on the other hand have spoiled and corrupted that which they gave to us so freely. 

By our inaction we will be left to pass on a gathering gloom of stench to fill the nostrils of the little ones. And who will stand up for them ?  What institution that we allow to be corrupted will finally put its foot down ?  We are not even able to 'stand tall' regarding the same institutions that we call upon to act.  How can we ? We mock them to their face when justice is called upon for other peoples and nations. But hey ! There had better be free flights for us out of harms way with toothbrushes and toothpaste made freely available or you will never hear the end of it. 
Yeah, we so quickly allow the stomping out of life and turn the cheek on atrocities and all that for the oily measure of our own comfort. 
Time to wake up all you weak "girlish" leaders. 
MO 57C

Articles of interest:
World markets decline as unrest continues in Middle East

As protests crackdowns continue, West lines up to sell arms

                   (Articles Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)

a short poem:       

     Lip Service
Continue to earnestly weigh 
those lip served words
that knowingly fall upon the deaf.
Take no immediate action 
that the noose be well set. 
Go ahead without reluctance
and do those things  
that your mind
has been set to do.
Surely in your wisdom
you know
that we will grease the steel wheels
with babes,
and break our young 
in their boots.
Bring with you the scale
for good measure,
for the baggage
of your allowance 
will surely overwhelm.


----------



## Journeyman

57Chevy said:
			
		

> In this case UN/Libya you are quite right


Thank you.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Mutually resolved by PM


----------



## OldSolduer

Is it an atrocity what our Muamar is doing? 

Yes it is.

BUT.....unless we get the OK from the UN, all we can do is "strongly condemn" his actions WRT the demonstrations.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Is it an atrocity what our Muamar is doing?
> 
> Yes it is.
> 
> BUT.....unless we get the OK from the UN, all we can do is "strongly condemn" his actions WRT the demonstrations.


And so far, the U.N. Security Council's had this to say after a session today (22 Feb 11) - cynical highlights mine:


> .... The members of the Security Council *expressed grave concern* at the situation in Libya.  They *condemned the violence and use of force* against civilians, *deplored the repression* against peaceful demonstrators, and *expressed deep regret* at the deaths of hundreds of civilians.  They called for an immediate end to the violence and for steps to address the legitimate demands of the population, including through national dialogue.
> 
> The members of the Security Council called on the Government of Libya to meet its responsibility to protect its population.  They called upon the Libyan authorities to act with restraint, to respect human rights and international humanitarian law, and to allow immediate access for international human rights monitors and humanitarian agencies.
> 
> The members of the Security Council called for international humanitarian assistance to the people of Libya and expressed concern at the reports of shortages of medical supplies to treat the wounded.  They *strongly urged* the Libyan authorities to ensure the safe passage of humanitarian and medical supplies and humanitarian workers into the country.
> 
> The members of the Security Council *underlined the need* for the Government of Libya to respect the freedom of peaceful assembly and of expression, including freedom of the press.  They called for the immediate lifting of restrictions on all forms of the media.
> 
> The members of the Security Council *stressed the importance* of accountability.  They *underscored the need *to hold to account those responsible for attacks, including by forces under their control, on civilians.
> 
> The members of the Security Council *expressed deep concern* about the safety of foreign nationals in Libya.  They *urged* the Libyan authorities and all relevant parties to ensure the safety of all foreign nationals and facilitate the departure of those wishing to leave the country.
> 
> The members of the Security Council will *continue to follow the situation* closely.



Meanwhile, Canada's getting ready to help Canadians get outta Dodge - this from DFAIT:


> .... The Government of Canada expects to have an evacuation flight out of Tripoli on Thursday, February 24th. Canada is also working very closely with like-minded countries to secure seats for Canadians on their evacuation flights.
> 
> Canadian citizens in Libya registered with the Registration of Canadians Abroad service (ROCA) will be contacted by our Emergency Operations Centre to determine their travel intentions.
> 
> Canadians in Libya who wish to be evacuated should call the Emergency Operations Centre in Ottawa collect at 00-1-613-996-8885, or call the Embassy of Canada in Tripoli at 218 (21) 335-1633 in order to register their interest.
> 
> Canadian Government chartered flights will be operated on a cost-recovery basis. Canadians will be advised of the cost before boarding. Safe haven destinations will be in Europe.
> 
> Canadian citizens will be expected to make their own onward travel plans at their own expense.
> 
> Departure information may change without notice due to logistical difficulties ....


More from CBC.ca, Reuters, AFP, _Globe & Mail_ and CTV.ca.


----------



## brihard

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Is it an atrocity what our Muamar is doing?
> 
> Yes it is.
> 
> BUT.....unless we get the OK from the UN, all we can do is "strongly condemn" his actions WRT the demonstrations.



I recognize the general merits of the Westphalian system, and the need, in most instances, to respect principles of sovereignty. This is a case however that points out the necessarily finite nature of sovereignty, and the moral hazard inherent in upholding it unflinchingly, and without regard for the consequences of doing so. Gadhafi has failed in his responsibility to his population, and in fact has turned on them fully, with murderous intent and effect. I stand by my call to smoke the bastard with a JDAM. I'm comfortable with a precedent stating that dictators who order their military to turn on their citizens become damned by their actions, and can either surrender immediately, or become fair game in order to protect innocent life. A man who still commands sufficient loyalty from some of the army to do what he's doing is a rogue, and must be treated as such. Sovereignty ceases to be paramount when a state fails to faithfully fulfill it's responsibilities to the body politic.


----------



## willellis

Brihard said:
			
		

> Yes. He's ordering the wholesale murder, by his armed forces, of his own citizens. This 'internal affairs of a sovereign country' bullshit has allowed any number of atrocities to occur over the past decades as the United Nations and other impotentt bodies wring their hands and write increasingly terse and angsty notes. He has lost all moral mandate to be in any position of governance, is committing undeniable crimes against humanity, and is a clear and present danger in the most immediate sense to the lives of the citizens of Libya.
> 
> If we can get a positive location on Gadhafi, drop a JDAM on him. It may not make things much better, but it will eliminate one factor that continues to make things worse. While we're at it, whack his sons who are cheerleading his massacres.
> 
> Don't get me wrong- if we can get our hands on him instead and put him on trial in the international criminal court, I'm fine with that too. But not if it means one additional person will die while we wait for the grab.
> 
> There are times where the precise, unapologetic, unannounced application of lethal force by an external actor is exactly what a given situation merits. This is one of them.



+1, but the US won't bomb one of their sources of oil.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

willellis said:
			
		

> +1, but the US won't bomb one of their sources of oil.



IIRC, they get almost none of their oil from Libya.


----------



## willellis

recceguy said:
			
		

> IIRC, they get almost none of their oil from Libya.



Quite probable, never the less, the US wouldn't look to good if they sign a business deal for oil, and then 7 years later, they are blowing the crap out of the country trying to find some lunatic.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

willellis said:
			
		

> Quite probable, never the less, the US wouldn't look to good if they sign a business deal for oil, and then 7 years later, they are blowing the crap out of the country trying to find some lunatic.



Didn't they just do that in a little place called Iraq?


----------



## aesop081

willellis said:
			
		

> +1, but the US won't bomb one of their sources of oil.



US imports of Libyan oil totaled 80 000 barels per day in 2009, representing only 5% of Libya's exports. Not exactly something to lose sleep over.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/Libya/Oil.html


----------



## willellis

recceguy said:
			
		

> Didn't they just do that in a little place called Iraq?



Yup, and they look like idiots for doing so.


----------



## willellis

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> US imports of Libyan oil totaled 80 000 barels per day in 2009, representing only 5% of Libya's exports. Not exactly something to lose sleep over.
> 
> http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/Libya/Oil.html



True, but I don't think it is the amount of oil that is the factor, but rather they are business partners.


----------



## George Wallace

willellis

I see you haven't read much history.  They have invaded Mexico, Cuba, Canada, Panama, various Caribbean Island nations, and a long list of other once friendly nations over the past 200 years or so.  Why would this be an exception?


----------



## willellis

George Wallace said:
			
		

> willellis
> 
> I see you haven't read much history.  They have invaded Mexico, Cuba, Canada, Panama, various Caribbean Island nations, and a long list of other once friendly nations over the past 200 years or so.  Why would this be an exception?



I believe that times have changed since then. I know that Panama was only 30 years ago, but even still, I feel that this is not something that will benefit the US if they were to go through with it.


----------



## aesop081

willellis said:
			
		

> True, but I don't think it is the amount of oil that is the factor, but rather they are business partners.



The Waha Oil Company, which is owned by a Libyan company called "National Oil Corporation" in a joint venture with ConocoPhillips, Marathon Oil and Amerada Hess.

I just started looking but i have yet to find any other US buisness with Libyan oil companies.



			
				willellis said:
			
		

> I feel that this is not something that will benefit the US if they were to go through with it.



For the record, i dont think anyone has anything to gain ( and much to lose) by intervening here.


----------



## willellis

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> The Waha Oil Company, which is owned by a Libyan company called "National Oil Corporation" in a joint venture with ConocoPhillips, Marathon Oil and Amerada Hess.
> 
> I just started looking but i have yet to find any other US buisness with Libyan oil companies.
> 
> For the record, i dont think anyone has anything to gain ( and much to lose) by intervening here.



I am nearly certain that BP had signed deals in 2004 with Libya. As for intervention, I agree. I was just discussing with family that I have such admiration for people that are willing to step up in the face of tyranny, and say enough is enough. The country will be better for it if they can overthrow this so called "government".


----------



## aesop081

willellis said:
			
		

> I am nearly certain that BP had signed deals in 2004 with Libya.



BP = British Petroleum


----------



## Kat Stevens

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> BP = British Petroleum



...And I believe it's Dutch owned.


----------



## The Bread Guy

willellis said:
			
		

> +1, but the US won't bomb one of their sources of oil.


Zat right?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/15/newsid_3975000/3975455.stm



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> I see you haven't read much history.  They have invaded Mexico, Cuba, Canada, Panama, various Caribbean Island nations, and a long list of other once friendly nations over the past 200 years or so.  Why would this be an exception?


Correct - read the attached, willellis, and learn.

_- edited to clarify -_


----------



## The Bread Guy

Fidel takes a bit of a poke:


> Cuba's former leader Fidel Castro said Tuesday that unrest in Libya may be a pretext for a NATO invasion. Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega has jumped to the support of the embattled leader of the North African nation, saying he telephoned to express solidarity .... "You can agree or not with Gadhafi," Castro said. "The world has been invaded by all sorts of news ... We have to wait the necessary time to know with rigor how much is fact or lie."  But he did urge protests of something he says is planned: A U.S.-led invasion of the North African nation aimed at controlling its oil.  "The government of the United States is not concerned at all about peace in Libya and it will not hesitate to give NATO the order to invade that rich country, perhaps in a question of hours or very short days," Castro wrote ....



Reports out there that AQ's set up an "Islamic Emirate" in eastern Libya:


> Al-Qaeda has set up an Islamic emirate in Derna, in eastern Libya, headed by a former U.S. prisoner at Guantanamo Bay, the country's deputy foreign minister told EU ambassadors in Tripoli.
> 
> However, residents in the city have told reporters there is no substance to these rumors, which they claim the Libyan government is sowing to "scare Europe."
> 
> "Al-Qaeda has established an emirate in Derna led by Abdelkarim al-Hasadi, a former Guantanamo detainee," Khaled Khaim said.
> 
> "They have an FM radio station and have begun to impose the burqa" (head-to-toe covering for women) and have "executed people who refuse to cooperate with them."
> 
> Khaim said Hasadi has a lieutenant, "also a member of al-Qaeda and named Kheirallah Baraassi" in al-Baida.
> 
> Derna is the capital of a province by the same name in the region of Cyrenaica, some 1,250 kilometers east of Libya's capital Tripoli. Al-Baida lies about 100 kilometers west of Derna.
> 
> Earlier, Italian Foreign Minister Francesco Franco Frattini said embattled Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi had lost control of Cyrenaica and shared reports that an Islamic emirate had been declared there.
> 
> Speaking at a meeting in Rome organized by the Community of Sant'Egidio, a Christian organization, Frattini said here had been recent proclamations in Cyrenaica that it was now an Islamic emirate and calls to break with the West ....


----------



## 57Chevy

Mass evacuations underway in Libya as EU considers sanctions 
Thousands of foreign nationals are being evacuated from Libya as the situation becomes increasingly chaotic and the government loses the east of the country. Calls for sanctions are getting louder.

European and other countries were frantically trying to get their nationals out of Libya on Wednesday as events on the ground continued to escalate. 
A spokesman for the European Union said member countries were in the process of evacuating some 10,000 EU citizens by air and sea.
Thousands of Tunisian and Turkish nationals were attempting to leave by Libya's western land border; many of them spoke of harrowing scenes and of being attacked by Libyan security forces.

Asian countries said Wednesday they were preparing a "mammoth" evacuation operation for more than 100,000 migrant workers.
In a newspaper interview Italy's Foreign Minister Franco Frattini warned that as many as 300,000 refugees might try to reach Europe to escape the violence in Libya. He added that estimates that as many as 1,000 people had been killed so far "are credible." 
According to the International Federation for Human Rights (IFHR) at least 640 people have been killed in Libya in protests against the regime since they started last week.

The figure is more than double the official Libyan government toll of 300 dead, and includes 275 dead in Tripoli and 230 dead in the protest epicentre in the eastern city of Benghazi, the IFHR's Souhayr Belhassen told AFP.

The Benghazi toll includes "130 soldiers who were executed by their officers in Benghazi for refusing to fire on crowds" of protesters, she said.
Belhassen, who heads the Paris-based IFHR, said their figures were based on military sources for Tripoli and on Libyan rights groups' assessments in Benghazi and elsewhere.

Gadhafi remains defiant

Meanwhile, Libyan sources said Gadhafi was barricaded in the Bab al-Azizya compound in Tripoli, and was being protected by four military brigades. But despite his defiant stance, there were signs that his grip on power was slipping.

article continues at link...

Also: 
Gaddafi regime handing weapons to supporters
"They start giving guns to everybody who's saying 'I'm supporting him'," Mr Basset said.

"I've seen the guns with people who [are] very young. 

"There is lots of people now - they're holding guns, they have no idea how to use even the guns. 

"They've just got a Kalashnikov and they're just shooting everywhere."

more at link....

                                (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)


----------



## daftandbarmy

willellis said:
			
		

> I believe that times have changed since then. I know that Panama was only 30 years ago, but even still, I feel that this is not something that will benefit the US if they were to go through with it.



My bet is on a UN sanctioned 'Arab nation led' intervention, supported by the EU and US. At least, I hope it happens that way or I'll lose a case of beer.  ;D


----------



## willellis

Thanks for the link Milnews. I can certainly understand where you are coming from too, but I am trying to look at how things will play out in today's world. Times have changed, and the world is smaller now. If there is a US force moved to Libya, would it not make more sense to send ground forces? If they refer back to the bombing method, this would become Iraq part III.


----------



## willellis

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> My bet is on a UN sanctioned 'Arab nation led' intervention, supported by the EU and US. At least, I hope it happens that way or I'll lose a case of beer.  ;D



Makes sense to me.


----------



## Edward Campbell

A lot depends on Egypt. Despite its own internal political problems it remains the dominant regional power. It is, relative to its neighbours: large, powerful, rich and sophisticated. Egypt traditionally aspires to a leadership role in North Africa and the Middle East - this may be a good time for it to exercise some leadership. Mubarak as cautious, he craved stability above all else, it seems to me. The new leaders _may_ be more of the Nasser/Sadat type, we, in the West, probably hope more Sadat than Nasser, but we'll likely have to settle for whatever we get.

I'm not sure that any US _engagement_ is either desirable or, given the current state of the US military (deployments, contingencies, etc), even likely.

This is an Arab/North African mess - they will, most likely, want to try to sort it out amongst themselves and we would be wise to let them try, with a UNSC mandate.

Don't forget: it is not just Libya: Bahrain, Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen are all in various stages and degrees of crises. Then there's Iran ...


----------



## GR66

My guess would be that Egypt may be the best equipped and positioned to intervene despite the current crisis there (with possible behind the scenes US logistics, intel and economic support) as well as being the most politically acceptable choice.  

Becoming the Arab "white knights" in Libya may also be a pretty smart political move for an Egyptian military that is likely pretty desperate to maintain their dominant political and economic position in their own country.  It's much harder to complain about the group that is seen as the saviours of your oppressed Arab brothers.


----------



## 57Chevy

Looks to me that the world concern right now is on getting as many
of their citizens out of there in a quickened manner.
Some will encounter an array of delays
Evacuation of Canadians from Libya on hold: report
                                                  _________________________



			
				milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Fidel takes a bit of a poke:


First lets not forget that Castro is not so much a foolish man and although he made a hardline statement regarding the 
possible US/NATO invasion he is cautious:
Castro offered lukewarm support for Gadhafi, saying more time was needed to assess what was going on in Libya.
Cuban Diplomat points finger at US
IMO Castro is not the type to support the murder of ones own citizens.
However,
It is interesting to note some of the other exterior support for the Qadhafi regime
like muscle heads such as Chavez and Ortega 
Both well known instigators to US departements and good friends for no real good reasons.

The president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, has received almost $1 billion in aid from President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela -- sometimes in "suitcases full of cash" sent from Caracas -- a relationship that prompted a U.S. diplomat to dub Ortega a "Chavez Mini-Me," leaked U.S. diplomatic cables show.
Ortega, the cables say, also funds his party's political campaigns with money from drug traffickers and once bribed a prominent Nicaraguan boxer to stump for him in public in exchange for not facing sexual assault charges -- which Ortega himself has faced, as alleged by his stepdaughter.
 Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega 'dubbed Chavez Mini-me' in US leaked cables

Nicaragua's leftist President Daniel Ortega says he has telephoned Libyan leader Moammar Qaddafi on Monday to express his solidarity.
---
Leftist leaders in the Americas have long embraced Qaddafi  and he has responded over the years by awarding the Muammar Qaddafi International Human Rights Prize to Castro and Ortega, as well as to Presidents Hugo Chávez of Venezuela and Evo Morales of Bolivia.
Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega and Cuba's Fidel Castro Stand-By Qaddafi

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has condemned the killing of Protesters in Libya and called on the Libyan government to respect the people's will.
Demands for change shaking the Middle East would end the oppression of "arrogant" powers and would reach other continents like Europe or America, unless Discrimination and Military occupation ended, he predicted. "Instead of killing people, listen to them," 
Ahmadinejad condemns civilian killings in Libya
Do you mean like Central and South America ? 
so then,
Noting the Iranian viewpoint on the Libyan massacre perhaps these two characters will reconsider their statements:
Chávez pledged that Venezuela would "stay by Iran at any time and under any condition." Ahmedinejad called Chávez a kindred spirit. "I feel I have met a brother and trench mate after meeting Chávez." Chávez said he "admired the Iranian president for 'his wisdom and strength'," saying, "We are with you and with Iran forever. As long as we remain united we will be able to defeat (U.S.) imperialism, but if we are divided they will push us aside".
Wikipedia

Ortega met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The two heads of state toured shanty towns in Managua. Ortega told the press that the "revolutions of Iran and Nicaragua are almost twin revolutions...since both revolutions are about justice, liberty, self-determination, and the struggle against imperialism. 
Wikipedia

                        (Articles reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)


----------



## brihard

CBC's now reporting that we've sent a C17 for evac. Although apparently 'no military personnel are onboard'. I assume they mean other than flight crew.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/02/24/libya-canadians.html


----------



## Journeyman

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Don't forget: it is not just Libya: Bahrain, Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen are all in various stages and degrees of crises. Then there's Iran ...


I've been watching Bahrain for a couple of days now, and I think that crisis is different from Libya, Tunisia, and Yemen; it may be much closer to Egypt.

First off, _I believe_ it's of more importance. As mentioned, it's the home of the US Navy's Fifth Fleet (_roughly_ 25,000 military personnel serving afloat and 3,000 support personnel ashore in Bahrain. These naval forces typically represent some 60-80 percent of all American military forces in the Gulf area). This Fleet is seen as a much necessary regional counterbalance against Shi'ite Iran. 

Secondly, the crisis is also of concern for two neighbours -- Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. 

The Saudis fear that the concessions Bahrain is making with their Shia majority will embolden the Saudi Shia, who mostly inhabit the oil-rich eastern province near the Bahrain border. Adding to their concern is the impending succession of several of Saudi Arabia's top leaders; this is not a good time for instability.

Any Bahrainian concessions are also likely to have a knock-on effect in Kuwait, where 30 percent of their population are Shia...with many of the same grievances. Needless to say, Kuwait's stability is critical for US operations in Iraq, especially logistics.

Finally, I feel Bahrain is also different because of the nature of the protests. Sure, like the other protests, al Jazeera is showing the majority of signs and banners as being in English (obvious target audience). But in Bahrain the religious tone is very much understated. The protest's leadership _seems_ to be more highly-educated, economically-driven youth; there appears to be a clear disconnect from the country's more traditionally conservative Shi'ite opposition groups.

So......Libya -- I'm not too concerned. The population has always been divided east/west, with the overwhelming majority living within 20 feet of the coast (hell, they didn't even have a road linking the entire country until the late-1980s); if there was no oil, no one would care.

Bahrain however, like Egypt, is important for regional stability.



Edit: typo


----------



## daftandbarmy

Brihard said:
			
		

> CBC's now reporting that we've sent a C17 for evac. Although apparently 'no military personnel are onboard'. I assume they mean other than flight crew.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/02/24/libya-canadians.html



So they were pretty much 100% correct there, right?  ;D

Too bad we couldn't visit them with those C17s filled with troops. If you want a 'just cause', finding and hanging Goofy Ghadaffi Duck is a good one.


----------



## The Bread Guy

- edited to add extra info at bottom -



			
				Brihard said:
			
		

> CBC's now reporting that we've sent a C17 for evac. Although apparently 'no military personnel are onboard'. I assume they mean other than flight crew.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/02/24/libya-canadians.html



This from the CBC story caught my eye:


> .... "We have arranged for the evacuation of Canadians on a number of flights and boats chartered by allies such as the United Kingdom, Spain, and the United States," Lawrence Cannon said *in a statement issued from Rome on Thursday* ....



as well as this from Reuters:


> Canada will send a military cargo plane to evacuate its citizens from Libya, where conditions are becoming more dangerous, Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon told reporters on Thursday.
> 
> The announcement came hours after plans to send a chartered civilian airliner on Thursday to the Libyan capital Tripoli fell through over insurance concerns. Cannon said nearly 200 Canadians had been, or were about to be, evacuated from Libya on planes and ships arranged by other nations.
> 
> Cannon, *speaking to reporters in the Canadian embassy in Rome*, said a C-17 military transport plane with 156 seats was on its way to Italy from Germany and would fly to Tripoli as soon as Libyan authorities have permission ....


The Minister's in Rome?  Does he _need_ to be there?  Some 14K were evacuated from Lebanon in 2006, and (although I stand to be corrected) I don't remember a Minister being "forward deployed" like this.  As much as I appreciate a Minister of the Crown wanting to keep a grip on the situation (although it makes one wonder about his faith in the folks working for him), I really hope he doesn't take up a seat on the planes out of Libya.

Late add - To be fair, I've also spotted this as a rationale:


> .... Cannon is in Italy to discuss the situation in Libya and the region with his Italian counterpart ....


----------



## 57Chevy

Well put JM. The mentality of the people in Bahrain is completely different from those in Libya. The people are accustomed to the western influence because of the presence of the operational US 5th fleet. The latest protests show that there are deep rooted tensions based on the Sunni discrimination (Government) of the majority Shia population, that's one big reason the people want a new government. 
 Opposition resumes protest in Bahrain

For those interested,  
a further read on the difference between Sunni and Shia muslims can be found here  (What's the difference between Shia and Sunni Muslims ?)
                                              _________________________

Some new and interesting developments and possible heavy responses from world powers on the Libyan ordeal.
The White House said Barack Obama planned to call David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy, to discuss possible actions,
including a no-fly zone or sanctions.
--- 
Switzerland said it had frozen Gaddafi's assets
---
British special forces are in Malta, with some reports that they are in Tripoli.
Libya: International response gathers pace after Gaddafi counterattacks
                                             ________________________
Some additional dialogue from the UN
"At this critical juncture, it is imperative that the international community maintain unity and act together to ensure a prompt and peaceful transition,"
---
"I want to underscore what my special advisers said yesterday on the prevention of genocide and responsibility to protect," Ban said. "The reported nature and scale of effects of the attacks on civilians are egregious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law."

"I condemn them loudly ... and those who are responsible must be held accountable in courts of law," he added.
UN chief calls for 'prompt, peaceful' transition in Libya
                                           __________________________
And this rare and paramount support: 

China and Russia, traditionally reluctant to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, supported the strong press statement the council issued Tuesday which condemned and deplored "the repression against peaceful demonstrators," demanded an "immediate end to the violence," and called for steps "to address the legitimate demands of the population."
Whether China and Russia will go along with sanctions - which both countries also generally oppose - remains to be seen.
UN to meet on further options against Libya
                     (Articles reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)


----------



## PuckChaser

57Chevy said:
			
		

> China and Russia supported the strong press statement the council issued Tuesday which condemned and deplored "the repression against peaceful demonstrators," demanded an "immediate end to the violence," and called for steps "to address the legitimate demands of the population."



Pot, this is kettle, you're black over.


----------



## Kat Stevens

The kettle is in a perfect position to remind the pot of it's colour.


----------



## 57Chevy

(Modified)
---
---
British Foreign Secretary William Hague said that he did not rule out the possibility of sending Special Forces to Libya.

Hague convened a meeting of the cabinet emergency group COBRA, along with Defence Secretary Liam Fox. Prime Minister David Cameron is on a trade mission in the Middle East, centring on the sale of arms to Persian Gulf despots.

Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt told LBS radio, “The most significant news is the SAS [Special Air Service] troops that are now ready to spring into action.”

When asked directly if he could envisage a British military intervention in Libya, he replied: “Absolutely … we wouldn’t have SAS troops on stand-by if we weren’t envisaging the possibility of having to use them.”

A statement from the Ministry of Defence (MoD) said it was “assisting FCO [Foreign and Commonwealth] officials in Tripoli and has pre-positioned a number of other assets and personnel in the area to assist as and when appropriate as part of the overall Foreign Office led response.” It added, “A number of further UK assets are also being readied to assist the FCO if required.”

Unnamed sources within the military have let it be known that the Special Boat Service (SBS) has deployed a forward team to a Mediterranean location. British Forces News said that the Special Forces are on alert and will be backed up by paratroopers from the Special Forces Support Group.

Frank Gardner, the BBC’s security editor, suggested that SAS personnel might already be on the ground in plain clothes.
---
Full article here
Calls mount for military intervention in Libya

                               (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)


----------



## The Bread Guy

Liberal and Conservative Senators lay out how Canada could help:


> …. Support from the international community, and Canada especially, should be offered for building Libyan civil society and the national institutions neglected and denied during Gadhafi's four-decade, one-man rule.  Although the Security Council has expressed "grave concern" and called on Libya "to meet its responsibility to protect its population," its issuance of a press statement is insufficient to communicate the gravity of the situation that Libyans face -namely, the threat of mass atrocities. Time is literally of the essence …. But strong words must be paired with strong action.
> 
> Canada and the international community must stand by the people of Libya who, like so many others throughout the Arab world, seek the basic human rights that should be enjoyed by all who desire them. Whereas the protests elsewhere have led to relatively peaceful transitions or to dialogues for reform, Libya's rulers have chosen repression and slaughter.  Our response may very well determine whether the next authoritarian government threatened follows Gadhafi's lead. This is not about picking winners; it's about being on the right side of history by saving human lives.
> 
> We have seen the cost of inaction, delay and obfuscation on innocent populations elsewhere. The Responsibility to Protect is about the world engaging when a civilian population is under attack -either from its own government or because its government lacks the means or will to protect it. Libya is one of the clearest examples yet of just such a circumstance.
> 
> Canada has an opportunity to help build a coalition at the UN for rapid engagement. This needs to be a matter of hours and days, not weeks and months.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Unfortunately, IMHO these senators may discover that for Canada to be able to play a role in building a coalition at the UN level, our view on R2P would have to be backed up by a C2P (Capacity to Protect), otherwise nobody takes you seriously.

A good fit for Canada in something like Libya would have been to provide logistics, communication and other technical support to a UN coalition, but right now, the Army and Air Force are committed in Afghanistan and otherwise in rubber band mode at home and could not take on another mission "in a matter of hours and days, not weeks and months". While Libya would be the perfect place for such support "from the sea", our masters have not seen fit to equip the Navy or its Fleet Auxiliary Service with the ships that could do that, and the Navy is also in rubber band mode anyway.

So, nice thought on the part of those senators. It probably put their minds at ease that "they tried everything and offered all support", but they likely know that we can't do it anyway.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, IMHO these senators may discover that for Canada to be able to play a role in building a coalition at the UN level, our view on R2P would have to be backed up by a C2P (Capacity to Protect), otherwise nobody takes you seriously.
> 
> A good fit for Canada in something like Libya would have been to provide logistics, communication and other technical support to a UN coalition, but right now, the Army and Air Force are committed in Afghanistan and otherwise in rubber band mode at home and could not take on another mission "in a matter of hours and days, not weeks and months". While Libya would be the perfect place for such support "from the sea", our masters have not seen fit to equip the Navy or its Fleet Auxiliary Service with the ships that could do that, and the Navy is also in rubber band mode anyway.
> 
> So, nice thought on the part of those senators. It probably put their minds at ease that "they tried everything and offered all support", but they likely know that we can't do it anyway.



Canada must have the highest proportion of off road clubs per capita in the world. That's how these guys got started: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Desert_Group

IMHO, if we devloped a div/corps/army level recce unit that specialized in desert (and other LR) patrolling, we could get something useful done for pretty cheap.


----------



## Journeyman

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> IMHO, if we developed a div/corps/army level recce unit that specialized in desert (and other LR) patrolling, we could get something useful done for pretty cheap.


But remember the timeline -- 1940-43. Desperate governments can be pretty amenable to innovation. 

The only desperation these days involves the weekly 'Miss Congeniality' EKOS polls.


----------



## The Bread Guy

_- edited to add PMO's head's up re:  PM statement on Libya tonight ~1900, U.S. info -_
PM's going to have more to say tonight:


> PM Harper will deliver a statement in Ottawa concerning Libya upon his return from Val d'Or, Qc this evening at approximately 1900.



Meanwhile, this from the U.S. ....


> The US is to impose unilateral and multilateral sanctions on Libya, the White House has announced.
> 
> US spy agencies are also monitoring Libya for evidence of atrocities, Jay Carney, the White House spokesperson, announced on Friday.
> 
> He declined to give details of what the sanctions might entail in a press conference in Washington.
> 
> The United States has withdrawn embassy personnel from the Libyan capital and suspended all embassy operations for security reasons, Carney said.
> 
> The embassy has temporarily ceased all operations, he said.
> 
> Diplomatic personnel had been ordered to leave the country earlier this week and, on Wednesday, Crowley said at least 35 American diplomats and their family members would be ferried out ....



.... and from the non-interventionist camp, we have this, from stopwar.org.uk - more "it's only the oil we're after, ya know" messaging:


> There must be no US or British intervention in Libya: the future of Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain, Yemen must be determined by the people of those countries alone.
> 
> The uprisings sweeping the Middle East deserve the support of all progressive people. They are directed against autocracies which have denied their people basic rights and the possibility of a decent life.
> 
> These autocracies have also, for the most part, depended on the self-interested support of the big powers, the USA and Britain first of all. Western governments have prioritised cheap oil, arms sales and support for Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians above the rights of the Arab peoples.
> 
> The response of the British government to the events of the last month exemplifies this hypocrisy. David Cameron has prioritised arms sales to the region. And the clamour to intervene in Libya has more to do with control of that country’s oil resources than with support for Libya’s people.
> 
> The Conservative-Liberal Coalition has followed Tony Blair’s lead in seeing the Middle East entirely through the prism of the interests of BP and British Aerospace. Any British intervention in the region would be directed to furthering those interests, not the freedom or democracy which can only present a challenge to western domination of the region.
> 
> Stop the War Coalition is clear that there must be no US or British intervention in Libya or anywhere else in the Middle East under any pretext whatsoever. Such interference over the last century is the root of the region’s troubles, and its continuation will solve none of the difficulties there.
> 
> The future of Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain, Yemen and all the other states facing popular uprisings must be determined by the people of those countries alone. Solidarity with those fighting for their democratic and national freedom is our obligation.
> 
> We can best discharge it by demanding that the government at long last takes its hands off the Middle East and its people, leaving them to settle accounts with their own rulers.


----------



## The Bread Guy

In no particular order....

"The United Nations Human Rights Council today strongly condemned the recent violence in Libya and ordered an international inquiry into alleged abuses, while also recommending that the country’s membership in the UN’s top human rights body be suspended.  In a resolution adopted unanimously at the end of a special session held in Geneva, the 47-member Council called on the Libyan Government to meet its responsibility to protect its population, immediately end all human rights violations, stop any attacks against civilians, and respect the popular will, aspirations and demands of its people ...."

"China is taking the unprecedented step of dispatching a navy ship to protect its citizens being evacuated from conflict-ridden Libya — underscoring the navy's growing capabilities and Beijing's need to protect its citizens abroad.  The missile frigate Xuzhou was ordered to break off from anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden and is sailing toward Libya, the Defence Ministry said in a notice reported by state media Friday. It's orders are to protect ships carrying Chinese expatriates to safety, the notice issued Thursday said. No details were given.  The ship's mission, approved by the Central Military Commission headed by President Hu Jintao, marks the first time China's entaglement-wary leaders have ever sent a navy ship to take part in the evacuation of civilians ...."  _(More on the Type 054A (Jiangkai-II Class) Missile Frigate here)
_

"Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi promised a gathering of his supporters on Friday to defeat the protesters who seek to topple his embattled regime, reports reaching here said.  Addressing the rally at the Green Square in Tripoli, capital of Libya, Gaddafi said: "The Libyan people love Muammar Gaddafi and see him as icon of dignity," Libyan TV reported this evening.  "If the people do not love me, I do not deserve to live for a single day," he stressed.  Meanwhile, he threatened to open the arms caches for tribes to fight the protesters, saying: "We'll fight then and rout them. We'll defeat any external hostile attempts as we did with all previous ones." ...."

"The government of Muammar Gaddafi will never resort to destroying Libya's oil wealth in its fight to put down an insurrection, the Libyan leader's son Saif al-Islam told Turkish news channel CNN-Turk on Friday.  "We will never demolish the sources of oil. They belong to the people," Saif said in an interview translated from English into Turkish on the CNN-Turk website.  He said the Gaddafi family had no intention of fleeing Libya, and the government was in control of the west, south and centre of the country.  "We have plans A, B and C. Plan A is to live and die in Libya. Plan B is to live and die in Libya. Plan C is to live and die in Libya," Saif said ...."

"The government of Col. Moammar Gadhafi hasn't destroyed significant stockpiles of mustard gas and other chemical-weapons agents, raising fears in Washington about what could happen to them—and whether they may be used—as Libya slides further into chaos.  Tripoli also maintains control of aging Scud B missiles, U.S. officials said, as well as 1,000 metric tons of uranium yellowcake and vast amounts of conventional weapons that Col. Gadhafi has channeled in the past to militants operating in countries like Sudan and Chad ...."  _(A bit of an overview of Libya's chemical history here)_

More on links


----------



## 57Chevy

UN moves to pile pressure on Gadhafi regime

An international push to punish the Gaddafi regime for its brutal reaction to the Libyan uprising moved into high gear Friday night, after an Anglo-French attempt to spur the world into action.

Sanctions including a total arms embargo, freezing of assets and travel bans on government figures were being discussed by the UN Security Council in New York, after being proposed by France and Britain. The plan would also see the International Criminal Court begin investigating the Libyan government's attacks on protesters and consider indicting senior figures for crimes against humanity.

British diplomats said they were hopeful that "the usual UN timetable would not prevail". One added: "The urgency of this situation will be brought to bear".

Echoing comments by David Cameron, Michele Alliot-Marie, the French foreign minister, said: "We can't make do with speeches any more, we need to act". Western aides said they were encouraged by the response of China and Russia, who often reject the suggestion of interference in other states' internal matters. "They have not been blocking the way so far," one said.

A "no-fly zone" over Tripoli and Benghazi - which was requested by rebel Libyan diplomats to prevent strafe attacks from the air - looked unlikely, amid ongoing efforts to evacuate foreign nationals.

Indeed, Nato and the European Union were keen to stress the priority of rescuing European nationals stranded in Libya, with some concerned that sanctions or military intervention could trigger reprisals.

EU defence ministers also held talks with Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Nato secretary-general, aiming to increase the pressure on Col Moammar Gadhafi without endangering the lives of thousands of Westerners. "We have to be careful that nationals do not get caught in the cross fire when pressure is brought to bear," said one EU diplomat. European governments had last night reached a consensus on the need for sanctions on the Gadhafi clan and instructed officials to announce detailed measures early next week.

Amid divisions and foot-dragging by Italy, which has huge economic interests in Libya, the EU - and its foreign minister, Lady Ashton - have been criticized for failing to act quickly.

Endorsing the move to "restrictive measures" against Gadhafi, Baroness Ashton insisted: "We are putting as much pressure as possible to try to stop the violence in Libya"

Meanwhile in Geneva, the 47-nation UN Human Rights Council established the UN's own commission of inquiry to look into possible prosecutions for war crimes.

Last night there was no immediate sign of the Gadhafi family fleeing.
"Plan A is to live and die in Libya, Plan B is to live and die in Libya, Plan C is to live and die in Libya," the dictator's son, Saif al-Islam said.
                           (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)


----------



## The Bread Guy

... on the Libyan fracas:


> .... “I have instructed our officials to prepare a full range of sanctions against the Libyan regime, both in collaboration with our international partners, or unilaterally, if necessary.
> 
> “No options have been ruled out.
> 
> “Canada fully supports the United Nations Security Council on a resolution that could include a weapons embargo, individual sanctions against key Libyan officials and an asset freeze.
> 
> “The Libyan regime must and will be held accountable for its violation of human rights atrocities committed against the Libyan people.
> 
> “Canada also calls for Libya’s immediate suspension from the United Nations Human Rights Council. We are working with our allies and international partners to ensure that this suspension occurs, and will be acted on by the General Assembly.
> 
> “As well, Canada fully supports the Human Rights Council’s decision to dispatch a mission to investigate human rights violations in Libya.
> 
> “Finally, we call on the United Nations Security Council to refer the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court.
> 
> “Those responsible for ordering and carrying out atrocities against the Libyan people must be held accountable ....


----------



## 57Chevy

meanwhile....("People who don't love me don't deserve to live," he said) :

Gadhafi forces fire on protesters in Tripoli

BENGHAZI, Libya - Government paramilitary forces opened fire Friday on protesters who swarmed the streets of Tripoli in what opponents hoped would be a final push to topple Moammar Gadhafi's regime. Witnesses described multiple casualties from the fiercest violence yet in the Libyan capital.

It appeared that the regime had retained control, for now, of its major remaining stronghold. After the clashes, a defiant Gadhafi urged thousands of his supporters at a rally in the heart of the city to take up arms on his behalf.
---
---
"We are just hearing about people dying, and it's like this isn't going to end," she said. "This guy will kill until the last day of his life."

By nightfall the pro-government forces, including militias and paramilitary forces, appeared to gain the upper hand. Most protesters retreated indoors, witnesses said.

It was Gadhafi, wearing a Russian-style fur hat, who assembled thousands of cheering supporters in the square. Standing on the ramparts of a castle and shaking his fist, he vowed to open state arsenals and distribute weapons to protect his regime.

"Every Libyan individual will be armed, every Libyan tribe will be armed. So Libya will turn to hell," he said, the square packed with people waving green flags.

"People who don't love me don't deserve to live," he said.

The address was broadcast on state television and appeared to be live, with the camera zooming in on the clock looming over the square to show the time.
---
---
full article at link....
                           __________________________

Map: Libyan uprising closes in on Tripoli attached
Tripoli and the surrounding area, where Gaddafi’s forces had managed to stifle earlier protests, appear to be his last main stronghold as the revolt that has put the east under rebel control has also reportedly advanced through the west

              (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)


----------



## AIC_2K5

Don't raise Libyan hopes with promise of intervention, Mackay says


OTTAWA—Just how far will the world go to stop the bloodshed in Libya?

Probably not as far as anti-government demonstrators in the country are calling for, said Defence Minister Peter MacKay.

While the United Nations Security Council debates a long list of measures designed to punish and disarm Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi and the security forces that remain under his command, a number of nations say they are unlikely to order their military forces into the country to keep the peace.

The decade-long military slog in Afghanistan and the lukewarm global response to civilians being killed in Sudan’s Darfur region have shown that the UN’s famous Responsibility to Protect doctrine, a policy conceived in Ottawa in response to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, has “lost it’s lustre,” MacKay said.


http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/945036--don-t-raise-libyan-hopes-with-promise-of-intervention-mackay-says?bn=1

More on link.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Prominent Canadian demands that other countries actually "do something".  Hurl:

Irwin Cotler: What Canada should do about Libya
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/02/26/irwin-cotler-what-canada-should-do-about-libya/



> ...
> Accordingly, Canada as an original architect of the R2P Doctrine, should join the international community in undertaking the following action...
> 
> • Calling on the European Union, which recently revised its European Security Strategy to include a strong reference to the R2P Doctrine — and which developed “Rapid Reaction Battle Groups” for that purpose following its intervention in the Congo, to deploy such a group to Libya as soon as possible.
> • Calling on NATO to establish a no-fly zone to put an end to the bombing of civilians...
> 
> *Irwin Cotler is a Member of Parliament and the former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.*



My comment:



> How typically Canadian--calling on others, the EU and NATO, to do the actual military dirty work without us. Why would they listen?
> 
> By the way, the two EU "battle groups" have never been deployed in any sort of action. There is no way the EU would agree (agreement would have to be unanimous) to so use them now, even with fervent Canadian urging. Moreover the troop numbers for both units together are only a total of some 4,000 .
> http://www.government.fi/ajankohtaista/tiedotteet/tiedote/fi.jsp?oid=316451&c=0&toid=1946&moid=3125
> http://www.defenceiq.com/tri-service/articles/eu-debates-of-attrition-the-slow-death-of-europe-s/



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## tomahawk6

Libya is likely to split along tribal lines if Gaddafi is assasinated or leaves. With the international community freezing his assets it leaves Gaddafi no choice,but to tough it out.
On a good note the RAF and SAS/SBS rescued 150 oil workers in the Libya desert airlifting them to Malta.


----------



## 57Chevy

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Desert_Group





			
				tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> On a good note the RAF and SAS/SBS rescued 150 oil workers in the Libya desert airlifting them to Malta.



Libyan rescue: careful planning lay behind daring mission
British special forces managed to placate local militia before rounding up oil workers and transporting them to the runway
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/26/libya-british-oil-workers-military
Mark Townsend guardian.co.uk, Saturday 26 February 2011 20.38 GMT 

Extracting the hundreds of UK oil workers stranded in the remote desert oilfields of Libya had provided David Cameron with one of the greatest headaches of his premiership.

With workers trapped in remote compounds on the vast stone-and-sand plain that forms part of the Sahara desert, in areas largely controlled by armed rebels, an attempted airlift had always appeared the most likely solution.

Initially it was assumed the RAF Chinook helicopters that were spotted arriving at Luqa airport in Malta on Friday would be tasked with the rescue mission. A return trip to some of the most isolated oilfields could constitute a 1,200-mile return trip, just about within the helicopter's range. Rapid air drops using Chinooks are a regular feature of clandestine operations by special forces units in Helmand province of Afghanistan.

But several major sticking points emerged. The helicopters are only able to carry a maximum of 55 passengers and as the days passed the number of Britons reported in the desert had grown to more than 500. Any airborne mission using helicopters would also be an unpalatable risk.

Attention turned to the Hercules C-130 transport aircraft, two of which were stationed in Malta. The Hercules' ability to land and take off from short runways – they can land in a field – combined with an operating range of thousands of miles and an ability to carry up to 128 passengers – meant they were given the task.

Intelligence, understood to have been provided by special forces on the ground, had identified a number of airstrips in rebel-held territory in the east of the country and special forces units from the SAS and the Special Boat Squadron may have tried negotiating for permission to use them. Eventually a suitable desert runway located south of Benghazi was selected and secured.

The main issue was the presence of Libyan ground-to-air missile systems, despite the C-130 Hercules has a sophisticated array of anti-missile technology, which includes a warning system, infrared countermeasures and decoy flares to guard against heat-seeking devices. On 30 January 2005, an RAF C-130 was shot down by an Iraqi insurgent with an anti-aircraft gun after it had dropped SAS paratroopers.

Intelligence on Libya's defence capability and siting of missile systems will have been central to any planning. Collating the information and scouring the country for a suitable landing point – a central meeting point – from where the oil workers would be taken for rescue is believed to have taken days to plan.

A number of the compounds where oil workers were staying were reported to have been under siege by local militia forces and this will have presented another problem for those planning the operation, although there were no reports of firefights involving British troops.

Somehow British special forces managed to placate local militia, most likely by negotiation, and then succesfully rounded up the oil workers from their bases and transported them to the runway.

Although defence sources last night far refused to expand on the precise role of the SAS and SBS, it is thought that troops may have been landed in Libya by HMS Cumberland when it docked in Benghazi on Thursday and then fanned south into the country's huge desert.

The manoeuvre echoes second world war strategies by British commanders when units of the Long Range Desert Group (LRDG) mounted covert daring strikes in North Africa against enemy positions and supply dumps.

Hours before the daring operation took place the Ministry of Defence confirmed it had "pre-positioned assets" for a rescue operation. Reports claimed that there may be up to 500 Britons still in compounds scattered across the Libyan desert, prompting speculation that another rescue mission may be required.

A Foreign Office spokesman confirmed that the evacuation operation was not finished, pointing to the inevitability of more Hercules rescue flights. He said: "Nothing is compete yet, we've definitely still got people there."


----------



## MarkOttawa

Text of UNSC Resolution 1970 is here:
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10187.doc.htm

The Council is...



> ...
> “Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and taking measures under its Article 41...



Article 41:
http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter7.shtml



> The Security Council may decide what *measures not involving the use of armed force* [emphasis added] are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations.



So a no-fly zone or other military action would require a further resolution.  China? Russia?  Even India?

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## CougarKing

Isn't it about time this thread be re-named to "Libyan Civil War: the coming fall of Qaddafi?" Just a suggestion.

This topic has expanded to more than just the "Benghazi massacre topic" of more than a week ago.

Plus...

DJ Qaddafi?  :facepalm:

link



> *Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi may be reviled by many of his own people and the international community, but he's enjoying an unexpected surge of popularity -- as a music video star.
> 
> A remix of a rambling 75-minute speech Kadhafi delivered on Tuesday, set to dance music and featuring the strongman alongside footage of two gyrating girls, has gone viral on the Internet.*
> 
> It has racked up almost half a million views on the video-sharing website YouTube since it was posted three days ago.
> 
> Called "Zenga Zenga", the music video mixes Kadhafi's quotes with club beats, using lines in which he vows to fight "inch by inch, home by home, alley by alley" as the chorus for the song.
> 
> (...)



And Libyan opposition rebels take a key city near the capital:

link



> ZAWIYA, Libya - *Hundreds of armed anti-government forces backed by rebel troops who control the city closest to the capital Tripoli prepared Sunday to repel an expected offensive by forces loyal to Moammar Gadhafi surrounding Zawiya.*
> 
> The Gadhafi regime, eager to show foreign reporters that the country is calm and under their control, took visiting journalists to Zawiya, 30 miles (50 kilometres) west of Tripoli. But an Associated Press reporter on the tour confirmed the anti-government rebels are in control of the centre of the city of 200,000. They have army tanks and anti-aircraft guns mounted on pickup trucks deployed.
> 
> (...)


----------



## willellis

Wow... The comments for that video are something else as well. One of them asking where he/she can find it on DVD to play at their wedding.  :


----------



## sean m

Supposedly the Mercenaries Are from Kenya,  as  this article states:

http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/InsidePage.php?id=2000030088&cid=4

The Kenyan President has been accused of selling the country to various nations including Libya. If so then the reason for some of these mercenaries from  Kenya would seem to make sense, since President Kibaki would not want to lose a valuable source of money for himself and his cronies.

Here is the article for this, 

http://www.politicalarticles.net/blog/2008/07/14/political-corruption-mwai-kibaki-is-selling-kenya-to-libya-china-india-turkey-iran/


----------



## MarkOttawa

More Western evacuations by military:

UK, Germany fly secret missions into Libya
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/27/AR2011022700331.html



> BERLIN -- British and German military planes swooped into Libya's desert, rescuing hundreds of oil workers and civilians stranded at remote sites, as thousands of other foreigners are still stuck in Tripoli by bad weather and red tape.
> 
> The secret military missions into the turbulent North Africa country signal the readiness of Western nations to disregard Libya's territorial integrity when it comes to the safety of their citizens.
> 
> Three British Royal Air Force planes plucked 150 stranded civilians from multiple locations in the eastern Libyan desert before flying them to Malta on Sunday, the British Defense Ministry said in a statement. One of the RAF Hercules aircraft appeared to have suffered minor damage from small arms fire, Defence Secretary Liam Fox said.
> 
> The rescue follows a similar secret commando raid Saturday by British Special Forces that got another 150 oil workers from the remote Libyan desert.
> 
> Separately, Germany said its air force had evacuated 132 people also from the desert during a secret military mission on Saturday.
> 
> German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said Sunday that two German military planes landed on a private runway belonging to the Wintershall AG company, evacuating 22 Germans and 112 others and flying them to the Greek island of Crete.
> 
> Another 18 German citizens were rescued by the British military in a separate military operation Saturday that targeted remote oil installations in the Libyan desert, Westerwelle said. He said around 100 other German citizens are still in Libya and the government was trying to get them out as quickly as possible...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## PPCLI Guy

Am I the only one who is fed up with the uproar about evacuation of Canadians?  The bleating comes from people who have knowingly put themselves at risk (for abundant compensation), and who happily jump on the "bloated civil service" bandwagon...which directly leads to understaffed Embassies.  The political posturing from the Opposition is equally suspect - they would have complained just as bitterly had the government decided to invest in a more robust DFAIT.

Sometimes, people have to take responsibility for their own decisions, like deciding to work in a less than stable country such as Libya.


----------



## GAP

No, you are not the only one....this posturing is really getting tiring....


----------



## The Bread Guy

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Am I the only one who is fed up with the uproar about evacuation of Canadians?  The bleating comes from people who have knowingly put themselves at risk (for abundant compensation), and who happily jump on the "bloated civil service" bandwagon...which directly leads to understaffed Embassies.  The political posturing from the Opposition is equally suspect - they would have complained just as bitterly had the government decided to invest in a more robust DFAIT.
> 
> Sometimes, people have to take responsibility for their own decisions, like deciding to work in a less than stable country such as Libya.


Even the _Globe & Mail_ is taking this line - highlights mine:


> .... Obviously, the Canadian government must try to help as much as it can in such situations. It needs to work with other governments, as it apparently did in this case, to negotiate space for its own nationals on rescue flights and ships. It needs to try, as it also did with respect to the Libyan evacuation, to get a plane there to help evacuate its citizens. But when its efforts founder, is it really evidence of abandonment or incompetence? *At the end of the day, it’s Canadians themselves, and in some cases the companies they work for, who are ultimately responsible for their own well-being*.


----------



## sean m

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/02/28/world-libya.html

The U.S. military is repositioning its naval and air forces around Libya to provide "flexibility once decisions are made," a Pentagon spokesman said.

Does Anyone Feel that this is a good idea of the United States if they do decide to go in, They have not even been asked by those in Libya to help them through military intervention. If they do decide to send in the naval, air or army forces into the country I feel that this could backlash and cause problems for the United States and the West.  Does Anyone feel that Canada should be involved militarily in this continuing violent escalition of violence. What bis your thought


----------



## OldSolduer

I'm sure Bob Rae could have done much better.....


----------



## CougarKing

link




> *The United States said it was prepared to offer "any kind of assistance" to Libyans seeking to overthrow the regime of strongman Moamer Kadhafi as they set up a transitional body.*
> 
> As forces opposed to the longest-serving Arab leader took control of several western Libyan towns, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton echoed the calls of world leaders, including President Barack Obama, for him to quit.
> 
> "We are just at the beginning of what will follow Kadhafi," she said.
> 
> "First we have to see the end of his regime and with no further bloodshed," she continued, noting Washington is eager for his ouster "as soon as possible."
> 
> The top US diplomat spoke as she prepared to leave for a ministerial-level meeting of the UN High Commission on Human Rights on Monday, and for bilateral talks with many of her counterparts about the crisis in Libya.
> 
> Meanwhile, The New York Times reported late Sunday that US and European officials discussed plans to impose a no-fly zone over Libya to prevent further killings of civilians by troops loyal to Kadhafi.
> 
> The newspaper cited an unnamed senior administration official as saying that no decision had been made.
> 
> Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said Sunday that a key friendship treaty signed between Italy and Libya in 2008 was "de facto suspended."
> 
> According to The Times, the accord contains a non-aggression clause that some analysts said complicated Italy?s position in the event of international military intervention in Libya.
> 
> *US administration officials said Sunday that they were also discussing whether the US military could disrupt communications to prevent Colonel Kadhafi from broadcasting in Libya, the paper said.
> 
> In addition, the administration was looking at whether the military could be used to set up a corridor in neighboring Tunisia or Egypt to assist refugees, the report noted.*
> 
> "I think it is way too soon to tell how this is going to play out. We are going to be ready and prepared to offer any kind of assistance that anyone wishes to have from the US," Clinton told reporters, noting Washington was in touch with the Libyan opposition.
> 
> Two senior US lawmakers urged Washington to recognize any transitional government and supply it with weapons and humanitarian assistance to oust Kadhafi, who has ruled Libya with an iron fist for four decades.
> 
> *"We ought to recognize the provisional government as the legitimate government of Libya and we ought to give that government certainly humanitarian assistance and military arms... to give them the wherewithal to fight on behalf of the people of Libya against a cruel dictator," Senator Joe Lieberman told CNN.*
> 
> Lieberman was speaking alongside Republican Senator John McCain from Egypt, where a popular uprising swept president Hosni Mubarak from power earlier this month after nearly 30 years of autocratic rule.
> 
> McCain urged Obama, his former rival in the 2008 presidential campaign, to "get tough" and make it clear that Libyan officials involved in attacks on their own people would face prosecution for war crimes.
> 
> The UN Security Council has imposed a travel ban and assets freeze on Kadhafi's regime and ordered an investigation into possible crimes against humanity by the Libyan leader, the first time such a decision has been made unanimously.
> 
> On Friday, Obama announced unilateral sanctions targeting Kadhafi and his inner circle in a move intended to encourage defections and peel away loyalists defending his rule.
> 
> *Clinton has signed an order revoking the US visas of Libyan officials and others linked to the violence against civilians. New visas will now be denied as a matter of policy.*


----------



## Edward Campbell

Just about the last thing Libya (or Tunisia or even Egypt and Bahrain, which "matter" much more) needs, right now, is foreign, especially US, intervention.

It is not clear who may end up running Libya, nor is it clear, to me anyway, why it matters a whole lot. We, the big, US led Western "we" and the even bigger Sino-Indo-American led "we" do care about Egypt and Bahrain and a few other places that are seething with discontent - Pakistan, too, maybe? - but not about Libya.

These populist _movements_ may well bring on fundamentalist _Islamist_ government - that was the result of the last really "free and fair" elections (1991) in relatively sophisticated Algeria. Libya has, for over 60 years, been behind its North African neighbours in most socio-economic measures; it depends upon Egypt and others for a steady supply of educated professional and technical people to "operate" the country. It is quite possible that a new military _junta_ of some sort will take over and it _may_ decide to reform and modernize the country - or it may decide that further decades of political repression and socio-economic stagnation are in Libya's best interests.

In any event, it is of little concern to us ... whoever "us" is.


----------



## sean m

With Respect,  Since you are a man with far more wisdom and knowledge and have contributed a lot more to our country and society as a whole than I . I feel your statment in regards to little concern to "us"  is not correct, I am understanding you correctly.  It seems to me that when ever political, social and other forms of opression do matter to us, since it threatens our security and the global community as well.  I think that this notion of "us" and " them"  is what has led to show much conflict in the world. We have the opportunity to help make the middle east better so I feel we should not jsut blow this opportunity away, like blowing out a candle. You are without a doubt right that any result for better or worse could come about in the country. lets at least work with all our might to help make sure that a positive result occurs.  Who ever could have thought the recent events in the middle east would have ever happened. If those individuals who over threw the regimesthere went with the mentality "what the government does is little concern to us.




			
				E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Just about the last thing Libya (or Tunisia or even Egypt and Bahrain, which "matter" much more) needs, right now, is foreign, especially US, intervention.
> 
> It is not clear who may end up running Libya, nor is it clear, to me anyway, why it matters a whole lot. We, the big, US led Western "we" and the even bigger Sino-Indo-American led "we" do care about Egypt and Bahrain and a few other places that are seething with discontent - Pakistan, too, maybe? - but not about Libya.
> 
> These populist _movements_ may well bring on fundamentalist _Islamist_ government - that was the result of the last really "free and fair" elections (1991) in relatively sophisticated Algeria. Libya has, for over 60 years, been behind its North African neighbours in most socio-economic measures; it depends upon Egypt and others for a steady supply of educated professional and technical people to "operate" the country. It is quite possible that a new military _junta_ of some sort will take over and it _may_ decide to reform and modernize the country - or it may decide that further decades of political repression and socio-economic stagnation are in Libya's best interests.
> 
> In any event, it is of little concern to us ... whoever "us" is.


----------



## Edward Campbell

sean m, I rather admire your passion to "help" people, but my sense of humankind's history is that if people do not, perhaps cannot or maybe just will not help themselves then all the "help" in the world, from others, is wasted.

It is possible, maybe even probable, that the people of Libya (and Tunisia and Egypt, and ... and ... and ...) are, finally, taking a first step towards helping themselves; if so then I say _Bravo!_; if not, well, better luck next time.

Maybe, just maybe, if enough countries in North Africa and the Middle East and West Asia all decide to "help themselves" at about the same time - say in the same decade - then we _might_, just might see some change and some of that change _might_ be in a positive direction ("positive direction" being defined as good for the liberal, secular West and the conservative, secular East). But it is just as likely that change in a "positive" direction will come only after the people endure a generation or two of radical, fundamentalist, _Islamist_/_jihadist_ government with the consequential tyranny and bloodshed from external and internal wars.

I think the big, Big, BIG issue is oil supply - for America, Asia and Europe. 







Canada, Nigeria, Russia and Venezuela are key players. It _might_ be easier to "help" the Nigerians, Russians and Venezuelans "help themselves" than to worry about liberty and democracy North Africa and the Middle East. For me ... well I'll be happy if the top-ten big oil producers are stable and keep key pipelines and sea-lanes open.


----------



## GAP

I think you will find that many of the countries in turmoil will think they can dabble with radical, fundamentalist, Islamist/jihadist government, and change if needed....

Iranians thought so, to their dismay. Maybe these populations have to learn that radical, fundamentalist, Islamist/jihadist governments do not free them. 

The "West" trying to direct them towards something else is not likely to work very successfully. The "West" has an agenda, and so do "radical, fundamentalist, Islamist/jihadist governments"....


----------



## MarkOttawa

More on "no-fly":

Govt working on Libyan no-fly zone: PM
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h6bleBDGxtuaeN9aYdhiaZU--CfQ?docId=CNG.0c072a7a730504b85eecf4e0f0fdd530.441



> LONDON — The government is working with its allies to draw up a plan for a military no-fly zone over Libya, Prime Minister David Cameron said Monday.
> 
> Cameron told parliament the talks were motivated by the threat of "further appalling steps" being taken by Moamer Kadhafi to crack down on the most serious challenge to his rule in four decades.
> 
> "We must not tolerate this regime using military force against its own people," Cameron said.
> 
> "In that context I have asked the ministry of defence and the Chief of the Defence Staff to work with our allies on plans for a military no-fly zone."..



Italy says would consider Libya no-fly zone request
http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews/idAFLDE71R25N20110228



> * Italy has closest NATO airfields to Tripoli
> 
> * Frattini says non-aggression pact suspended
> 
> * Italy gradually raising its voice against Gaddafi
> 
> By Silvia Aloisi
> 
> ROME, Feb 28 (Reuters) - Italy would look at allowing bases in the Mediterranean to be used by allies *if there were a United Nations-backed deal to enforce a no-fly zone* [emphasis added] over Libya, Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said on Monday.
> 
> "If and when the Security Council members took the decision, then we would consider it," Frattini told Reuters in an interview, but added that there was so far no agreement over deploying international military force.
> 
> "Italian bases are the only ones that could be used as they are the closest to Libya. But we are not at that point yet," Frattini told Reuters by phone from Geneva where he is attending a meeting of the U.N. Human Rights Council.
> 
> "We think a no-fly zone is a useful measure but there is no consensus among members of the Security Council over its enforcement, which would require the use of war planes," he said. He said that several countries felt that for now, such a measure was premature...
> 
> ...NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen distanced himself from talk of an imminent implementation of a no-fly zone, saying the focus should be on measures already adopted by the Security Council to isolate Gaddafi's government...



Note the current UNSC situation:
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/99510/post-1021950.html#msg1021950



> ...
> The Council is...
> 
> Quote
> 
> '...
> “Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and taking measures under its Article 41...'
> 
> 
> Article 41:
> http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter7.shtml
> 
> Quote
> 
> "The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force [emphasis added] are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations."
> 
> So a no-fly zone or other military action would require a further resolution.  China? Russia?  Even India?



Meanwhile:

U.S. to position aircraft carrier off Libya as counter to Gadhafi
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/02/28/109564/us-to-position-aircraft-carrier.html



> BENGHAZI, Libya — The United States is moving naval and air forces, including an aircraft carrier, into the Mediterranean Sea near Libya, U.S. officials said Monday, as the Obama administration and its allies consider how to respond to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's brutal efforts to suppress a widespread rebellion among civilians and army troops...
> 
> U.S. officials said no decision had been made about how the U.S. forces would be used, but that one option under consideration is the imposition of a no-fly zone designed to prevent Gadhafi from using aircraft as he fought the rebels.
> 
> “We have planners working and various contingency plans and I think it's safe to say as part of that we're repositioning forces to be able to provide for that flexibility once decisions are made,” Marine Col. David Lapan, a Pentagon spokesman, told reporters.
> 
> Another official, who requested anonymity to discuss the issue, said the pre-positioning of military assets “doesn’t mean to suggest that there will be military intervention.”
> 
> At the same time, he said, consideration of imposing a no-fly zone “*has picked up a little speed* [emphasis added].”
> 
> Gadhafi opponents in Libya's second-largest city, Benghazi, have said they oppose foreign military intervention, a message they reiterated in comments on Twitter after the Pentagon moves became public...



So the US and UK are thinking in a NATO context and don't mention the UNSC.  Italy at this point says UNSC authourization needed (and provides best basing options for non-carrier aircraft).

Questions:  Would NATO approve a no-fly without the UNSC (cf. the NATO air attack on Serbia)?  Would the US, UK and others act even without NATO agreement, much less a UNSC one?  Under what conditions would our gov't support a no-fly--*and would it contribute CF-18s*?  When will our gov't indicate its position on these issues?  Hah!

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## CougarKing

Mr. Campbell,

I am surprised that neither Sudan (more South Sudan which will be its own nation-state soon) nor Angola are on that map you posted regarding oil sources.

Angola was described by Dambisa Moyo in her book Dead Aid as having surpassed Saudi Arabia as "China's single biggest supplier in oil." {{p. 104, Moyo}} To quote a figure, "In 2006, 64 percent of Sudan's crude oil exports went to China." {{105, Moyo}}

In the book, China in Africa, Chris Alden makes similar comments about the importance Sudan, Nigeria and Angola in helping to supply China's energy needs. He states that since 1996, "over 15 billion had been invested by China (in Sudan), primarily in the oil industry and related infrastructure projects." {{61, Alden}}

Sorry for the little tangent. Just was surprised by the lack of Sudan or Angola in that map.


----------



## The Bread Guy

A bit more on the American forces angle, shared with the usual caveats....


> The United States military “is in the planning and preparing mode” on Libya, and will be able to provide the full range of options for national leaders, Pentagon spokesman Marine Corps Col. Dave Lapan said here today.
> 
> The U.S. military is moving naval and air forces to the region, he said.
> 
> President Barack Obama asked the military to prepare these options as the situation in Libya gets worse. News reports indicate while Libyan ruler Moammar Gadhafi is attacking rebels in and around the capital of Tripoli, anti-regime forces hold the east.
> 
> In a Feb. 26 call to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Obama said: “When a leader’s only means of staying in power is to use mass violence against his own people, he has lost the legitimacy to rule and needs to do what is right for his country by leaving now,” according to the White House.
> 
> The Defense Department has not been directly tasked for any mission, Lapan said.
> 
> “We have planners working various contingency plans,” he said. “It’s safe to say as a part of that, we’re re-positioning forces to provide for that flexibility. We are re-positioning forces in the region to provide options and flexibility.”
> 
> Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton also urged Gadhafi to stop killing his own people and leave. She also said the United States government has been reaching out to Libyan rebels.
> 
> “We’ve been reaching out to many different Libyans who are attempting to organize in the east and as the revolution moves westward, there as well,” Clinton said at Andrews Air Force Base yesterday. “I think it’s way too soon to tell how this is going to play out, but we’re going to be ready and prepared to offer any kind of assistance that anyone wishes to have from the United States.”
> 
> Lapan ruled nothing out. “Again, it goes back to having a full range of options available,” he said. “So those forces could be used in any number of ways. Re-positioning them provides that flexibility so they can be used if needed.”


----------



## kstart

I'm concerned though about Tripoli, and Gaddafi's cult-like, meglomaniac character-- I'm worried about others trapped in that city and the mounting pressures and how Gaddafi will respond to that, and e.g. if food supplies run low, hopefully others abandon and allow others to get out (who are guarding the periphery. . .).  I think it's appropriate that there are others on standby (last resort).  I worry about things like mustard gas, and I hope he doesn't have access to that-- what if he is pushed to suicide -- in his nuttiness, would he take others down, dramatically, i.e., the one's loyal to him. . . like the case of other cult-figures even. . .?  Not sure how it's going to play out?  

It looks like e.g. in Braida, the Libyan people are helping themselves, organizing, interesting adherence to Geneva conventions re: mercenary captives.  It looks like there is an educated class of people involved, likewise in Benghazi. . . though it's between Council and Provisional Government not yet set up, but regional stability is working. . .civil stability.  Even the Elders having control, e.g. even radical youth extremists, are honouring the Elders.  Benghazi, seems to have civil control, Council, but Provisional government is trying to be worked out. . .?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704520504576162710080404774.html



> In a Libyan Town, Elders Take Charge
> At a Town Hall Meeting in Baida, Prominent Citizens Mark a Return to Freedom and a Shift Away From Youth Movement
> 
> By CHARLES LEVINSON
> BAIDA, Libya—A day after the last forces loyal to besieged Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi in the country's east were defeated, this coastal town's elders met to begin rebuilding.
> 
> Masouda al-Alamy, a distinguished professor of animal science at the city's Omar Mukhtar University, called the meeting to order on Wednesday, her voice cracking with emotion. "Today, we meet and can speak freely for the first time," she said. "For the first time we feel we are free."
> 
> At Baida's airport on Wednesday, civilians examine debris that was left after some of the fiercest fighting during the uprising in eastern Libya.
> Around 200 locals, including tribal sheikhs, university professors and prominent businessmen, met in a town meeting hall with green plush seats. It was built in the time of the monarchy to house the Libyan parliament, but more recently it was the meeting place for the town's Revolutionary Peoples' Committee, the closest thing Libyans have had to representative government under Mr. Gadhafi.
> 
> "We were a hopeless people, an immoral country forgotten to the world, and in three days all that has changed," said Abdullah Mortady, an architect. "For 42 years we didn't speak. For 42 years this whole country was only for one man and his sons."
> 
> Top items on the agenda at the meeting included forming committees to take charge of security, food and fuel distribution, reopening schools, and collecting weapons pillaged during the protests. Another key challenge facing these elders: how to rein in the revolutionary zeal of the region's youth, charged with emotion after days of violent battle culminating in a historic victory.
> 
> Mr. Mortady came home on the first night of the uprising to find his 16- and 19-year-old sons gone. His worried wife told him they were in the streets protesting. When they returned home well after midnight, they were both armed with guns from pillaged police stations.
> 
> The Battle for Baida
> Anti-Gadhafi protesters demonstrated outside City Hall Wednesday in Baida.
> "I was very scared, but now I'm quite proud," Mr. Mortady said.
> Like youth all over eastern Libya, Mr. Mortady's sons had transformed themselves from peaceful protesters into armed pro-democracy rebels in a period of about 48 hours. That is a worrying specter for many of the town's elders, who fear a breakdown of law and order now that police and army forces have been replaced with bands of young revolutionaries.
> 
> The elders stepped in quickly to take responsibility for the hundreds of pro-Gadhafi soldiers captured by the young pro-democracy fighters in recent days. Masoud Abdullah, a professor of management science at the local university, and his older cousin, a prominent tribal leader in the area, were among those who called an urgent meeting to decide what they were going to do after the first batch of prisoners were taken Saturday morning.
> 
> "The young people wanted to kill them, and we said no way," Mr. Abdullah said.
> Outside that meeting, angry youth had heckled their elders. "They called us hypocrites and traitors," Mr. Abdullah said. "One kid yelled at me, 'They killed my two brothers. How can you forgive them?' "
> 
> On Wednesday morning, the pro-democracy fighters' anger was still evident. At Baida's airport, the site of some of the fiercest fighting of the uprising in eastern Libya, 30-year-old ambulance driver Tareq Tajori pointed to dried bloodstains on the asphalt outside the terminal. "That was my friend," he said. "They shot him. Now they need to be shot."
> But when the elders ordered restraint, the youth obeyed, thanks to a strong tribal order that still holds sway here, and which many say will help ensure order as Mr. Gadhafi's government melts away. "When the tribes say stop, the youth stop," Mr. Abdullah said.
> 
> Among those who have assumed a prominent role in Baida is Mr. Gadhafi's former Minister of Justice Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, who resigned when firing on protesters began.
> But other figures associated with Mr. Gadhafi's government are less welcome. When a group of town leaders retreated to a private annex on Wednesday, a shouting match erupted. They grabbed one man by the collar and ejected him from the room.
> "He worked for the secret police," said Hassan Abdel Razaq, among those in the meeting. "He used to send reports for the intelligence service on all the townspeople. There will be no place for people like him in the new country we are building."
> 
> Among those who have assumed a prominent role in Baida is Mr. Gadhafi's former Minister of Justice Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, who resigned when firing on protesters began.
> But other figures associated with Mr. Gadhafi's government are less welcome. When a group of town leaders retreated to a private annex on Wednesday, a shouting match erupted. They grabbed one man by the collar and ejected him from the room.
> "He worked for the secret police," said Hassan Abdel Razaq, among those in the meeting. "He used to send reports for the intelligence service on all the townspeople. There will be no place for people like him in the new country we are building."
> 
> The prisoners taken during the uprising, which in Baida number around 300, are being held in secret locations around the town to keep them out of the hands of youths seeking revenge. On Wednesday, a group of Western journalists was taken to one of those locations, an elementary school on the town's outskirts.
> 
> The three-car convoy, trying to shake a car driven by unknown youngsters, wound in and out of side roads, made U-turns, split up and rejoined. "We are very worried," said Ahmed Jabreel, a Libyan diplomat until recently posted to the United Nations in New York, who is now on the side of the pro-democracy rebels in Baida. "People are very angry here and they want revenge, but this is not our way."
> 
> At the school, a few young men with heavy machine guns and ammunition slung around their necks stood sentry.
> 
> About 100 prisoners, some bandaged, lay sprawled shoulder to shoulder on mattresses in the school's classrooms. Most of the prisoners spoke Arabic and said they were from Libya, while four said they were from Chad.
> 
> The elders said they were contacting detainees' families and tribal leaders to come pick them up. "We are not killers," said Mr. Abdel-Jalil, the former justice minister. "Gadhafi made us killers."
> Write to Charles Levinson at charles.levinson@wsj.com


----------



## Snakedoc

I don't think this has been posted yet.  Looks like the CF is sending a 13-member recce and medic team to Malta now in addition to the planes on the ground.

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110228/libya-evacuations-canadians-110228/


Canadian military team deployed near Libya

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Mon. Feb. 28 2011 5:43 PM ET

The Canadian military has sent a reconnaissance team and medics to Malta, as Western countries weigh their options for a possible intervention in Libya, including a ‘no-fly zone' to protect civilians. 

The 13-member team landed on Monday along with two new C-130J cargo planes and two C-17 transports. The planes will be used to help get foreign nationals out of the increasingly chaotic North African country. 

"A team of Canadian Forces is now on the ground in Malta. We continue to provide assistance to those who need it and we encourage Canadians who need further assistance to contact the Department of Foreign Affairs," Defence Minister Peter MacKay confirmed during question period Monday. 

The Canadian Press is reporting that special forces teams are also preparing to deploy. 

The United Kingdom have used commandos to escort their transports into Libya and protected them while on the ground. 

One British plane was fired on during an evacuation and took minor damage. 

Earlier Monday, the federal government issued tough sanctions against Libya on Monday and renewed calls for Col. Moammar Gadhafi to resign, with Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon saying it was "the only acceptable course of action." 

Cannon joined the chorus of world leaders urging Gadhafi to heed the call of protesters and step down. 

"A tide of change is sweeping the Middle East and North Africa. Leaders who try to defy or repress the tide, like Gadhafi or the leadership in Iran, will eventually be overwhelmed," Cannon told the United Nations in Geneva, Monday afternoon. 

Earlier in the day, Government House Leader John Baird released more details about sanctions Canada is imposing on Libya and the Gadhafi regime. 

He said Ottawa is freezing any Canadian assets belonging to Gadhafi and his regime and placing a ban on financial dealings with Libya, saying the actions will help end "the appalling violence." 

Baird said the Harper government hopes the sanctions will help force Gadhafi from power quickly. 

Baird refused to go into details about how much money in Canada was linked to the Gadhafi regime, or how long it had been here, citing "operational" concerns. 

But he said "there were specific instances brought to our attention." 

Speaking to CTV's Power Play, Baird said the assets of Gadhafi, the Libyan government, the Libyan central back and those of 15 "close associates" have been frozen by the Canadian government. 

"We don't want that money to be stolen from the Libyan people, we don't want it to be used to spread the appalling violence we've seen in the capital," he said Monday. 

The Harper government is also banning any Canadian company operating in Libya from making any transactions with the Libyan government, its agencies or the central bank. 

However, companies will not be banned from operating in Libya, Baird said. 

"We are hoping the hard line taken by the international community and the even harder line taken by our government against the current Libyan regime will bring about change quickly and the negative impact of these sanctions will be limited and will be very short term," Baird said. 

He added that the situation in Libya is "deteriorating rapidly" and since Canadian companies are now evacuating their workers, it's unlikely any organizations would be looking at expanding any time soon, anyway. 

However, Baird said he hoped the sanctions would be "short-term" and regime change will occur "very quickly." 

The UN Security Council voted unanimously over the weekend to impose an arms embargo and urged member states to freeze the assets of Gadhafi, four of his sons and a daughter. 

Prime Minister Stephen Harper then said Canada would add to those restrictions by banning financial transactions with the Libyan government and its agencies. 

Canadians continued to flee Libya Monday by any and all means of transportation possible, amid the ongoing political turmoil. A total of 250 Canadians have now been evacuated from the country, Baird said. 

Harper's communications director Dimitri Soudas sent out a message on Twitter Monday morning that 33 Canadians were aboard British ship HMS Cumberland that was approaching Malta, in the Mediterranean Sea. 

The ship, which was "due to arrive in Malta shortly," was carrying a number of expatriates from other countries as well. 

Soudas also wrote on his Twitter feed that a Canadian Forces C17 cargo plane had carried a load of evacuees, including one Canadian, to Malta. 

CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife reported that the C17 flew into Libya's isolated southwest region Monday morning. 

"The C17 military cargo plane has just landed in Malta carrying Filipino, Vietnamese, Thais, one German and one Canadian," Fife said, adding that Canada has two C130 Hercules aircraft and two C-17s based in Malta.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Speculation only:  could the CF team be a prelude to fulfilling this promise?


> On top of sanctions and ongoing evacuations, Canada is also prepared to provide humanitarian assistance to the people of Libya, Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon has told the UN Human Rights Council.
> 
> At a meeting Monday in Geneva, Cannon told council members that Canada was "concerned with the looming humanitarian disaster in Libya" and was ready to help but offered few details about what that assistance might look like ....



Meanwhile, this from AFP on a mentioned (possible) no-fly zone:


> A military no-fly zone over Libya is unlikely to get off the ground as several allies are balking at the plan, Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said Monday.
> 
> "In terms of the no-fly zone, there doesn't seem to be consensus among our allies," Cannon told a teleconference from Geneva, declining to offer Canada's position.
> 
> "There are too many elements still not known, so I would not want to offer an opinion at this time," he said. "We still don't have enough information."
> 
> Earlier, British Prime Minister David Cameron said Britain was working with its allies to draw up a plan for a military no-fly zone over Libya.
> 
> Cameron told parliament the talks were motivated by the threat of "further appalling steps" being taken by Moamer Kadhafi to crack down on the most serious challenge to his rule in four decades ....


----------



## willellis

I was just watching the BBC news and there was an interview with Ghafaffi. In the interview, he stated that " there are no demonstrations " and that " all my people love me. "  This man has some serious issues with denial. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12603259


----------



## Edward Campbell

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> Mr. Campbell,
> 
> I am surprised that neither Sudan (more South Sudan which will be its own nation-state soon) nor Angola are on that map you posted regarding oil sources.
> 
> Angola was described by Dambisa Moyo in her book Dead Aid as having surpassed Saudi Arabia as "China's single biggest supplier in oil." {{p. 104, Moyo}} To quote a figure, "In 2006, 64 percent of Sudan's crude oil exports went to China." {{105, Moyo}}
> 
> In the book, China in Africa, Chris Alden makes similar comments about the importance Sudan, Nigeria and Angola in helping to supply China's energy needs. He states that since 1996, "over 15 billion had been invested by China (in Sudan), primarily in the oil industry and related infrastructure projects." {{61, Alden}}
> 
> Sorry for the little tangent. Just was surprised by the lack of Sudan or Angola in that map.




I think, in fairness, that my source (Oil & Gas Journal) (I should have cited it) highlighted only the world's top 20 producers (7 billion barrels appears to be the smallest of the proven reserves it shows). I'm not certain of the age of that data and we (should) know that there is a mass of _guesstimated_ data about reserves out there. It may be that Sudan and Angola are significant producers, right now, but we may not have well documented data about their reserves.

It is hard for China to "horn in" on e.g. Saudi Arabia where domestic and (generally) Western interests are well established everywhere. We know, also, that China is taking a big slice of "new" oil in Central Asia and that it has its eyes of Russian oil, too.


----------



## a_majoor

A promising thing to note is the most radical of Islamic organizations (the Al-Qaida) hasn't been involved in these protests (either in Libya or elsewhere), and even the Muslim Brotherhood's role in Egypt seems to be muted (although we could be unpleasantly surprised).

Lybia undergoing a revolution may actually be in our national interest, since the trouble making ability of Gaddafi will be radically reduced. Given our very limited resources, I say "watch and shoot" as far as a response is concerned.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Thucydides said:
			
		

> A promising thing to note is the most radical of Islamic organizations (the Al-Qaida) hasn't been involved in these protests (either in Libya or elsewhere), and *even the Muslim Brotherhood's role in Egypt seems to be muted* (although we could be unpleasantly surprised).


Indeed low key, but not zero.  The International Crisis Group think tank (partially funded by CIDA) has a report out on the events in Egypt (overview here, full report - 41 pg 2 MB PDF - here) that reads more like a magazine account than a think tank study.  There's examples of how the MB has been helping out in the streets while not hogging the limelight.



			
				Thucydides said:
			
		

> Given our very limited resources, I say "watch and shoot" as far as a response is concerned.


Here here.


----------



## sean m

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Indeed low key, but not zero.  The International Crisis Group think tank (partially funded by CIDA) has a report out on the events in Egypt (overview here, full report - 41 pg 2 MB PDF - here) that reads more like a magazine account than a think tank study.  There's examples of how the MB has been helping out in the streets while not hogging the limelight.
> Here here.
> [/quote
> 
> Very True Milnews.ca, on the frontline documentary about the Muslim Brotherhood they were shown providing security, medical treatment, they basically defended the protesters from the pro Mubarak crowds.   Groups like the muslim brotherhood and Hezbollah really seem to know how to win support of the people. This works as a disadvantage to us since they also gain increased power and no one truly knows their end goals not even some of their own members.
> 
> At least we can be more thankful that any radical Muslim groups in Libya have not performed as well as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.  Yet the Libyan have greater worries when gaddafi and his sons promise to go down fighting.
> 
> Here is a video showing Saif  Gaddafi  promoting killing of civilians by mercenaries.
> 
> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5ad_1298859291


----------



## AJFitzpatrick

willellis said:
			
		

> I was just watching the BBC news and there was an interview with Ghafaffi. In the interview, he stated that " there are no demonstrations " and that " all my people love me. "  This man has some serious issues with denial.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12603259



Well if they don't love him they aren't his people are they now.  I wonder if he is truly mad or if he is just playing for time, maintaining morale amongst "his people" and working on his exit strategy.


----------



## daftandbarmy

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Speculation only:  could the CF team be a prelude to fulfilling this promise?
> Meanwhile, this from AFP on a mentioned (possible) no-fly zone:



I just saw a news clip showing the rebels manning about 6 x twin 14.5mm AA units, with about a zillion rounds of ammo. My thoughts, in this order, were:

1) these things will do more to ensure a no fly zone than the UN ever will, and
2) why don't we have anything like that to deploy against air attack?


----------



## willellis

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I just saw a news clip showing the rebels manning about 6 x twin 14.5mm AA units, with about a zillion rounds of ammo. My thoughts, in this order, were:
> 
> 1) these things will do more to ensure a no fly zone than the UN ever will, and
> 2) why don't we have anything like that to deploy against air attack?



Where were they mounted out of curiosity?

My thoughts on yours; CF-18s are our defense against air target aren't they? I'm not well versed in our domestic defenses, so please advise if I am mistaken.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

We got rid of all of our air defence assets (ground).
No more ADATS, no more Sky Guard


----------



## SupersonicMax

willellis said:
			
		

> Where were they mounted out of curiosity?
> 
> My thoughts on yours; CF-18s are our defense against air target aren't they? I'm not well versed in our domestic defenses, so please advise if I am mistaken.



Well, normally we layer our defence...  We don't bank on 1 platform for everything.


----------



## willellis

Tried a PM supersonicmax, but you box is full.


----------



## MarkOttawa

This seems rather wretched excess given the likely current state of Libyan air defences, esp. in the east of the country (usual copyright disclaimer):

A no-fly zone over Libya would be a complex operation
To establish a no-fly zone, the U.S. and its allies would need to bomb Libya's air defense system and devote hundreds of aircraft to patrol the country, military officers say.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/middleeast/la-fg-libya-no-fly-20110301,0,1283071.story



> Reporting from Washington —
> Although White House and European leaders have repeatedly threatened to establish a no-fly zone over Libya, such a complex operation could require hundreds of aircraft and a bombing campaign to neutralize the country's air defense system, current and retired U.S. military officers say.
> 
> Libya's military is considered no match for those of the U.S. and its allies, but it would take a large-scale Western effort to establish round-the-clock patrols over Libyan airspace to deter further attacks on rebels, the U.S. officers said.
> 
> "This is all doable," retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Michael M. Dunn, former vice director for strategic plans and policy for the Pentagon's Joint Staff, said of creating a no-fly zone.
> 
> But "the simple fact of the matter is that it's not simple," he said.
> 
> There is little evidence that consideration of a no-fly zone has moved beyond the conceptual stage in Washington or in European capitals, where officials seem to be hoping, at least for now, that the threat alone will deter the Libyan air force from attacking protesters...
> 
> If a no-fly zone is implemented, one of the biggest worries for U.S. planners will be Libya's surface-to-air missile batteries along its coastline, especially its so-called SA-6 missiles, which, though designed years ago by the Soviet Union, remain able to shoot down U.S. and European fighters, several analysts said.
> 
> Libya is believed to have about 50 SA-6 missiles, which are easy to move to avoid detection. Pentagon planners probably would seek to neutralize the SA-6s by warning Libya's military not to target NATO aircraft but also with airstrikes against batteries that took threatening actions, such as activating their radar, the officers said...
> 
> In the initial stages of a no-fly zone over Libya, air defense batteries might test NATO pilots. With Kadafi and his supporters desperately clinging to power, there is also the possibility that at least some Libyan fighters would attempt to engage NATO aircraft, several officers said. The Libyan air force flies Vietnam-era, Soviet-designed MIG fighters that are not considered much of a threat to U.S. aircraft.
> 
> Even so, retired Air Force Lt. Gen. David A. Deptula said, "If you are going to do this, you have to be prepared for the possibility that aircraft are going to be engaged in combat."
> 
> To carry out patrols over Libyan airspace 24 hours a day, the U.S and its allies would need hundreds of aircraft, including fighters and refueling tankers, Dunn said. The U.S. could reduce the number of aircraft required by flying only during the day, when attacks on anti-government rebels are most likely, or by going after only Libyan airplanes, not helicopters, he said.
> 
> Moving hundreds of aircraft to air bases around Libya would take several weeks, but it could be done without too much effect on U.S. combat operations in Afghanistan. It would not be possible to sustain a no-fly zone using fighters flying from U.S. aircraft carriers, Dunn said.
> 
> Before the U.S. and its allies could begin positioning aircraft, they would need consent from governments in countries near Libya to use bases, a hurdle that at a minimum would require winning U.N. authorization for the operation, as well as an endorsement from NATO.
> 
> To minimize flight times to Libya, it would be vital to have access to air bases in southern Italy, including a large installation in Naples, and the U.S. might also seek permission from Greece, Egypt or Tunisia, Dunn said.
> 
> Italy would look at allowing bases in the Mediterranean to be used by allies only if the operation was authorized by the United Nations, Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said Monday.



As for the Brits (*and Russians*):
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Libya-Protests-RAF-Typhoons-Could-Enforce-No-Fly-Zone-Over-Libya/Article/201103115943119?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15943119_Libya_Protests%3A_RAF_Typhoons_Could_Enforce_No-Fly_Zone_Over_Libya



> Britain is considering basing Typhoon jets at RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya, according to Sky News sources.
> 
> Two VC10 tanker aircraft are already in Cyprus, and have been offering support during the extraction of civilians from Libya.
> 
> In the plans currently being discussed at the Ministry of Defence, the VC10s would remain there to assist the fast jets.
> 
> David Cameron told MPs on Monday that he had asked the Chief of the Defence Staff, the head of Britain’s armed forces, to work with allies to see if a military no-fly zone was possible...
> 
> ...Russia's top diplomat has poured cold water on the idea, saying world powers should focus instead on implementing sanctions.
> 
> Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told reporters that world powers needed to "avoid the superfluous", when asked about the idea of creating an exclusion zone...



Could Canada contribute say 8-12 Hornets if the gov't decided to join in?  And would this gov't do so without a UNSC resolution?

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Old Sweat

The following story from the Globe and Mail is reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Ottawa prepares to join effort to aid Libyan opposition 

CAMPBELL CLARK 

OTTAWA— From Tuesday's Globe and Mail 
Published Monday, Feb. 28, 2011 9:15PM EST
Last updated Tuesday, Mar. 01, 2011 7:36AM EST

Ottawa is drawing up plans to take part in an international effort to airlift aid to opposition-held areas of Libya, as the world wrestles with the question of how much military muscle it will use to side with protesters against Moammar Gadhafi’s regime. 

Beyond sanctions, the pace of international pressure quickened on Monday: The United States repositioned air and naval assets in the region; British Prime Minister David Cameron said he would work with allies to establish a no-fly zone and France announced it was sending planes with medical assistance to the rebel-controlled city of Benghazi. 

UN hears Canada, too, stepped up its military preparations, sending a 13-person reconnaissance team to Malta, where four Canadian Forces planes are stationed to assist efforts to evacuate Canadians after Britain and Germany sent military rescue missions into Libya over the weekend. CTV News reported that it has been told Canadian special forces are also on the ground in Libya. 

Western countries including Canada now back the idea of entering Libyan territory, at least to evacuate citizens or deliver aid, effectively ignoring the Gadhafi regime’s claims to territorial sovereignty – but they have not yet agreed on the question of whether it will be extended to direct military intervention such as enforcing a no-fly zone. 

In Libya, Gadhafi troops escalated attacks against anti-government forces using fighter jets, special forces and regular troops in what could become an all-out civil war. The Libyan leader’s troops clashed with rebels in two important cities, Misurata and Zawiyah, both within about 200 kilometres of Tripoli, but rebels, armed with automatic rifles, were said to be putting up stiff resistance. 

Now Western nations, moving to impose sanctions under a UN resolution, have taken the rare step of backing forays into Libya’s territory to effectively side with the rebels. The question is how far they will take it. 

France’s Prime Minister, François Fillon, said his country is sending two planes with doctors, nurses and medical supplies to opposition-held areas in Libya’s east in what he called the beginning of a massive operation of humanitarian support. 

Canada is drawing up contingency plans that include the possible use of military planes in Malta – two massive C-17 aircraft and two smaller Hercules transports – to airlift international aid to rebel-held areas of Libya. 

But the question of whether a humanitarian mission would require troops for protection is complicating planning, because it raises the issue of how far Canada and other countries will go in sending troops into Libya’s territory to assist opposition-controlled areas during a civil war, sources said. Ottawa is considering several options as countries co-ordinate aid to follow the French lead. 

In a speech to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon signalled that Canada “stands ready” to help the humanitarian mission. He told reporters later that Ottawa is now developing plans. 

“The UN resolution [on sanctions] obviously as well calls for humanitarian aid, so we’re very supportive of the fact the French will be going forward with that,” he said. “We’re certainly prepared to give a hand in that regard, and I think as the days go forward we’ll be better positioned to appreciate the different options that are there as they’re being more refined.” 

But while Britain’s Mr. Cameron called on allies to work on plans to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya to ground the Gadhafi regime’s air force, Mr. Cannon said there was no consensus among allies on that, and would not say whether Canada supports such a move. 

“It’s one thing to say ‘no-fly’ but it’s another element be able to apply it and put it into effect,” he said. 

Prime Minister Stephen Harper spoke by telephone with U.S. President Barack Obama Monday night, and both issued statements saying they had agreed to co-ordinate in expanding humanitarian efforts and in considering “other options should they become necessary.” 

Moves to impose UN sanctions including an arms embargo, travel bans on Mr. Gadhafi and associates, and freezing of assets have already been imposed by most Western nations. In Canada, the federal government imposed a unilateral ban on all financial transactions with the Libyan government, saying it had already blocked attempts by the regime to withdraw unspecified sums. 

Government House Leader John Baird said the measures do not amount to a full ban on commercial activities by Canadian companies, but that they will be prohibited from making any payments to the Libyan regime. Canadian firms with major operations in Libya, including oil firm Suncor Energy and engineering giant SNC-Lavalin, said they were studying the sanctions, and declined to comment on what impact they have had. 

“Obviously we don’t want to see commercial operations flowing money into the regime at this time that would be used – either to be stolen, or even worse, used to finance the violence against the Libyan people,” Mr. Baird said.


----------



## Rifleman62

The report was written prior to current events, but why release it?

Remember, Canada is not respected by the world as proven by it's inability to get a seat on the UN Security Council. It is a national disgrace brought to you by the mean, sneaky Harper government. 

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/adopt+report+praising+Libya+human+rights+record/4362346/story.html

*As bloodshed continues, UN set to adopt report praising Libya's human rights record*

By Steven Edwards, Postmedia News February 28, 2011

UNITED NATIONS — The UN Human Rights Council is set to adopt a major report hailing Libya's human rights record — despite moving to suspend the Arab country's council membership amid an international outcry over attacks on civilians.

The report shows countries applauding and commending Libya as they note "with appreciation the country's commitment to upholding human rights on the ground."

Even Canada "welcomed improvements" Libya made "in its respect for human rights," according to the report, which is scheduled for a vote before the Geneva-based 47-member council March 18.

But the Canadian government also made a number of critically framed recommendations to the Gaddafi regime, including one calling for reinforced measures aimed at fully investigating torture claims.

The 23-page report was compiled as part of the council's "Universal Periodic Review" — a process the UN bills as a rigorous scrutiny of the human rights records of each UN member state every four years.

Highlighting what it called the council's "hypocrisy," UN Watch, a Geneva-based monitoring group, on Monday called on the body's president to withdraw the report.

"It's now clear that the session on Libya was largely a fraud," said Hillel Neuer of Montreal, UN Watch executive director.

"The council should schedule a new session in which members would tell the truth about the Gaddafi regime's heinous crimes, which were committed over the four decades he's been in power, yet ignored by the UN."

According to UN Watch, topping the list of recalled witnesses should be the Libyan diplomats who defected last week and "admitted that the Gaddafi regime is a gross violator of human rights."

The UN launched the council in 2006 to replace a discredited Human Rights Commission, which had come to be manipulated by countries with poor human rights records. Canadian-led Eye on the UN was among other monitoring groups that on Monday claimed the council has also lost its legitimacy.

"The Universal Periodic Review system was touted as the No. 1 innovation because everyone would be scrutinized equally," said Anne Bayefsky, Eye on the UN chief, and senior fellow with New York-based Hudson Institute.

"But human rights abuser states caught on early that the rules enable them to line up countries that support them to speak on their behalf. The result is that human rights abuser states come away from the process looking like they were open-minded and had subjected themselves to scrutiny."

Iran, Sudan and Cuba are among countries that heaped praise on Libya's human rights record — despite themselves having poor human rights records, according to monitoring groups.

Libya should "continue its efforts to promote women's rights in social and public life, and protect them from violence," recommends Iran, which last year faced international criticism for sentencing a woman accused of adultery to death by stoning.

Sudan, which itself faces international sanctions for human rights abuses, said Libya should "continue its efforts to address the adverse effects of the sanctions imposed (on Libya) during the 1990s."

Cuba felt Libya was on the right track with its "positive efforts to increase the culture of the human rights of the Libyan people."

Israel was alone in not bothering with the diplomatic protocol of "welcoming" the report ahead of making critical remarks.

Israel notes that Libya's council membership "served to cover the ongoing systematic suppression, in law and in practice, of fundamental rights and freedoms," the report said bluntly.
© Copyright (c) Postmedia News

Read more: http://www.canada.com/news/bloodshed+continues+adopt+report+praising+Libya+human+rights+record/4362346/story.html#ixzz1FMS3v4xj


----------



## a_majoor

Saw the weirdest thing on the info bar while watching CTV news this morning:

"Gaddafi placed $2 billion in Canadian banks after vist with then Prime Minister Paul Martin in 2004" (paraphrase)

While I doubt Prime Minister Martin personally invited Gaddafi to open a savings account, I would be very interested to know the meaning and circumstances behind this. Was Gaddafi being invited or encouraged to invest in Canada?  Is this money deposited in accounts owned by Gaddafi? The Lybian government? Corporations (real or shell) headquartered in Lybia? Is it in Canadian government bonds? Canadian corporate stocks and bonds?

This is a story that really needs to be followed up.


----------



## sean m

Canada special forces on standby for Libya: report
(AFP) – 2 hours ago

OTTAWA — Canadian special forces are "on standby" for deployment in Libya, local media said Tuesday, as a reconnaissance team set out to help evacuate foreign nationals from the chaotic North African country.

"Canadian special forces (JTF2) are 'on standby' to depart for Libya," Le Devoir newspaper's military reporter Alec Castonguay said in a Twitter message.

Canada's defence department would not confirm the report.

"For reasons of national security and to ensure their safety, the Canadian Forces doesn't discuss the operations of its special operations forces unit," the military's spokeswoman Jenna Alexander said.

"So we can't confirm they would be deployed to Libya."

On Monday, the Canadian military sent a 13-member reconnaissance team and medics to Malta along with two C-130J cargo jets and two C-17 jumbo transport aircraft to assist in the evacuation of foreign nationals from Libya.


----------



## GAP

sean m please supply links to the articles you are quoting to properly accredit the information...it makes it easier to look up and does not violate Copywrite rules....


----------



## Navalsnpr

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110301/libya-rescue-aborted-110301/

CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Tue. Mar. 1 2011 2:28 PM ET
A Canadian Forces C-130J Hercules aircraft was denied landing rights in Tripoli Tuesday and had to return to Malta without the load of oil workers that officials had hoped to evacuate.

The military transport departed Malta on Tuesday for the Libyan capital, but was waved off before it arrived.

"There basically wasn't any ramp space for the Hercules aircraft to land at Tripoli airport," said CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife.

"It is very, very busy. There are planes coming in constantly and by the time the Hercules aircraft left Malta and got to Tripoli airport there was nowhere for it to land and it had to turn around and go back to Malta."

The plane has now returned to Malta and another flight is scheduled for Wednesday. It isn't clear which company the oil workers are employed by, or how many there are.

Meanwhile, an order has just been issued to send a Canadian frigate from Halifax to the region.

Fife reported that the frigate will only be used for evacuation and humanitarian purposes, not military ones. The vessel will be in the region in case the unrest continues to spread into other countries.

It could take about a week to get to the region from Halifax.

Canada has had trouble organizing evacuations for the Canadians stuck in Libya over the past two weeks.

At least two charter planes landed in Tripoli but left empty, because there were apparently no Canadians at the airport waiting to be flown out.

And a C-17 military transport was denied landing rights in Libya last week and sat on the tarmac in Rome for days awaiting the necessary approvals.

Now Canada has two C-17 transport planes and one C-130 stationed in Malta, making rescue efforts much easier, said Fife.

Canada also has a military reconnaissance team and nine combat medics in Malta.


----------



## Old Sweat

With a slightly different "spin" and without the positive statement re the Frigate, here is a story from the National Post website reproduced under the Fair Dealings Provision of the Copyright Act:

Canada mulls military response to Libya crisis

REUTERS/Asmaa Waguih

Matthew Fisher, Postmedia News · Tuesday, Mar. 1, 2011

The Harper government is close to deciding whether to send a warship to the Mediterranean Sea where it would assist with whatever NATO or the United Nations decides to do to try to influence events in Libya.

However, the nearest available Canadian frigate is 6,500 kilometres away in Halifax, and would not be ready to put to sea for about a week.

So if Ottawa does dispatch a ship, the actual decision on whether its mission would be humanitarian or involve military intervention would not have to be taken for nearly a month. By then it is possible that the Libyan dictator, Moammar Gadhafi, will have been ousted from power.

That timeline sounds long, but it actually took more time than that to amass a multinational naval armada in the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf after the 9/11 attacks and during the wars in 1991 and 2003 against Iraq.

An option that the Harper government is apparently not actively considering is sending CF-18 Hornet fighter jets to help NATO or the UN enforce a possible no-fly zone over Libya. This is in keeping with the government’s decision not to send Canadian fighter jets to Afghanistan although almost every other NATO country with a modern air force has done so.

Nobody will speak about it officially, but it is a virtual certainty that Canada has already sent Joint Task Force 2 special troops to the Mediterranean area. 

However, their participation is likely to be limited to protecting Canadian transport aircraft that might be sent from Malta to rescue Canadian oil workers in the Libyan desert, or to assist in a French-led plan to deliver aid to parts of that country now controlled by forces opposed to Gadhafi.

While Canadians are as mesmerized as others by what has transpired across the Middle East so far, they may not see any obvious connection between their own interests and the tumult there. 

But there are. Canada is likely to be one of the few western beneficiaries of the uncertainty that is sweeping the Arabian Peninsula and North Africa.

The reason is, of course, oil. For decades to come the tarsands are going to be Canada’s trump card every time there is volatility in international energy markets.

Congressman John Garamendi of California called on Monday for Washington to respond to the crises in the Middle East by developing a national clean energy plan that “prioritizes the need to (1) Make It In America, (2) transition away from dirty fossil fuels and (3) secure energy independence.”

These are laudable goals popularized over the past year or two by New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. But even in the unlikely event of draconian legislation being passed in Washington to encourage biofuels or solar, geothermal or wind power, the U.S. is many years away from achieving any of this. 

The strong likelihood is that the new regimes emerging from the wrecks of the old, mostly pro-American dictatorships and monarchies in that troubled region will be less likely to want to do Washington any favours regarding energy, or anything else. 

The upshot of this is that the American need for clean oil will be superseded by its dire need to maintain access to any reliable supply of oil. 

The events of the past two months, and dramas still unfolding in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan and oil-rich countries such as Libya, Oman and a few of the Gulf sheikdoms, make it more and more obvious that there is going to be a keen demand for Canada’s so-called “dirty oil” for years to come. 

Viewed through this prism, if the U.S. does not want the kind of oil that Canada has to offer, China and India, with huge economic ambitions to fuel, almost certainly will.

So without even trying, Canada, with the second-largest oil reserves in the world, is well-placed to profit from the suffering and uncertainty in Tripoli and elsewhere across the Middle East.


----------



## Old Sweat

And this from the Globe and Mail, reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act, takes the story a couple of steps further down the road. Note, it is my opinion that this is where the media can make mistakes in content and interpretation in its collective desire to get the story "firstest with the mostest." 

With special forces on ground, Ottawa sends frigate to Libyan coast 

STEVEN CHASE 

OTTAWA— Globe and Mail Update 
Published Tuesday, Mar. 01, 2011 12:24PM EST
Last updated Tuesday, Mar. 01, 2011 3:04PM EST

The Canadian government has dispatched HMCS Charlottetown to the Mediterrean Sea to aid in the international response to the crisis in Libya.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced the frigate's departure Tuesday afternoon in the House of Commons.

The ship leaves from Halifax Wednesday to take part in the international and Canadian evacuations of foreign citizens from the strife-torn North African country.

Gadhafi a 'mad man,' UN hears Earlier Wednesday, The Globe and Mail learned that Canadian special forces soldiers are playing an active role in Ottawa response to the crisis.

The government has been using military aircraft to ferry Canadian citizens and diplomats out of Libya to Malta since last week and it's believed soldiers belonging to Special Operations Forces have assisted in providing security for the operation.

Other countries have used special forces soldiers for similar purposes. Britain has used commandos to escort its planes and protect them while they are on the ground.

The value of soldiers from Canadian Special Operations Forces Command – which includes the elite Joint Task Force 2 unit as well as the Special Operations Regiment – is that they can be quickly deployed because they are self-sufficient. They're not designed for lengthy operations but do not need a wagonload of logistical support to accompany them.

Canada has been operating Hercules aircraft and a huge C-17 Globemaster plane out of Malta, where the federal government has set up a temporary base of operations to respond to the situation in Libya.

It's believed Canadian special forces soldiers have also been operating out of Malta, an island nation about 360 kilometres north of Libya in the Mediterranean Sea.

Special forces can provide a variety of services from first aid to reconnaissance, evacuation – what the military calls “assisted departures – as well as protective security. Troops are trained as medics, drivers, signalers and a range of other jobs.

The Canadian Forces refuse to discuss special forces operations but it's believed these troops are being used to safeguard the federal government's efforts to rescue Canadians, a necessary tool in a country where the machinery of government has broken down and criminal activity is increasing.

Canada suspended its diplomatic presence in Libya late last week amid a crackdown by Moammar Gadhafi’s regime against pro-democracy protestors.

A Canadian C-17 aircraft carried the Canadian ambassador, five consular officials and 18 other Canadians out of the country at that time. The plane's 46 passengers also included British citizens and officials from the Australia government's diplomatic mission in Libya.

The Prime Minister's Office said Tuesday that Stephen Harper called Maltese Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi to thank him for hosting Canadian Forces aircraft and personnel as this country works to extract the remaining Canadian citizens from Libya.


----------



## MarkOttawa

This also sounds like serious overkill to me--what shape are Libyan air defences likely to be in?

F-22s Could Test Libya's Air Defenses
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a62fed3fb-0215-4903-bc7b-51fb8abf9993



> If the U.S. decides to establish a no-fly zone over Libya, the effort could be led by F-22s in their first combat assignment.
> 
> The F-22 and some cyberoperations would be employed in shutting down Libya’s air defense system which is comprised “almost exclusively” of Russian-built SA-6 surface-to-air missiles, says a former Air Force chief of staff. The SAMs are like those that opposed NATO forces involved in operations in Serbia and that shot down the single F-117 fight lost in combat.
> 
> U.S. aircraft carriers are moving to the Western Mediterranean, but operations in Afghanistan will not permit them to maintain a long-term no-fly zone over Libya. That task would fall to the Air Force, he says.
> 
> A likely scenario would have shorter-range fighters flying out of Egypt, using facilities like Cairo West where multi-national Bright Star exercises are conducted.
> 
> “We have a great relationship with the Egyptian air force and army and they are the ones in charge of the country,” the veteran fighter pilot says.
> 
> They will not operate from bases in Libya occupied by insurgents because of the danger of shoulder-fired missiles, anti-U.S. protests and sabotage.
> 
> Larger aircraft, such as tankers, E-8 Joint Stars and E-3  AWACS could operate from Oman, Tunisia or Qatar to establish orbits off Libya’s shores.
> 
> The establishment of a no-fly zone would require “a massive SAM roll-back effort, like that imposed on Iraq [during the Northern and Southern Watch operations after the first Iraq conflict in 1991],” the former Air Force official says. “Every time the Iraqis turned on a radar, we hosed them.”
> 
> “Any cyberoperations would be part of the SAM roll-back radar and computer jamming program, but it would be a small part,” he says. Other targets would be communications systems. The “heavy  weight of effort required” to impose a round-the-clock no fly zone would likely require the “first actual use of the F-2 2… and that might well be the guys [stationed at] Langley [AFB, Virginia].”



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## The Bread Guy

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> .... what shape are Libyan air defences likely to be in?


One read on that question, via Wired.com's Danger Room....


> .... “Libya possesses one of the most robust air-defense networks on the African continent, falling second only to Egypt in terms of coverage and operational systems,” Sean O’Connor, an air-defense analyst, wrote in a May 2010 assessment. “Libyan strategic SAM assets are primarily arrayed along the coastline, ostensibly defending the bulk of the Libyan population and preventing foreign incursion into Libyan airspace.”
> 
> With rebels holding several cities, it’s unclear how many SAMs are still operational. Last May, O’Connor counted 31 long-range SAM sites and 17 radars belonging to the Libyan air force. The bulk of this “strategic missile force comprises Soviet-designed SA-2, SA-3 and SA-5 systems dating from the 1970s and 1980s. In addition, the Libyan army possesses a large number of short-range SA-6, SA-8, SA-9, SA-13 and Crotale missiles.
> 
> For its part, the Libyan fighter force in theory numbers around 200 planes — mostly old Soviet and French designs. Defectors flew two Libyan Mirage F.1 fighters to Malta. Another Libyan fighter crew bailed out of their Su-22 jet rather than follow orders to bomb protesters. It’s likely very few Libyan fighters remain operational. Those that do are mostly being used to attack rebels, and wouldn’t pose much of a challenge to U.S. and allied planes.
> 
> By the same token, O’Connor doubts Libyan SAMs would survive long in a shooting war. “Advances in electronic warfare and [Electronic Counter-Measures] have made many of the older Soviet-era SAM systems obsolete in a modern air combat environment. Libya’s … systems are no exception.” ....


----------



## Old Sweat

They just wont stop updating their stories. The following from the National Post website is reproduced under the Fair Dealings provision of the Copyright Act:

Canada to send HMCS Charlottetown to Libya

Tobi Cohen, Postmedia News · Tuesday, Mar. 1, 2011

OTTAWA — Canada is sending the frigate HMCS Charlottetown to Libya to help in the ongoing evacuation efforts in that troubled North African country, the federal government announced Tuesday afternoon.

On Tuesday, a Canadian C-130 Hercules en route to assist in the evacuation was turned back to its base in nearby Malta shortly after taking off.

Government sources say there was not enough room at the airport in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, to accommodate the aircraft at the time and that it would try again later.

Canada also has sent two C-17 strategic aircraft as well as 22 military personnel comprised of military police, medical staff and a 13-member Operational Liaison and Reconnaissance Team.

“An OLRT is a group of (Canadian Forces) experts deployed in the initial stages of a mission to assess the situation, liaise with allies and other agencies and establish lines of communication,” Lt. Len Hickey of the Canadian navy said.

“If necessary, a joint task force headquarters and other capabilities follows on to facilitate the evacuation . . . from the emergency area to a safe haven.”

Canada also is expected to announce plans to send a Canadian patrol frigate, HMCS Charlottetown, to the region.

Over the last few days, Canada has stepped up its military presence in the violence-plagued country which is on the verge of civil war.

It also has imposed a number of sanctions against Libyan despot Col. Moammar Gadhafi and his regime, including a travel ban and a freeze on Libyan assets. Canadian banks reportedly have frozen approximately $2 billion in Libyan assets already.


----------



## PanaEng

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> One read on that question, via Wired.com's Danger Room....
> ... SAM sites and 17 radars belonging to the Libyan air force. The bulk of this “strategic missile force ...


with a comment like that I don't know how much this chap really knows; may be an editorial error...
or maybe I don't know squat about air power - are air defence assets strategic?

Regardless, the Libyan regime has money - enough to buy newer systems - so we shouldn't underestimate its AD capabilities.

cheers,


----------



## Old Sweat

The following story from the Ottawa Citizen's web site is reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act:


Canadian frigate leaves for Libya
  
Postmedia News March 2, 2011 10:09 AM  

HALIFAX — A Canadian navy frigate and its crew of 240 officers set sail Wednesday as part of an international show of military strength against the regime of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi.

HMCS Charlottetown departed in the morning from Halifax for what is expected to be a six-day journey to the African nation, which has been beset by violence during a bloody uprising against the long-ruling strongman.

The frigate and its crew will join two Canadian C-130 Hercules aircraft, which are already in the area, and are capable of landing on shorter, unpaved terrain. Canada also has one C-17 in nearby Malta along with 22 military police officers, medics and reconnaissance personnel.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay has said the ship carries a Sea King helicopter and is prepared to go beyond simply removing the 250 Canadians, who are still believed to be stuck in Libya.

Postmedia News has confirmed that JTF2, Canada's elite special forces unit, has also been sent to the region, something the government has not publicly acknowledge.


Read more: http://www.canada.com/news/Canadian+frigate+leaves+Libya/4371356/story.html#ixzz1FSOI9Ex2


----------



## Journeyman

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> F-22s Could Test Libya's Air Defenses
> 
> This also sounds like serious overkill to me--what shape are Libyan air defences likely to be in?


Hypothetically.....if the US announced it was going with F-15s and F-18s would your headline have been:

*"US refuses to use overpriced, untested aircraft in operations!"*?


----------



## MarkOttawa

No.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## tomahawk6

A couple of images of Libyan air defense sites near Tobruk. If this is an example of the state of their system a no fly zone should be a piece of cake. The question I must ask though is would we be so quick to intervene in places like Iran or Syria to support democracy protestors ?


----------



## MarkOttawa

Start of a rather lengthy post at the CDFAI's _3Ds Blog_:

Gunboat Diplomacy
http://www.cdfai.org/the3dsblog/?p=124



> From the Docks of Nova Scotia
> To the Shores of Tripoli…
> 
> HMCS Charlottetown is setting sail for the Mediterranean...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## GR66

WRT a western imposed No-Fly Zone in Libya.  Say we (let's say NATO as the lead international group running the operation) shoot down a couple of Libyan aircraft.  Gadhafi then claims this as "proof" that this isn't any sort of "rebel" uprising but rather a foreign-led invasion of their country.  He then has his forces begin the wholesale slaughter of "foreign-backed forces" (i.e. all civilians in any areas that have rebelled against his rule).  What do we do then?  Do we face up to the (unintended but possibly predictable) consequences of our actions and counter with a full ground invasion to defend the civilians?  Do we have the will and capability to do so?  What are the legalities?  

I'd love to see Gadafhi gone as much as the next person but is the reality of the situation more complex than it might seem on the surface?  Just playing devils advocate here.


----------



## GAP

A No-Fly proclamation is not bloodless....

1. Take out all radars (definitely)
2. Take out all known missle sites (definitely)
3. Cripple Military Runways (maybe)
4. (unlikely) take out aircraft/shelters/maintenance areas...


----------



## The Bread Guy

GR66 said:
			
		

> WRT a western imposed No-Fly Zone in Libya.  Say we (let's say NATO as the lead international group running the operation) shoot down a couple of Libyan aircraft.  Gadhafi then claims this as "proof" that this isn't any sort of "rebel" uprising but rather a foreign-led invasion of their country ....


I know one demographic that would just _"love"_ this ....


> The Government of Canada has announced that it will send HMCS Charlottetown to Libya to join the US aircraft carrier fleet led by the USS enterprise. This is part of a much larger NATO led buildup in the area. The Canadian Peace Alliance is opposed to any military intervention in Libya or in the region as a whole.
> 
> If the western governments were genuine in their desire to help the people of Libya – or Egypt or Tunisia for that matter – they would not have supported the dictators and their regimes. That support for the dictators is a chief reason why the situation is so violent for the people rising up. Western military deployment to Libya is a bit like asking the arsonist to put out their own fire. Far from being a shining light in a humanitarian crisis, western intervention is designed to maintain the status quo and will, in fact make matters worse for the people there.
> 
> Western intervention only serves to install compliant and corrupt dictatorial regimes. The people of Tunisia, Egypt and Libya have done more to bring peace and democracy to their countries than years of US-led military occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The west needs to learn the lessons from those failed invasions and not compound the crisis in Libya ....


Not saying I agree with this, just saying it would feed into the message track.


----------



## MarkOttawa

SecDef and others pretty wary:

Gates: Libyan no-fly zone means attacking Libya
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20038391-503544.html



> Although there is a lot of talk about establishing a no-fly zone over Libya, both the secretary of defense and the secretary of state made clear Wednesday it isn't going to happen anytime soon.
> 
> Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Capitol Hill that the Obama administration is a "long way" from making a decision about a no-fly zone, and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates explained why.
> 
> "Let's call a spade a spade," Gates said at a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing. "A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defenses."
> 
> He added that it couldn't be done by a single aircraft carrier off the coast.
> 
> "It's a big operation in a big country," Gates said.
> 
> On top of that, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the same subcommittee that the Pentagon has no confirmation that Libyan strongman Muammar al Qaddafi is using his air force to kill civilians.
> 
> In other words, there is no need to establish a no-fly zone, at least for now, and no desire within the military to do it period. The U.S. military has long experience with no-fly zones -- more than a decade over Iraq -- and knows what it takes, not just jets but tankers and early warning aircraft.
> 
> However, White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters at his daily briefing that a no-fly zone is being "actively considered."
> 
> "We have not ruled any options out," said Carney. "The fact that the no-fly zone idea is complex does not mean it's not on the table."
> 
> As Gates pointed out, establishing a no-fly zone requires the use of force to take out the air defense sites that could shoot down any patrolling aircraft, and so far neither the U.N. Security Council nor NATO has authorized the use of force in Libya.



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## kstart

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Saw the weirdest thing on the info bar while watching CTV news this morning:
> 
> "Gaddafi placed $2 billion in Canadian banks after vist with then Prime Minister Paul Martin in 2004" (paraphrase)
> 
> While I doubt Prime Minister Martin personally invited Gaddafi to open a savings account, I would be very interested to know the meaning and circumstances behind this. Was Gaddafi being invited or encouraged to invest in Canada?  Is this money deposited in accounts owned by Gaddafi? The Lybian government? Corporations (real or shell) headquartered in Lybia? Is it in Canadian government bonds? Canadian corporate stocks and bonds?
> 
> This is a story that really needs to be followed up.



Agreed.  

Martin government in 2004 with Petro-Canada (now called Suncor): 1 Billion Dollar signing bonus allotted to Gaddafi:

http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/06/08TRIPOLI498.html



> Petro-Canada has signed a series of 30-year contracts with Libya's National Oil Corporation (NOC), bringing its old agreements into line with Libya's preferred EPSA-IV contract standard.  The new deals stem from Libya's ongoing efforts to secure tougher terms from foreign oil companies, and mark the growing importance of Libya to Petro-Canada.  End Summary.  DONE DEAL - AT LAST  2. (SBU)  On June 19, representatives from Petro-Canada and the NOC signed a total of six contracts covering all of Petro-Canada's acreage in Libya.  The contracts were crafted under the NOC's EPSA IV agreement template, which has become the preferred framework for all international oil companies (IOCs) working in Libya (reftel).  An agreement signed by the NOC and Petro-Canada in December 2007 was recently ratified by the General People's Congress, paving the way to sign the actual contracts.  3. (SBU)  Under the new deals, Petro-Canada has committed to pay a $1 billion signing bonus and invest $3.5 billion in the redevelopment of several large producing fields, and $460 million in oil and gas exploration.  Petro-Canada will pay 50% of all development costs and 100% of all exploration costs.



Canada could stand to lose 50 Billion
http://www.canada.com/business/could+lose+billion+Gaddafi+falls/4340401/story.html

This is a 2004 Amnesty International Report on Libya:  http://www.amnestyusa.org/annualreport.php?id=ar&yr=2004&c=LBY  Can also click on the years (right hand column by year), can see how things were prior to 2004, and after and presently.  Related documents as well.  

http://www.economist.com/node/18231320

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/02/22/john-ivison-embracing-gaddafi-was-canadas-shame/

http://www.canada.com/business/could+lose+billion+Gaddafi+falls/4340401/story.html


----------



## Journeyman

Thucydides said:
			
		

> While I doubt Prime Minister Martin  personally invited Gaddafi to open a savings account, I would be very interested to know the meaning and circumstances behind this. Was Gaddafi being invited or encouraged to invest in Canada?  Is this money deposited in accounts owned by Gaddafi? The Lybian government? Corporations (real or shell) headquartered in Lybia? Is it in Canadian government bonds? Canadian corporate stocks and bonds?
> 
> This is a story that really needs to be followed up.


 _~shrug~  _ Apparently, it's "just politics."

Paul Martin had a very close relationship with several high-ranking Tamil Tiger personnel. See Stewart Bell, Ch 2 "Snow Tigers," _Cold Terror: How Canada Nurtures and Exports Terrorism Around the World_.

But then, he _was_ the Liberal PM....and the ex-pat Tamil community _was_ in his riding -- it's only votes, right?


----------



## The Bread Guy

.... here:


> The Canadian Forces launched Operation MOBILE on 25 February 2011 to assist the departure of Canadians and other foreign nationals from Libya. Op MOBILE is part of a whole-of-government effort led by the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT).
> 
> _*Joint Task Force Malta*_
> 
> Joint Task Force Malta is the Canadian Forces team based in Valletta, the capital of the Mediterranean island nation of Malta, to help the staff of the Embassy of Canada to Libya — temporarily relocated to Valletta — assist the departure of Canadian citizens and other entitled persons who wish to leave Libya.
> 
> One CC-177 Globemaster strategic airlifter and two CC-130J Hercules tactical airlifters are currently based at Malta International Airport, near Valletta on the largest island of the Maltese Archipelago. An Operational Liaison and Reconnaissance Team (OLRT) of 13 personnel deployed on 26 February 2011, accompanied by aircrews, Military Police, medical personnel. Co-ordination staff, logisticians and technicians soon followed, for a total of about 70 CF members as of 2 March 2011 ....


----------



## JB 11 11

Navalsnipr said:
			
		

> http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110301/libya-rescue-aborted-110301/
> 
> CTV.ca News Staff
> Date: Tue. Mar. 1 2011 2:28 PM ET
> A Canadian Forces C-130J Hercules aircraft was denied landing rights in Tripoli Tuesday and had to return to Malta without the load of oil workers that officials had hoped to evacuate.
> 
> The military transport departed Malta on Tuesday for the Libyan capital, but was waved off before it arrived.
> 
> "There basically wasn't any ramp space for the Hercules aircraft to land at Tripoli airport," said CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife.
> 
> "It is very, very busy. There are planes coming in constantly and by the time the Hercules aircraft left Malta and got to Tripoli airport there was nowhere for it to land and it had to turn around and go back to Malta."
> 
> The plane has now returned to Malta and another flight is scheduled for Wednesday. It isn't clear which company the oil workers are employed by, or how many there are.
> 
> Meanwhile, an order has just been issued to send a Canadian frigate from Halifax to the region.
> 
> Fife reported that the frigate will only be used for evacuation and humanitarian purposes, not military ones. The vessel will be in the region in case the unrest continues to spread into other countries.
> 
> It could take about a week to get to the region from Halifax.
> 
> Canada has had trouble organizing evacuations for the Canadians stuck in Libya over the past two weeks.
> 
> At least two charter planes landed in Tripoli but left empty, because there were apparently no Canadians at the airport waiting to be flown out.
> 
> And a C-17 military transport was denied landing rights in Libya last week and sat on the tarmac in Rome for days awaiting the necessary approvals.
> 
> Now Canada has two C-17 transport planes and one C-130 stationed in Malta, making rescue efforts much easier, said Fife.
> 
> Canada also has a military reconnaissance team and nine combat medics in Malta.



I love the media LOL! That C17 did NOT sit there for days.....hours maybe. Not days!!  :rofl:


----------



## Old Sweat

I hate these stories that cover more than one issue, especially when both are significant. This one, from the MSNBC web site, is posted under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act.

Libya detains NATO troops during rescue mission 

Three Dutch marines were being held by authorities in Libya after they were captured by forces loyal to Moammar Gadhafi while trying to rescue stranded workers, officials said Thursday. 

The trio were surrounded by armed men and captured Sunday after landing near Sirte in a Lynx helicopter that was on board the navy ship HMS Tromp, which is anchored off the Libyan coast to help evacuations from the conflict-torn country, Dutch Defense Ministry spokesman Otte Beeksma told The Associated Press.

News of the marines' detention by Gadhafi came a day after the Libyan Human Rights League estimated the death toll in the conflict stood at 6,000, the Egyptian newspaper Al-Masry Al-Youm reported.

On Wednesday, anti-government rebels fought off forces loyal to Gadhafi — who were supported by airstrikes — in a fierce battle for Brega, a strategic oil facility 460 miles east of Gadhafi's stronghold in Tripoli. 

On Thursday, witnesses told Reuters that a warplane had again bombed Brega while about 50 miles to the east rebels shored up the defenses of the town of Ajdabiya with rocket launchers, anti-tank aircraft guns and tanks.

Gadhafi's militant response to anti-government protests could lead to international charges. Later Thursday, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, was scheduled to announce he is opening an investigation into possible crimes against humanity committed in Libya. 

..It was unclear if the Dutch troops were being held hostage by Gadhafi.

.Beeksma said that Dutch officials were in "intensive negotiations" with Gadhafi's government to secure the marines' release, he said. 

"We have also been in contact with the crewmen involved," Beeksma said. "They are doing well under the circumstances and we hope they will be released as quickly as possible." 

Asked if the Netherlands, which is a member of NATO, considered the marines hostages, Beeksma said, "they are being held by Libyan authorities." 

Two people the marines were trying to rescue also were captured but have since been released and have left Libya. The identities of the marines were not released. 

Gadhafi's forces were regrouping in an attempt to regain territories now controlled by opponents of his regime. 

Witnesses in Brega told Reuters a jet fighter had attacked the town Thursday.

"I heard the plane, then the explosion, then saw the crater," Mohammed Shibli said, adding that the bomb landed near the university for oil engineering which is about a mile from the city's oil exporting terminal. 

"There was an airstrike about an hour and a half ago. I saw it with my own eyes," another witness Awadh Mohammed, a volunteer with the rebel forces, said.

The rebels were preparing for a renewed offensive by Gadhafi loyalists.

A Twitter message on Thursday, which could not be corroborated, spoke of reinforcements for Gadhafi's forces. 

"Cars reported to be full of mercenaries with the intention of joining the battalion outside Ras Lanuf to head to Brega to regain," read the message from ShababLibya (Libyan Youth Movement). "It seems 70 cars have arrived near the town of Ras Lanuf to support a battalion to attack the city of Brega and regain airport." 

In Ajdabiya, home to a military arms dump, rebel fighters were trying to work out how to use more advanced weapons and appeared determined to hold their ground.

.At one entrance to the town, rebels worked through the night to consolidate defenses, adding rocket launchers, anti-tank weapons and anti-aircraft guns. Rebels also manned three tanks. 

"Praise God we have weapons," said rebel fighter Drees Abdulwahid, 42, smiling and raising both hands to the sky. 

Another rebel fighter said he had four days training in how to use an anti-aircraft gun. 

Others struggled to load the belts of 10-inch long bullets into the weapon. One young man staggered under the weight of the belt.

Gadhafi loyalists bombed the town from the air Wednesday as its ground forces stabbed at Brega. 

Peace plan 
As the conflict continued, Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa said a peace plan for Libya from Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez was under consideration.


----------



## tomahawk6

Three Dutch Marines were captured by forces loyal to Gaddafi after a failed rescue attempt.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_netherlands_libya_marines_held

THE HAGUE, Netherlands – Three Dutch marines were captured by forces loyal to Moammar Gadhafi during a rescue attempt of two European workers and are being held by Libyan authorities for five days, a Defense Ministry spokesman said Thursday.

The two Europeans, one Dutch and one whose nationality was not released, were handed over unharmed to the Dutch embassy in Tripoli Thursday and have left Libya, the ministry said.

The three were surrounded by armed men on Sunday after landing near Sirte in a Lynx helicopter from the navy ship HMS Tromp, which was anchored off the Libyan coast to help evacuations from the conflict-torn country, spokesman Otte Beeksma told The Associated Press.

Dutch officials are in "intensive negotiations" with Gadhafi's government to secure the marines' release, he said.

"We have also been in contact with the crewmen involved," Beeksma said. "They are doing well under the circumstances and we hope they will be released as quickly as possible."

Defense Minister Hans Hillen welcomed the news that the two Europeans were safe and had left Libya. "Everything is being done to also get the crew safely out of the country as soon as possible," he said in a statement.

Asked if the Dutch government considered the marines hostages, Beeksma said, "they are being held by Libyan authorities."

Prime Minister Mark Rutte said news of the men's capture was kept quiet to assist talks on their release. Dutch daily De Telegraaf first reported their capture in its Thursday edition.

"These are situations that benefit from total secrecy because then you can carry out discussions in peace to ensure these people get home safely," he told national broadcaster NOS.

"It is terrible for the crew of the Lynx helicopter," Rutte said. "Everything is being done to make sure the crew gets home."

The identities of the marines were not released.

News of the marines' detention by Gadhafi came a day after anti-government rebels fought off forces loyal to Gadhafi in a fierce battle for Brega, a strategic oil facility 460 miles (740 kilometers) east of Gadhafi's stronghold in Tripoli.

Gadhafi's crackdown has been the harshest in the Arab world to the wave of anti-government protests sweeping across parts of the Middle East and North Africa. His forces are regrouping in an attempt to regain territories now controlled by opponents of his regime.

Later Thursday, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, is scheduled to announce he is opening an investigation into possible crimes against humanity committed in Libya.


----------



## Journeyman

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> ...a peace plan for Libya from Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez was under consideration.


Now _that_ should be entertaining.  op:


----------



## dapaterson

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Now _that_ should be entertaining.  op:



Where's the "Fill Up Your Tank Before Gas Hits $1.75 a Litre" icon?  Chavez and Gadaffi (or however we're anglicizing his name today) are quite the team.


----------



## The Bread Guy

A bit more on the NLD Marines, from the NLD Ministry of Defence:


> Dutch armed forces personnel detained in Libya
> 
> 3 March 2011, 11.04 hour
> 
> Last Sunday afternoon a naval helicopter from the Dutch frigate HNLMS Tromp, engaged in a consular evacuation operation in Sirte, was prevented from taking off by an armed Libyan unit loyal to the current regime.
> 
> Talks with the Libyan authorities about the situation thus created were launched immediately by the ship's command and by the Dutch authorities in The Hague. The 2 evacuees were transferred today by the Libyans to the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Tripoli. Intensive diplomatic talks are still under way concerning the release of the helicopter's 3 crew members.
> 
> The Minister of Defence Hans Hillen and the Chief of Defence general Peter van Uhm express their concern about the crew that is being held captive. The Minister: "We sympathize with the uncertainty of the relatives of the crew. Everything is being done for the safe return of the helicopter crew."
> 
> The relatives of the detained military personnel and of the evacuees have been kept informed of developments. For security reasons, this information was not made public earlier and no further information will be released.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Because why ELSE would Canada do something?  This from the World Socialists :


> .... Like the other imperialist powers, the Canadian government is depicting its plans to intervene militarily in Libya as born of altruism—of abhorrence at the repressive actions of Colonel Gaddafi’s regime, fear for the lives of ordinary Libyans as the country descends into civil war, and concern for the spread of democracy in North Africa and the Middle East.
> 
> This is poppycock. If Canada’s government is plotting with the US and the European Union to intervene in Libya, it is because the popular upsurge that has toppled Mubarak in Egypt and Ben Ali in Tunisia, hobbled Gaddafi, and challenged governments throughout North Africa and the Middle East is threatening vital imperialist economic and geo-strategic interests ....


----------



## Edward Campbell

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Because why ELSE would Canada do something?  This from the World Socialists :




Nice to see that the same old _party line_ is still being propagated by the same old gang. Leon Trotsky would be so proud.


----------



## Journeyman

> is threatening vital imperialist economic and geo-strategic interests ....


Geo-strategic interests?! Hell ya; at all costs we _must_ keep that vital land route open between the Mediterranean and Chad! 
:facepalm:


----------



## Old Sweat

This piece by Conrad Black should drive the usual suspects nuts. It appears in today's National Post and is reproduced under the Fair Dealings provision of the Copyright Act.

How Canada can help save Libya

Conrad Black, National Post · Saturday, Mar. 5, 2011

It was a signal achievement for the UN Security Council to censure Libya for barbarities against civilians. Also laudable was the UN General Assembly's decision to suspend Libya from its preposterous position as chair of the Human Rights Council. But otherwise, the toing and froing of the Western powers over Libya is becoming alarming: Bold talk of a no-fly zone and of military assistance for the rebels has given way to quavering about getting into the kinds of difficulties we had in Afghanistan and Iraq, where we armed groups that later became our enemies. Republican U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham darkly warned that "there are 30 tribes in Libya." So there are, but most of them are now targets for massacre by Muammar Gaddafi.

This sort of shilly-shallying was what produced the European Union Bosnian policy in the 1990s, which consisted of sanctions and an arms embargo that were utterly porous in regard to Serbia, but relatively enforced on the Muslim Bosnians, and were unctuously presented as an even-handed treatment of contesting forces on a level playing field. This outrage persisted, with the Clinton administration pretending it wasn't happening, until the Republican leader of the Senate, Robert Dole, called it by its rightful name as complicity in the ethnic cleansing of the Muslims by the Serbs and the Croatians. (Dole pushed through his "lift and strike" resolution threatening to wrest the status of commander-inchief of the armed forces from the president, and required that the Muslims be allowed to resupply and that air strikes be carried out against Serbia to deter Milosevic's aggression in Bosnia.)

There followed a rather ambivalent, not to say cowardly, policy, in which American and Allied planes did not descend below 15,000 feet out of fear of Serbian ground-to-air missiles, but rained down precision fire on strategic targets until -following the separate Kosovo campaign in 1999 -the Milosevic regime in Belgrade collapsed. What emerged was the notion of a war worth killing for, but not worth dying for, leading to heavy collateral damage in Serbia and a distinct lack of enthusiasm for the "liberators" of Belgrade. The West absolutely must not go through any such indignity again.

The martial traditions of America were not assisted then by president Clinton weeping at the fate of a single American airman who parachuted out of his aircraft and was captured. (He was released unharmed after a few weeks.) Previous American war presidents who had to deal with hundreds of thousands of war dead were made of sterner stuff, and spoke of the need "to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widows and his orphans" (Lincoln), and the courage and "faith to bear the sorrows that may come" (Roosevelt). After the equal-opportunity muscularity of the George W. Bush years, and the promising Obama start in Afghanistan, Washington seems to have retreated even from there.

What is developing in Libya is a civil war in which, so far, the West has enjoyed the free lunch of cheering on the rebels, without having to do anything except extract their own nationals and send some humanitarian aid. Now that the rebels are being counterattacked from the air by Gaddafi's air force, and are asking for military assistance, there is arm-flapping, hand-wringing and general waffling in the chancelleries of the West as we quiver in fear of the rag-bag detritus of the mad Colonel's decrepit military.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates told a congressional committee that, "Let's call a spade a spade: A no-fly zone means attacking Libya" (referring to the need to eliminate anti-aircraft batteries). So what? The United States cheerfully fires drone missiles into the territory of its glorious Pakistani ally (which supports elements of the Taliban we are fighting in Afghanistan) every day. Barack Obama, while his defence chief quails at taking out the anti-aircraft defences of the murderous lunatic Gaddafi, unctuously repeats that the Libyan leader "has lost the legitimacy to lead and he must leave." But such people don't just leave, and certainly not because such ungalvanizing figures as Obama tell him to leave.

I cannot accept that the West has reached the point of enfeeblement that we sit like worried, helpless sheep while Iran arms itself with nuclear weapons, and are afraid to assist a clear majority in Libya get rid of a murderous fruitcake of a despot. At the time of Munich, Winston Churchill called for the return of "martial courage of olden time." Here, we could settle for the purposefulness of the unprepossessing George W. in the Iraq Surge or of Obama escalating in Afghanistan. If NATO (the U.S. Sixth Fleet in practice) can't take out Libyan air defenses at no or minimal cost, we should all start studying Arabic and spending an hour a day with our foreheads pressed to the floor.

The best solution to Libya, as I suggested here recently, would be an Arab one; the fraternal invasion of Libya by Egypt, in support of an amenable regime, as all friendly parties engaged in the expulsion of Gaddafi would welcome such an initiative, and Egypt could negotiate in advance a revenue-producing arrangement for itself in securing the pacification of the country and the full resumption of oil flows. The Egyptian army would raise its prestige doing so, but if it is too preoccupied assuring a satisfactory result in the post-Mubarak election, the West will simply have to carry the anti-Gaddafi rebels across the finish line (and collect some credit for doing so).

At least all indications are that in the buzz of collegiality with which the West is noisily worrying about the dangers of doing anything about Libya except imitating King Canute from the White House balcony, Canada is being consulted. And there is something Canada can do, which would be noticed by our allies: We should recognize the provisional government of Libya as legitimate, and make contact with it. This could have a catalytic effect, inspirit the rebels, nudge the Americans and Europeans into doing something, and generally start a rockslide around Gaddafi.

The Europeans, who are disposed to do something, would be grateful, and so would the U.S. Republicans, at the moment the majority party in the United States. Even President Obama says that Gaddafi lacks legitimacy; so let us confer legitimacy on those who have earned it. A gangster and terrorist regime is slaughtering its own population, which is fighting back gallantly. We owe them our support, and every day's delay is shameful and could make a benign outcome more doubtful. For once, Canada could make a difference and be seen by the world to do so. There is no excuse for waiting.

National Post cbletters@ gmail.com


----------



## Armymedic

Conrad Black is just echoing the voicing of the Opposition parties and others who are demanding our "Harper's Government"  :-X  to "do something", whether it is install a no fly zone or other R2P provisions.

Those voices are the most dangerous to us CF members as it is those which will force us into situations where we will be placed in very uncomfortable situations like the FRY and other poorly conceived missions of the 90's.


----------



## Old Sweat

I am going to go waaay out on a limb to say that maybe the best result 

is for Gaddafi's forces to brutally crush the uprising, thus keeping him in power. My reason for stating this is based on nothing more noble than blatant self interest, but consider:

a. he is anti-Islamist, and by remaining in power, puts off the establishment of the "Islamist crescent" for an indefinite period of time;

b. his presence between Tunisia and Egypt means that both must deal with a potentially hostile power on their flank. This will reduce the potential for Egyptian adventures against Israel, if that country's armed forces were ever so disposed;

c. ditto for deep Saharan states such as Chad and the Sudan as well as Mali et al; 

d. his stock of chemical weapons remains under the control of a despot who has renounced their use; and

e. his success is apt to encourage some of the other states such as Yemen and even Saudia Arabia in their resolve.

I really would like to see him hanging by his heels a la Mussolini, but a nagging voice keeps telling me that may not be as good a thing as we think. Besides I would love to see several talking heads explode in HD.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Re: Conrad Black's column, it would take some guts (notable lacking in many (most? almost all?) Western capitals) but we could -

1.  Recognize the "provisional government" in Libya and offer it some aid: food, medicines - no arms, the gods know that Africa is already awash in arms, no one needs any more there;

2. Expel Gadhafi _loyalists_ from embassies and consulates in Western nations;

3. Blockade Libyan ports and airports and cut all oil pipelines; and

4. Wait for the Libyan people to "do the right things" ... or not.


----------



## PPCLI Guy

Rider Pride said:
			
		

> Conrad Black is just echoing the voicing of the Opposition parties and others who are demanding our "Harper's Government"  :-X  to "do something", whether it is install a no fly zone or other R2P provisions.
> 
> Those voices are the most dangerous to us CF members as it is those which will force us into situations where we will be placed in very uncomfortable situations like the FRY and other poorly conceived missions of the 90's.



The R2P crowd drives me nuts.  They never do the practical calculus on the other side of the equation, which is W2I, or Will To Intervene.  Perhaps even more importantly, they never consider the key limiter, which is M2I or Means to Intervene.  Policy objectives must be matched to available elements of national power rather than aspirational statements unlimited by means.


----------



## Armymedic

Excellent points. Currently, our country's citzens, after Afghanistan, do not have W2I, nor does our CF currently have M2I in any size that will provide any effect, except to allow the "Harper Gov't" to point and say, "look what we are doing", in response to the obvious Opposition talking point of "they aren't doing enough on this file".


----------



## MarkOttawa

Why does Canada need an activist, possibly interventionist one, in this case?  Other than to try to assert something that is pretty debatable: that we are a middle ("principal" in the more recent conceit) power punching like crazy to achieve...what?  Other than being seen to be doing something with no clear idea of what national interests are actually being forwarded in a practical fashion.  Foreign and defence policy as theatre for an almost exclusively domestic audience.

The Charlottetown may get us a tiny bit of say with others.  But what do we want, better need, to say?  Other than blithering platitudes?  The expenses of the ship deployment might better go to various forms of humanitarian help.  I can barely believe I just wrote that but...

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Edward Campbell

Libya, competently governed (something which has hardly ever happened in history), doesn't need humanitarian aid. It is a rich country that can buy whatever its people need. Sadly, i doubt that, at the end of this imbroglio, there will be a competent government, so ...


----------



## MarkOttawa

I might add that it is now an armed rebellion (real civil war soon?) against a legitimate gov't that all in the West were sucking up to like crazy until moments ago.  Innocent civilian casualties hardly seem high under the circumstances.  What basis is there for any type of armed intervention?  Libya, following on Tunisia and Egypt, has become an emotional thing in the West, driven by the media.  Plus a sudden realization by Western politicians that their links with Qadhafi have become oh-so-embarrassing so he must go (probably guilt feelings too).  I cannot see what basis in law or precedent there is for Obama et al. to say Gadhafi "must go".  We are just making up the rules as we go along.

Rather reminds me of Kosovo 1999 and American determination to get rid of Milosovic come hell or high water, feeling betrayed by him.  It's stupid to personalize these things.

Meanwhile what about other nasty places?

Fears rise of Ivorian civil war
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2f453e08-4672-11e0-aebf-00144feab49a.html?ftcamp=rss#axzz1FfVjLasn

AP: 53 peacekeepers killed in Somalia offensive
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hPImypnwWHvlvdp6GbZl_u5Al7fA?docId=5dc8db659342468cb972cb6ca7d354fa

Not much TV coverage, plus they are black.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

Nastiness is not necessarily all on one side:

Libyan rebels accused of targeting blacks
Rights groups say African migrant workers and black Libyans face beatings and detention by rebel fighters who suspect them of being mercenaries hired by Moammar Kadafi to put down the rebellion.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-mercenaries-20110305,0,5517806.story






_Guest workers from Ghana wait in vain to board a passenger ship in Benghazi harbor. Sub-Saharan African migrants and dark-skinned Libyans have faced harassment and detentions in recent weeks as rebel fighters go after suspected mercenaries said to be fighting for Kadafi. (Luis Sinco, Los Angeles Times / March 4, 2011)_



> Reporting from Benghazi, Libya
> Advertisement
> 
> About a dozen African men stood lined along a hallway of the courthouse in the eastern city of Benghazi. The men were suspected of being mercenaries fighting on behalf of Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi and had been rousted from their homes in the morning, turned in by residents responding to a rebel campaign urging them to report "suspicious people."
> 
> We are construction workers, one of the men said, pleading his innocence to a Times reporter visiting the courthouse, which now serves as the headquarters of the rebel government.
> 
> But the interview was abruptly ended and the group of Africans were led away to detention by Muhammed Bala, who described himself as a security officer for the rebel government.
> 
> "We're out looking for mercenaries every day," Bala said.
> 
> Across eastern Libya, rebel fighters and their supporters are detaining, intimidating and frequently beating African immigrants and black Libyans, accusing them of fighting as mercenaries on behalf of Kadafi, witnesses and human rights workers say.
> 
> In a few instances, rebels have executed suspected mercenaries captured in battle, according to Human Rights Watch and local Libyans.
> 
> The rebel-led provisional government in Benghazi denies mistreating suspected mercenaries, though it acknowledges that it is detaining some for questioning. It says it has given human rights representatives access to detainees.
> 
> But rebel fighters and bands of gunmen who looted government weapons depots are reportedly instigating their own detentions and beatings.
> 
> Kadafi has long used mercenaries, many of them from sub-Saharan Africa, to help enforce his rule...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

Tom Ricks:

Six considerations for discussing the imposition of a Libyan no-fly zone
http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/03/six_considerations_for_discussing_the_imposition_of_a_libyan_no_fly_zone



> I wish everyone talking about imposing a no-fly zone on Libya would take a deep breath. Americans have an odd habit of backing into war . We first deployed ground combat forces into Vietnam in the spring of 1965 simply to protect American air bases, for example. (Honestly, we didn't mean to violate Vizinni's law -- scroll down to the end of the poison discussion.)
> 
> Here are some of the issues that need to be examined. Anyone who advocates a no-fly zone should be required to answer them.
> 
> 1. Imposing a no-fly zone is an act of war. For example, it would require attacking Qaddafi's air defense systems-not just anti-aircraft guns and missile batteries, but also radar and communications systems. We may also need some places out in the desert to base helicopters to pick up downed fliers. So, first question: Do we want to go to war with Qaddafi?
> 
> 2. Hmmm, another American war in an Arab state -- what's not to like?..
> 
> As General Mattis once said, _if you're *going to take Vienna, take f---ing Vienna*_.



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Edward Campbell

And then there’s this, based on a _tweet_ from the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff (reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_):

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/canada-to-send-another-military-rescue-flight-to-libya/article1931350/


> Canada to send another military rescue flight to Libya
> 
> Ottawa— The Canadian Press
> Published Saturday, Mar. 05, 2011
> 
> Canada is sending another military flight to try and evacuate more of its citizens from strife-torn Libya.
> 
> Prime Minister Stephen Harper's spokesman Dimitri Soudas sent out a tweet saying a Canadian Forces flight was scheduled to airlift more citizens from the North African country on Saturday.
> 
> The Canadian air force has been sending planes into Libya over the past week, but getting landing permission has been a nightmare due to widespread confusion on the ground. The lack of an electronic link with the capital Tripoli has meant all landing rights requests must be faxed and often there are few people at the other end to collect the documents.
> 
> Canadians in Libya have been instructed to get to appropriate sea ports or airport evacuation points if they want to leave the country.
> 
> Unlike a few other countries, Canada has not proposed bold extraction missions to pluck its stranded citizens from the chaos.
> 
> The Netherlands tried to conduct such a mission this week, but it backfired with three Dutch marines captured by forces loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.
> 
> Libya has been mired in chaos as Gadhafi loyalists clash with opposing rebels. Hundreds have been killed and tens of thousands have fled the violence.
> 
> The crisis in the country is already far worse than any of the other uprisings in the Arab world this year as Mr. Gadhafi has unleashed a violent crackdown on anyone who opposes him. His political foes have taken up arms in their attempt to remove him from the post he has held for 41 years.
> 
> Canada and other countries have condemned Mr. Gadhafi for his actions and have imposed a wide range of sanctions on the leader and his regime.
> 
> The Harper government has also sent a frigate to join an international flotilla gathering off the coast of Libya, but has implied the military buildup is for humanitarian relief purposes for the moment.
> 
> HMCS Charlottetown was dispatched on Wednesday. There have been suggestions it could be used for relief operations, but the frigate is not set up to carry much cargo.
> 
> Canada has also promised millions of dollars in humanitarian assistance to Libya, but it will be sent through non-governmental organizations, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Organization for Migration.




The further _politicization_ of operations.

Of course _"Canada has not proposed bold extraction missions to pluck its stranded citizens from the chaos."_ How could a country mount a "bold extraction mission" when the PMO _tweets_ all the bloody details?


----------



## The Bread Guy

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> The further _politicization_ of operations.
> 
> Of course _"Canada has not proposed bold extraction missions to pluck its stranded citizens from the chaos."_ How could a country mount a "bold extraction mission" when the PMO _tweets_ all the bloody details?


If only they'd tweeted more about the Afghan mission....


----------



## Armymedic

All operations IRT Libya are going to be politically motivated.


----------



## a_majoor

Rebels declare a provisional government:

http://www.p2pnet.net/story/49758



> The new Republic of Libya: temporary council
> p2pnet view P2P | Freedom:- Libyans determined to rid themselves of Muammar Gaddafi, the dictator who’s ruled their lives for more than 40 years, have published a declaration for a temporary council in the Republic of Libya, says Alive in Libya.
> 
> Named in article 5 as president; and, deputy president and official spokesman, respectively, “Based on agreement of municipal councils across various liberated areas”, are:
> 
> Mustafa Abdul Jaleel
> Abdul Hafid Abdul Qader Ghoga
> The post doesn’t include details.
> 
> The original, in Arabic, can be viewed here – http://www.libya-alyoum.com/news/index.php?id=21&textid=2554, says the post.
> 
> 
> The English language translation is in full below >>>
> 
> *The Libyan Republic*
> Declaration of the Establishment of the National Transitional Temporary Council
> 
> In affirmation of the sovereignty of the Libyan people over the entirety of their territory, land, sea, and air; and in response to the demands of the Libyan people, towards the realization of the free will with which they shaped the uprising of February 17th; and in preservation of the Libyan people’s national unity; we resolve to establish a national council named ‘the National Transitional Temporary Council’ to be the only legitimate representative of the Libyan people.
> 
> Article 1
> 
> Functions
> 
> 1. To ensure the safety and peace of citizens and the national territory
> 
> 2. To coordinate national efforts to liberate the remaining quarters of the nation
> 
> 3. To coordinate the efforts of local councils working towards the return of civic life
> 
> 4. To supervise the military council so as to ensure the realization of a new doctrine for the national army towards the defense of the Libyan people and protection of its borders
> 
> 5. To supervise the election of a founding assembly charged with developing a new constitution for the country to be submitted to public referendum, so that the legitimacy of the constitution is founded on:  the will of the people, the triumphant uprising of February 17th, respect for human rights, guarantee of civil liberties, separation of powers, an independent judiciary and the establishment of national institutions that provide for broad and pluralistic participation, the peaceful transition of authority and the right of representation for every segment of Libyan society
> 
> 6. To form a transitional government to pave the way for free elections
> 
> 7. To conduct and to steer foreign policy, to organize relations with foreign nations and international and regional organizations, and to represent the Libyan people before them
> 
> Article 2
> 
> The Council’s Organizational Structure
> 
> 1. The Council is composed of 30 members, representing all of Libya’s regions and all segments of Libyan society, with youth membership representing no less than 5 members.
> 
> 2. The Council will select from its members a president, an official spokesperson and coordinators for a variety of domestic and foreign functions.
> 
> Article 3
> 
> Seat of the Council
> 
> The Council’s permanent seat is at the capital, Tripoli, taking Benghazi as its temporary seat until the capital is liberated.
> 
> Article 4
> 
> It is the responsibility of the Council to set protocols for its regular and emergency meetings and to make decisions in accordance with the interests of the Libyan people, in a manner that does not contradict the people’s demands, the basis of which were declared by the uprising of February 17th:  the fall of the Gaddafi regime and the establishment of a civil, constitutional and democratic state.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Rebels declare a provisional government:
> 
> http://www.p2pnet.net/story/49758



Cool - if it's the only one to do so over the next while.


----------



## CougarKing

From an update at the British Military Current events thread:

8 UK SAS Soldiers captured in Libya


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Journeyman said:
			
		

> _~shrug~  _ Apparently, it's "just politics."
> 
> Paul Martin had a very close relationship with several high-ranking Tamil Tiger personnel. See Stewart Bell, Ch 2 "Snow Tigers," _Cold Terror: How Canada Nurtures and Exports Terrorism Around the World_.
> 
> But then, he _was_ the Liberal PM....and the ex-pat Tamil community _was_ in his riding -- it's only votes, right?



And just to add to the conspiricy, how much influence did Power Corporation sway over the deal. After all, Martin (Canada Steamship), the Chretians (Bombardier), Mulroneys, Raes, et al are all beholden to this conglomorate which also has major influence with our public Canadian oil. Don't forget, Trudeau gave every taxpayer shares in PetroCan when it was bought and nationalized, although no matter how much I ask they won't cash me out  )


----------



## tomahawk6

They were escorting a diplomat who might as well have been MI6. Hope they are released forthwith.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Since the _Sunday Times_ page doesn't seem to be working for me (every link on the front page brings you to a review of a TV show with a priest in it), here's more from the BBC:


> The Ministry of Defence says it will not comment on Sunday Times claims that eight members of the SAS have been seized by rebel forces in Libya.
> 
> Defence Secretary Liam Fox told the BBC a small diplomatic team was in Benghazi and "they were in touch with them".
> 
> BBC correspondent Jon Leyne, in eastern Libya, said he had "strong suspicions" the reports were true.
> 
> The paper claims a unit was trying to put UK diplomats in touch with rebels trying to topple the Gaddafi regime.
> 
> It says eight SAS men, in plain clothes but armed, were captured.
> 
> The BBC's Jon Leyne, who is in the main rebel stronghold city of Benghazi, said: "I have been speaking to people from the authorities here who've not denied it and have spoken in terms that it probably is true without actually saying as much."
> 
> In a statement, the MoD said: "We do not comment on the special forces." ....



... and AFP:


> Britain on Sunday refused to confirm a report that Special Air Service soldiers and a diplomat were being held in Benghazi but revealed that a "small British diplomatic team" was in Libya's second city.
> 
> The Sunday Times newspaper said the SAS unit, reportedly up to eight men, were captured along with the diplomat they were escorting through the rebel-held east and who was seeking contact with opponents of Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi.
> 
> "We can neither confirm nor deny the report," a Foreign Office spokeswoman told AFP.
> 
> The defence ministry said it did not comment on the special forces, while Defence Secretary Liam Fox told BBC television: "I can confirm that a small British diplomatic team is in Benghazi.
> 
> "We are in touch with them but it would be inappropriate for me to comment further," he added ....


----------



## tomahawk6

The BBC is reporting the SAS and diplomats have left Libya and are onboard HMS Cumberland.


----------



## Edward Campbell

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> And then there’s this, based on a _tweet_ from the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff (reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_):
> 
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/canada-to-send-another-military-rescue-flight-to-libya/article1931350/
> 
> The further _politicization_ of operations.
> 
> Of course _"Canada has not proposed bold extraction missions to pluck its stranded citizens from the chaos."_ How could a country mount a "bold extraction mission" when the PMO _tweets_ all the bloody details?





And now this, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/canadian-military-flight-evacuates-more-citizens-from-libya/article1931350/


> Canadian military flight evacuates more citizens from Libya
> 
> Ottawa— The Canadian Press
> Sunday, Mar. 06, 2011 11:59AM EST
> 
> Ottawa has confirmed a military flight was able to pluck more Canadians and other foreign nationals from strife-torn Libya on Saturday.
> 
> A spokesman for Defence Minister Peter MacKay said the Canadian Forces plane flew in from Malta and landed “without incident.”
> 
> “It's boarded a number of evacuees,” Jay Paxton told The Canadian Press.
> 
> Prime Minister Stephen Harper's spokesman Dimitri Soudas tweeted that the C130 plane landed in Malta late Saturday afternoon carrying nine Canadian citizens.
> 
> Mr. Soudas added that the plane also evacuated foreign nationals from the U.S., U.K., Ukraine and other countries.
> 
> Earlier Saturday Mr. Soudas had tweeted that almost 330 Canadians have been pulled from Libya so far.
> Canada's evacuation efforts have suffering a string of setbacks though. A military transport was denied landing rights in Libya last week and at least two civilian aircraft chartered by the Foreign Affairs Department left the north African country with no passengers in late February.
> 
> Many Canadians leaving Libya have done so aboard ships and planes belonging to other countries. But the government has defended its efforts saying it worked hard to secure the safety of its citizens by co-ordinating closely with its allies.
> 
> The Canadian air force has been sending planes into Libya over the past week, but getting landing permission has been a nightmare due to widespread confusion on the ground. The lack of an electronic link with the capital Tripoli has meant all landing rights requests must be faxed and often there are few people at the other end to collect the documents.
> 
> Canadians in Libya have been instructed to get to appropriate sea ports or airport evacuation points if they want to leave the country.
> 
> Unlike a few other countries, Canada has not proposed bold extraction missions to pluck its stranded citizens from the chaos.
> 
> The Netherlands tried to conduct such a mission this week, but it backfired with three Dutch marines captured by forces loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.
> 
> The United States is stepping up efforts to repatriate foreigners fleeing Libya.
> 
> In the United States, the State Department said Saturday four U.S. military aircraft are picking up Egyptians who crossed the Libyan border into Tunisia, and flying them to Cairo. Two Marine KC-130 aircraft left Djerba, Tunisia, with 132 Egyptians, and two Air Force C-130s are en route to Tunisia to evacuate more.
> 
> The government also said it is contributing $3-million to the International Organization for Migration to help repatriate thousands of foreign nationals who crossed into Tunisia to escape clashes between the Gadhafi government and the insurrection against him.
> 
> The announcement marks the latest in a series of relief flights. On Friday, the U.S. sent two cargo planes into Tunisia with supplies for refugees from Libya.
> 
> Libya has been mired in chaos as Gadhafi loyalists clash with opposing rebels. Hundreds have been killed and tens of thousands have fled the violence.
> 
> The crisis in the country is already far worse than any of the other uprisings in the Arab world this year as Mr. Gadhafi has unleashed a violent crackdown on anyone who opposes him. His political foes have taken up arms in their attempt to remove him from the post he has held for 41 years.
> 
> Canada and other countries have condemned Mr. Gadhafi for his actions and have imposed a wide range of sanctions on the leader and his regime.
> 
> The Harper government has also sent a frigate to join an international flotilla gathering off the coast of Libya, but has implied the military buildup is for humanitarian relief purposes for the moment.
> 
> HMCS Charlottetown was dispatched on Wednesday. There have been suggestions it could be used for relief operations, but the frigate is not set up to carry much cargo.
> 
> Canada has also promised millions of dollars in humanitarian assistance to Libya, but it will be sent through non-governmental organizations, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Organization for Migration.




Well done, Air Force.


----------



## MarkOttawa

British and Canadian air evacuation efforts: Chris Taylor does some fine digging and comparing at _Taylor Empire Airways_, including photos and interesting maps:

1) RAF civilian extractions from Libya
http://taylorempireairways.com/2011/03/raf-civilian-extractions-from-libya/



> ...
> I’ve illustrated the potential destinations and flight times in the graphic below.  I’ve also included all of Libya’s oil concessions (territories leased to Libyan or foreign petroleum companies for exploration and exploitation of oil fields) and known oil fields; this helps give us an idea of where the most petroleum-related activity is taking place, and subsequently where the most foreigners are likely to be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Libyan oil fields, oil concessions, and potential extraction airfields used by 47 Sqn on February 26th and 27th, 2011..._
> 
> The idea that our air force should seek permission from a tyrant’s collapsing bureaucracy is a farce. But this is Canada, so we pay for our men and women in uniform to be better-dressed surrogates for Air Canada and WestJet, rather than a force that can go into hostile environments and remove Canadians (and allies) at the decision of the Dominion government.  As the SAS, SBS and RAF have demonstrated, this is not a lack of equipment or capability; it is simply a failure of political will...



One might note that acting boldly, likely not in accord with international law, to help one's own nationals is still far different from acting to help depose a foreign government.

2) CF Operation Mobile air evacuation
http://taylorempireairways.com/2011/03/cf-operation-mobile-air-evacuation/



> ...
> 
> I am a little curious about the maps in the last photo [in Mr Taylor's post, not included here].  The map closest to the camera depicts the location of CF air and naval assets around the islands of Malta.  The far map is Libya, but it is difficult to read except for a half-dozen notations.  I’ve done my best to reproduce it here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Presumably the red- and black-outlined areas depict government- and rebel-held areas within Libya, though the resolution is not great enough to see what all those small notes actually say...




Once again, excellent work by Mr Taylor.  Do take a look at the full posts.  Meanwhile the Brits' special forces are now out of a bit of bother:

Libya unrest: UK diplomatic team released by rebels
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12660163

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## tomahawk6

There has been recent shootdowns of Libyan jets with Syrian pilots. Dont know if its rebel propaganda or not. Gaddafi has the money to buy mercenaries from anywhere.


----------



## jollyjacktar

I caught some of an interview with our old friend Sunil Ram today on CBC TV.  Very entertaining and enlightening it was too.  Apparently he comes by his vast knowledge and expertise honestly, he said he was a combat veteran of three wars in the middle east no less.  I'm at a bit of a loss as to which ones, but damn he sounded sure of himself...  :nod:  Apparently the forecast is extended periods of uncertainty due to a cold front of hand wringing on the West's behalf, whereas if we (the West) were to drop supplies and enforce a NFZ it will be over by the weekend.  (And we can all go back to reasonable gouging at the pumps I guess.)


----------



## tomahawk6

Ah that it explains it then. Sunil Ram served with the IDF.


----------



## Edward Campbell

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Ah that it explains it then. Sunil Ram served with the IDF.




Or this "explains" it all (well, two out of three ain't bad):



> I am an expert in the field of peacekeeping and military affairs with over a decade’s worth of experience as a military advisor with the Saudi Royal Family, including involvement in the 1991 Gulf War and the 1994 Yemeni War.


Source: Sunil Ram's biography on the American Military University website


----------



## GAP

pure bafflegab..... :


----------



## Edward Campbell

GAP said:
			
		

> pure bafflegab..... :




But the problem is that *most* of us, Canadians, get *most* of our information from the TV.* Now we may say that it is fortunate that only a handful of us actually watch CBC but Sunil Ram and people with similar 'qualifications' pop up on _Global_ and _CTV_, too - and on the American networks upon which too many Canadians depend for *most* of their information.

I'm not slagging Ram, he may actually understand the various situations and he's almost certainly even right now and again - but rather better, on average, than a stopped clock, one hopes. But he, like _Saint Stephen_ Staples and several others are 'experts' without "tested" (peer reviewed) qualifications.  One does not need to agree with a retired general in order to understand that (s)he has been "tested" in a highly competitive system and, like that system or not, has demonstrated a set of skills and knowledge that demand our attention. Folks like Ram and Staples, on the other hand, have pretty _light_ resumes - light on documented, specialized credentials and accomplishments.

In my opinion we need more of the Douglas Blands** and if I want someone with no particular military experience (so he would be unbiased) I'll take a Marc Milner every time. Unfortunately, for Canadians, Profs. Bland and Milner and their ilk are, unlike Ram and Staples _et al_, busy people who cannot "down tools" and run to a TV studio whenever a network calls.


----------
*   According to data I have seen over the past several years
** Whose resume doesn't mention that he was, for several years, an armoured corps officer - with extensive field and staff experience


----------



## kstart

Mercenary Armies:

From BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12647115

About "2-300 men" from Kidal region in Mali, left about a week ago (to the date of March 4th) in "40 vehicles who are in southern Algeria waiting to cross the border into Libya."  

" 'They are being paid about $10,000 to join up and then I've heard they are being told that they will get $1,000 a day to fight,' the official said. "

Comment:

Can Gaddafi actually pay these mercenaries?   I thought most of his assets were frozen via the UN Sanctions?
Is it a miss-communication and/or has Gaddafi secured other funding and/or has a large enough stockpile of $ . . .?

This also in, SAS Captured by "Rebel Forces":

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12658054

What are these diplomatic missions about?  I'd think it would be about business interests, resumption of oil production. . .?  Offers of help to keep the oil flowing. . .?

I also don't understand soaring gas prices, other than opportunists taking advantage of a situation?  I thought OPEC was about controlling the production to keep prices stable, respect of individual National interests-- couldn't they just ramp up production in other areas to compensate?  Did they?

There's probably some panic, there are large foreign contracts among other OPEC countries in Libya, including ourselves.  What else are the oil companies up to?  Making other deals with governments, BP to pay less compensation for the Gulf spill. . .?  I just don't like all the power they have, nonetheless we live with this.

Other mediating factor, obviously, the traders, marketplace.


----------



## Edward Campbell

OPEC can _influence_ prices but they are set in the market by the iron laws of supply and demand. Demand is increasing at a helluva rate (look at car sales in India and China) and prices will, without fail, follow - unless, suddenly, miraculously, cold fusion works, or something like that.

Price fixing conspiracy theories are nonsense - wildly popular with a majority of Canadian but utter, complete, arrant nonsense all the same.


----------



## kstart

I'm not suggesting price fixing (but I believe it's possible that happens-- there's always some criminal activity, not policed sufficiently, we find out after the fact. . . Enron?. . .), but just the chaos that naturally happens in the marketplace, creating the reality, by panic, etc.

If OPEC can stabilize prices-- maybe all countries are maximizing production already?  But there is some on reserve. . . 

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/opec-can-balance-for-libya-shortfalls-shell-ceo/127879/on

OPEC, short-term fixes, may still cause panic and stir.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7550

There are countries right now which can't transport their oil, while others still can in Libya, but it's said that's trailing off, but. . .

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/3/12/6906/Business/Economy/Libya-oil-ports-still-open-but-activity-tailing-of.aspx:



> Libya oil ports still open but activity tailing off
> Reuters, Thursday 3 Mar 2011
> Export situation unclear as passenger ships get priority
> Libyan oil port activity was tailing off on Thursday, but despite civil unrest tankers were still leaving and waiting to enter the country's ports, sources said on Thursday.
> 
> At least one empty tanker left a Libyan terminal on Thursday to take on cargo in Egypt, and at least two more tankers were waiting to enter Libyan ports.
> 
> The one million barrel capacity tanker Sanandaj, owned by the *National Iranian Tanker Company (NIT) * left the port of Benghazi empty on Thursday morning destined for Egypt's Sidi Kerir petroleum terminal in Alexandria to pick up cargo, a company spokesman said.
> 
> Another million barrel capacity tanker owned by NIT, the Sarv, was anchored outside the port of Tobruk on Thursday, waiting to enter Libyan oil company Agoco's Marsa El Hariga petroleum terminal, according to AIS Live ship tracking data on Reuters. It was not clear whether it was to take on cargo or offload.
> 
> A slightly smaller tanker was waiting to enter Libya's port of Mellitah in order to take on cargo, a shipping source said.
> 
> "The situation is very unclear; ports are theoretically open, but in practice they are almost closed because we are giving priority to passenger ships," a spokesman for the Libya Shipping & Maritime Agency in Tripoli said.
> 
> Despite this, at least 2.4 million barrels of crude oil in four tankers left Libyan ports earlier this week, shipping and trade sources said.
> 
> Forces loyal to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi attacked the major oil export terminal of Marsa El Brega on Wednesday in the first sign of a counter-offensive by the leader in the rebel-controlled east, which rebels said they had repulsed.
> 
> As fighting continues across Libya, the oil industry is trying to assess the output lost, with outage estimates currently around 800,000 barrels per day (bpd).
> 
> Ongoing communications difficulties with phones and the internet in Libya led to some cargoes being cancelled this week, shipping sources said.
> 
> Shokri Ghanem, chairman of Libya's National Oil Corporation, said on Wednesday the country's oil output had fallen to 700,000 to 750,000 bpd due to the worst crisis for Libya's oil industry in decades.
> 
> http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/6906.aspx



I wonder about the SAS mission, the diplomats and Rebel forces. . . in Benghazi-- wouldn't they be trying to make deals with the Rebels for safe passage of their Country's oil companies . . .?


----------



## Old Sweat

Here is a case where an experienced journalist and commentator misread the situation in that he put 250 members of JTF2 on board HMCS Charlottetown en route to the Med. It seems he took the size of the crew for embarked troops. Now I don't know if any SOFCOM troops are on board, nor do I expect that anybody is going to tell me anytime soon. 

The column from the Ottawa Sun is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act.

Libyans' fight, not ours
To stick our noses — and commandos — in uprising would be wrong

By Peter Worthington, QMI Agency

Last Updated: March 7, 2011 2:00am

Right now a Canadian warship — HMCS Charlottetown — is heading for the Mediterranean to join an allied flotilla off Libya.

It won’t get there until later this week and it is a precautionary gesture in case there are more crises in the area, requiring the evacuation (protection?) of stranded Canadians.

And to show solidarity with our allies.

The Charlottetown is a multi-role frigate and has one Sea King helicopter aboard (let's hope it works, if needed). So far, so good.

We are told there are also some 250 soldiers on board the ship. But not conventional soldiers, like the Princess Pats, RCR or Van Doos, but JTF 2 guys — so-called Special Forces, or Black Ops commandos.

One wonders why.

The public knows very little about JTF 2. It's a secret army within the army, and many are skeptical about the whole thing. We (the public) are told that in Afghanistan they went behind the lines and did dark deeds that cannot be publicized. Cloak and dagger stuff.

Is that what their role would be in Libya, if necessary?

One hopes not.

The very last thing Canada should be contemplating is putting soldiers on the ground in Libya. Let Libyans resolve their own future.

Yes, Moammar Gadhafi is a delusional despot whose time has run out. He's acting in character by not trying to escape, and odds are that his fate is to be torn apart by the mobs.

If so, let it happen.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has pledged $5 million in humanitarian relief for Libya. That's a pathetic amount and merely a gesture that is not needed.

Libyans are not among the poorest of Arabs, and the Libyan uprising is not motivated by poverty or destitution, but because people are fed up with a comic book caricature like Gadhafi oppressing them.

Those who think western countries should be helping depose Gadhafi are wrong. We helped prop him up when he was on top, so it's both hypocritical and cowardly to now help get rid of him.

Let Libyans run their own revolution.

The U.S. is being careful. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton points out that we’ve no idea who is going to run Libya when (and if) Gadhafi is no more, or who's leading the charge.

It's not yet certain that Gadhafi will go. He's got imported fighters killing as many protesters as possible. (One hesitates to call them "mercenaries" because the true mercenary has a code that determines conduct; Gadhafi's supporters are more like thugs than soldiers).

Back to JTF 2 guys aboard the Charlottetown.

Is it anticipated that they may be required to infiltrate behind Libyan lines? One hopes not. If evacuating Canadians is the role, surely regular troops are better at that.

In Afghanistan, the JTF 2 (there is no JTF 1) were somewhat resented by other soldiers. No photographs are supposed to be taken of JTF 2 members, no interviews. They are supposedly anonymous and incognito. But they are recognizable by often being unshaven, wearing dark glasses, and wearing outfits that would get the sergeant major apoplectic if regular soldiers dressed that way.

When Jean Chretien was PM and briefly visited Canadian troops in Afghanistan, he had a bodyguard comprised of JTF 2. Did he really need protection from Canadian soldiers? It was kind of insulting to them.

Anyway, let's hope Gadhafi is history by the time the Charlottetown reaches Libya, and the only thing JTF 2 has to worry about is sunburn.


----------



## Edward Campbell

kstart said:
			
		

> ...
> I wonder about the SAS mission, the diplomats and Rebel forces. . . in Benghazi-- wouldn't they be trying to make deals with the Rebels for safe passage of their Country's oil companies . . .?




Libyan oil, according to recent data goes here:






72% of Libya's oil goes to Europe, but the UK, which has its own oil, gets a fairly small amount.


----------



## Dissident

Not an expert in Naval capability, but I think one of our Frigate would be pretty crowded if it had its full compliment of sailors and an extra 250 embarked troops, JTF2 or not.


----------



## a_majoor

The major issue with oil is while demand fluctuates quickly, supply is relatively fixed.

I'm talking the sort of supply you as the end consumer needs, refined fuels and petroleum products. In Ontario, there are only 4 refineries, so no matter how much crude oil there is (and there is actually lots, new fields like the Bakken in Saskatchewan and North Dakota are coming on line, and new technologies like "frakking" are increasing yeilds from old fields), there is a limited throughput of refined product. In the US, heavy and complex environmental regulations have discouraged the building of new refineries for more than 30 years, so not only is throughput fixed, but creaky old refineries break down and throttle supply of refined fuel.

Your local gas station has a fixed supply of fuel (the environmentally friendly tanks cannot be rapidly upgraded or replaced with bigger ones), so when demand increases on weekends and holidays, the gas station cannot increase supply to meet demand (unlike a grocery store which can shuffle stock on shelves, place bins on the floor etc.)

And as Edward says, we are involved in a market where decisions made in Shanghai or Madras can affect us at the speed of light.

Fix this end of the problem, and see how prices change.


----------



## Kat Stevens

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Libyan oil, according to recent data goes here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 72% of Libya's oil goes to Europe, but the UK, which has its own oil, gets a fairly small amount.



NOW I see why our gas prices jumped $.12 in less than a week.  It's because the non existent oil Canada imports from the Middle East is under threat.  Best excuse available, I suppose.


----------



## willellis

Dissident said:
			
		

> Not an expert in Naval capability, but I think one of our Frigate would be pretty crowded if it had its full compliment of sailors and an extra 250 embarked troops, JTF2 or not.



Yea, I would have to agree. I'm pretty sure he meant 250 total on board.


----------



## kstart

There is some Canadian Oil interests in Libya:


Petro Canada (now merged with Suncor) signed a 1 billion dollar signing bonus over to Gaddafi, in exchange for 30 year contract in oil exploration.

Terms of the agreement here: http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/06/08TRIPOLI498.html


Libya also threated to nationalize Canadian oil:

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/libyas-gadhafi-threatened-to-nationalize-petro-canadas-operations-wikileaks-114979969.htm


----------



## MarkOttawa

If by any chance this passed, how much would/could the UK and France contribute to what would have to be a US-dominated operation (I would think).  And would/could Canada contribute say 6-12 CF-18s?

Britain, France ready Libya no-fly zone resolution
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gjK-uTaUi4eIZffTsS13LCaFVYQw?docId=CNG.49104d077a72cbffeafe9d3689e92793.af1



> UNITED NATIONS — A British-French resolution demanding a no-fly zone over Libya could go before the UN Security Council as early as this week, diplomats said Monday.
> 
> While Moamer Kadhafi's offensive against rebels is intensifying, any demand for military action would set off a new diplomatic battle at the Security Council.
> 
> Anticipating opposition, Britain's foreign minister has insisted that there must be "a clear legal basis" for the zone and set other conditions.
> 
> "You should expect something on Libya this week," one UN diplomat told AFP on condition of anonymity, confirming that France and Britain are drawing up a resolution. "There is a feeling of urgency now."
> 
> "There are elements of a text ready which can be distributed to the council. It could well be this week," said a British diplomat.
> 
> Britain and France have made the most aggressive calls among Western powers for a no-fly zone to hamper Kadhafi's offensive. The United States has said it is studying the possibility while warning of the major military operation it would entail.
> 
> The UN Security Council unanimously passed sanctions against the Kadhafi regime and ordered a crimes against humanity investigation on February 26. Any new move toward military action is likely to face tough resistance from China, Russia and other members of the 15 however.
> 
> Britain's Foreign Secretary William Hague said the Libyan rebels had "explicitly" asked for action to prevent Kadhafi's air attacks but that "many conditions should be attached" to any no-fly zone.
> 
> "At the UN Security Council we are working closely with partners on a contingency basis on elements of a resolution on a no-fly zone, making clear the need for regional support, a clear trigger for such a resolution and an appropriate legal basis," Hague told the British parliament...
> 
> Arab League secretary general Amr Mussa supported a no-fly zone when he spoke to French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe in Cairo on Sunday, French foreign ministry spokesman Bernard Valero said in Paris.
> 
> The six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council also released a statement on Monday backing a no-fly zone.
> 
> Strong support from Arab and African nations helped sway Russia, China and others behind the assets freeze and travel ban against Kadhafi and 15 other members of his family and regime.
> 
> Russia and China, which traditionally oppose military sanctions, may resist stronger measures so soon after the last vote, diplomats and experts said...
> 
> Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov last week called the no-fly zones "superfluous" and said international powers should concentrate on the existing sanctions.
> 
> "We do not consider foreign and especially military intervention a means to resolve the crisis in Libya," Russian news agencies quoted Lavrov as saying Monday. "The Libyans must resolve their problems themselves."
> 
> China's foreign ministry also indicated last week that it was cool to military action.
> 
> India, also a member of the Security Council, has opposed no-fly zones, though diplomats said it could be swayed if the Libya fighting worsens.



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Edward Campbell

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> If by any chance this passed, how much would/could the UK and France contribute to what would have to be a US-dominated operation (I would think).  And would/could Canada contribute say 6-12 CF-18s?
> 
> Britain, France ready Libya no-fly zone resolution
> http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gjK-uTaUi4eIZffTsS13LCaFVYQw?docId=CNG.49104d077a72cbffeafe9d3689e92793.af1
> ...
> Russia and China, which traditionally oppose military sanctions, may resist stronger measures so soon after the last vote, diplomats and experts said...
> 
> Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov last week called the no-fly zones "superfluous" and said international powers should concentrate on the existing sanctions.
> 
> "We do not consider foreign and especially military intervention a means to resolve the crisis in Libya," Russian news agencies quoted Lavrov as saying Monday. "The Libyans must resolve their problems themselves."
> 
> China's foreign ministry also indicated last week that it was cool to military action.
> 
> India, also a member of the Security Council, has opposed no-fly zones, though diplomats said it could be swayed if the Libya fighting worsens.
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa




This will be a conundrum for China. It traditionally, and for its own good reasons, opposes any actions that interfere with the _internal affairs_ of any UN member. But their interests in Africa might make then change their minds if, and it's a big Big *IF*, most African countries want military intervention.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Meanwhile Tom Ricks
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/99510/post-1023552.html#msg1023552

is now convinced in favour of a more, er, robust, US policy:

What Obama needs to do with Libya -- and with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, today
http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/07/what_obama_needs_to_do_with_libya_and_with_the_joint_chiefs_of_staff_today

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## hauger

Found this on Combat Camera, pretty sure it's in Libya and the 130J.

http://www.combatcamera.forces.gc.ca/netpub/server.np?find&catalog=news&template=news-nouvelles_detail_eng.np&field=itemid&op=matches&value=679&site=combatcamera

Sounds like the camera man was picking up an ELT on landing.


----------



## GR66

> Arab League secretary general Amr Mussa supported a no-fly zone when he spoke to French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe in Cairo on Sunday, French foreign ministry spokesman Bernard Valero said in Paris.
> 
> The six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council also released a statement on Monday backing a no-fly zone.



So, once again the world calls upon "The Great Satan", the "European Colonial Powers" and "Self-Interested, Interventionalist West" to step in and solve the internal problems of a troubled country.  And when Western forces are in the country two years from now trying to keep rival tribes from eachother's throats and trying to build democratic institutions who will be the bad guys that get the blame for trying to impose their will on an "occupied" nation or for trying to gain control of their valuable natural resources?

How quickly could the problem of Libyan Air Force strikes be solved by the Egyptians or Saudis supplying the rebel forces with some shoulder-fired AA missiles and trainers?  Send them some AT missiles to blunt the counter-attacks by pro-Gadaffi armoured forces?  Much easier to ask "Big Brother" to do the work...and take the blame for any fallout.


----------



## Old Sweat

The National Post editorial board is prepared to fight to the last European. Reproduced under the Fair Dealing provision of the Copyright Act.

National Post editorial board: NATO should prepare for war in Libya

March 8, 2011 – 8:00 am 

Pressure is growing for Western nations to intervene militarily in Libya’s emerging civil war. As we noted in an editorial published on Thursday — and as the embarrassing capture of a contingent of British special-forces troops over the weekend shows — there are good reasons to be wary about such a campaign. But Muammar Gaddafi’s apparent willingness to exterminate large numbers of his citizens in recent days has served to marginalize such concerns: Whatever the risks that attend military intervention, we must not permit a North African Srebrenica.

A first step for NATO nations would be to impose a no-fly zone over rebel areas in order to shield protestors and revolutionary soldiers from Col. Gaddafi’s air power. If we cannot bring ourselves to do even that, the West risks having no friends in whatever government replaces Col. Gaddifi’s. We also risk losing credibility in the larger Arab and Muslim worlds for our unwillingness to enforce the humanitarian principles we claim to hold dear.

The British and French governments have called for the imposition of no-fly rules. But both nations also have insisted on seeking approval in advance from the UN Security Council. Such a gesture would be useless: Neither China nor Russia — both veto-wielding Security Council members, and both guilty of their own human-rights violations — would permit any such resolution to pass. A more realistic approach would be to ask NATO’s council to authorize military action. This would mirror the approach taken in 1999, when the NATO bombing campaign against Serbian forces in Kosovo was performed without UN authorization.

The heavy lifting associated with the no-fly mission should be performed by Italy, France, Germany and Spain — which, collectively, import 90% of Libya’s oil exports. Britain, too, has a well-established trade relationship with Libya. It is in these countries’ interests to remove Col. Gaddafi as quickly as possible and stabilize the country around a new government. There are roles for Canada, the United States and other Western nations, too. Even as the Canadian air force seeks to acquire a controversial new multi-purpose fighter jet, our old CF-18s are more than a match for anything the Libyans have to throw up against them.

In the best case scenario, NATO will not have to fire a single shot or scramble a single aircraft — because Libyans will end Gaddafi’s cruel tyranny all by themselves. But failing that, we cannot stand by and permit a Libyan genocide to unfold.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> .... But failing that, we cannot stand by and permit a Libyan genocide to unfold.




Why not? We've done it (stood by while a genocide unfolded) plenty of times in past. What, besides oil for Italy, makes Libya so bloody special? Something needs to stir up the Arab, North African, West Asian and, especially, the East Asian Muslims to throw off the shackles of Saudi financed fundamentalism and have a nice little _reformation_. Maybe a bit of internecine killing will do the trick.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Some good points from Roger Cohen:

Libyan Closure
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/08/opinion/08iht-edcohen08.html



> LONDON — There’s a video of Dr. Alia Brahimi of the London School of Economics greeting Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi as “Brother Leader” at the school three months ago, and presenting him with an L.S.E. cap — a tradition, she says, that started when the cap was handed to Nelson Mandela.
> 
> It may be possible to sink to greater depths but right now I can’t think how.
> 
> Sir Howard Davies, the director of the L.S.E., had the decency to resign over the school’s financial links to Qaddafi and his own misjudgments. If only the L.S.E. were an isolated case. The Arab Spring is also a Western Winter.
> 
> I’m glad the United States and Europe have gotten behind the Bahrain-to-Benghazi awakening. But I’ve not heard enough self-criticism.
> 
> Hearings should be held in the U.S. Congress and throughout Western legislatures on these questions: How did we back, use and encourage the brutality of Arab dictators over so many years? To what degree did that cynical encouragement of despots foster the very jihadist rage Western societies sought to curb?..
> 
> ...you have the Cairo-Tripoli axis. They were useful, Mubarak and Qaddafi, for intelligence and renditions and a cold Israeli peace in the case of the Egyptian; for oil and gas in the case of the Libyan. They were also killers.
> 
> Disappear is a transitive verb for dictators. That’s what they do to foes, disappear them in the night for questioning that becomes a nameless forever...
> 
> There are many reasons I oppose a Western military intervention in Libya: the bitter experience of Iraq; the importance of these Arab liberation movements being homegrown; the ease of going in and difficulty of getting out; the accusations of Western pursuit of oil that will poison the terrain; the fact that two Western wars in Muslim countries are enough.
> 
> But the deepest reason is the moral bankruptcy of the West with respect to the Arab world. Arabs have no need of U.S. or European soldiers as they seek the freedom that America and the European Union were content to deny them. Qaddafi can be undermined without Western military intervention. He cannot prevail: Some officer will eventually make that plain...



It really is quite remarkably repulsive that Western countries were sucking up like crazy to the Col. until just the other day--and are now leaping over each other to condemn him (they all knew what he was like) and demand that he go.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## larry Strong

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> It really is quite remarkably repulsive that Western countries were sucking up like crazy to the Col. until just the other day--and are now leaping over each other to condemn him (they all knew what he was like) and demand that he go.
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa



Very much like all the Hollywood types who *now*, years after the fact decide to give payments for performances to charity......why did they not do the right thing from the start?????


----------



## daftandbarmy

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> There has been recent shootdowns of Libyan jets with Syrian pilots. Dont know if its rebel propaganda or not. Gaddafi has the money to buy mercenaries from anywhere.



But mostly from sub-Saharan Africa apparently:

Kickass In Libya

March 6, 2011: In Libya, the Kadaffi clan is desperately trying to suppress an uprising among most of its six million inhabitants. The Kadaffis have found that the most dependable troops can be obtained from the nomadic Tuareg tribes in the southwest, and further southwest through Algeria Mali and Niger. There are about five million Tuareg in these countries, but only about ten percent are in Libya. The most likely recruits are to be found in Mali and Niger, and that's where men from the local Libyan embassy have been offering young men $10,000 to join, and several thousand dollars a week to fight in Libya. This is nothing new for the Tuareg, who have been serving as mercenaries for Kadaffi since the 1970s. But now thousands of them are being hired. Times are hard for the Tuareg in Mali and Niger, where drought, and hostile locals have made life difficult. Kadaffi is offering a large payday for those who join. Even if the Tuareg men don't come back, their families have the $10,000, and whatever else their sons send back. If the Tuareg succeed in putting down the rebellion, Kadaffi will likely reward his Tuareg warriors, as he has in the past. 

In Libya, most of the 45,000 man army has either joined the rebels or deserted. The security services (80,000 men of the Revolutionary Guard, Peoples' Militia and secret police) have also suffered desertions. Worse, but these guys are trained to bully and terrorize civilians, not fight a war. Kadaffi desperately needs some kickass fighters who don't mind killing Libyan civilians.

The Tuareg have a lot of experience in the violence department. The Tuareg tribes have, for centuries, had a hostile relationship with their settled neighbors in general, and the peoples to the south in particular. The Tuaregs, who are lighter skinned (they are distant cousins of the ancient Egyptians and Semitic peoples) than the sub-Saharan Africans, speak different languages (again, related to ancient Egyptian, not the Bantu, and other language groups found to the south) and have a different lifestyle.

The sub-Saharan governments, especially in Niger, have played up the racial differences, tagging the Tuareg as evil "whites" and urging the destruction of the hated nomads. The southerners do have a beef, in that the nomadic Tuareg have been raiding the more settled blacks for a long time (like thousands of years.) So the animosity is nothing new. 

In addition to work as mercenaries in Libya, there is another new element. Al Qaeda has been hiring Tuareg to help move drugs north. Unlike the more secular Kadaffi, al Qaeda does have some problems with how the Tuaregs practice Islam. The Tuareg take their Islam in a decidedly Tuareg fashion. That is, many ancient religious practices were incorporated into the Tuareg version of Islam. This sort of thing is anathema to al Qaeda, in particular, and Islamic radicals in general. Leave the Tuareg and al Qaeda together long enough, and you can expect some homegrown Tuareg counter-terrorist action. But the Mali government doesn't want to wait, for they know that al Qaeda might get into some local mischief first. And the Western nations don't want al Qaeda to have a sanctuary, not matter how transitory, anywhere on the planet, even in the middle of the desert. 

The relations with the local tribes, especially the powerful Tuareg, are complicated. The Tuareg are not fond of Islamic terrorism, but young Tuareg are allowed, by their tribal chiefs, to work with al Qaeda as hired guns. The pay is good, and, so far, not too dangerous. But the young Tuareg are picking up some radical ideas from their al Qaeda bosses, and that is causing some tension with tribal leaders.
The drug smuggling is actually handled by Arab gangsters that are not terrorists. Al Qaeda gets paid lots of money to provide security for the drugs as they make the long run through the Sahara. The Tuareg provide local knowledge of the terrain, and people, at least in the far south. 

The Tuareg, like the Somalis and Afghans, are tribal warriors. If led by Tuareg with military training (like those who have long served in the Libyan army), they would be more effective, but not on a par with trained troops. There are over 100,000 Tuareg men through the tribal zone that are potentially willing to take the Libyan offer to fight. But getting these tribesmen to northern Libya, where the fighting is, takes time. Most of the new recruits are being moved by truck, and this can take days. But if Kadaffi can keep the rebels away from his stronghold in Tripoli (in northwest Libya) for a week or so, a substantial force of several thousand armed and loyal Tuareg can be assembled. These mercenaries would prove a difficult force to overcome.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htatrit/articles/20110306.aspx


----------



## jollyjacktar

I believe I heard on the radio coming into work today that there will be a NFZ following Libyan Gov't flattening a town to the east of Tripoli.


----------



## MarkOttawa

USN over-stretched:

F-22s Could Be Assigned To Libyan Operation
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/awst/2011/03/07/AW_03_07_2011_p28-293410.xml



> The Pentagon is generating plans for a no-fly zone over Libya—plans that could produce the first combat assignment for the F-22 Raptor stealth fighter.
> 
> Whether the idea progresses beyond this stage is subject to United Nations and NATO support, the scale of Libyan military action against its civilians, and the reluctance of the U.S. to take on stewardship of military operations in yet another Muslim country. Nonetheless, the idea does show how the U.S. Air Force confronts the task of taking down a large air defense system.
> 
> The Lockheed Martin F-22, F-16CJ Wild Weasels and some cyberoperations would be employed in shutting down Libya’s air defense system, which consists “almost exclusively” of Russian-built SA-6 surface-to-air missile (SAM)systems. The munitions are similar to those that opposed NATO forces involved in operations in Serbia and that shot down the single F-117 fighter lost in combat, says a former Air Force chief of staff.
> 
> While the SA-6 Gainful (2K12 Kub) is the most effective SAM in the Libyan inventory, others include the SA-2 Guideline (S-75), SA-3 Goa (S-125) and SA-5 Gammon (S-200).
> 
> U.S. aircraft carriers are moving to the western Mediterranean, but operations in Afghanistan may not permit them to maintain a long-term no-fly zone over Libya. That task would likely fall to the Air Force, says a senior USAF official.
> 
> “Creating and enforcing a leak-proof no-fly zone over Libya can be done without stretching U.S. forces,” the veteran fighter pilot says. “The Air Force has the capacity to do this without seriously affecting its missions in Afghanistan. There is no air superiority problem in Iraq or Afghanistan that requires more fighters and AWACS [Airborne Warning and Control Systems], than [those] already committed [to that mission].”..
> 
> Basing could be an issue. “Obviously it would be desirable to operate from bases in Italy,” the former Air Force chief of staff says. “Italy would likely allow us to use its bases because of [its] vested commitment to [maintaining] access to Libyan oil and gas.”
> 
> A worst-case scenario, with NATO rejecting support of a no-fly zone, might have shorter-range U.S. fighters flying out of Egypt, using facilities like Cairo West where multi-national Bright Star exercises are conducted...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

The key, gruesome, question is at the end of this quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/08/AR2011030805868_3.html?sid=ST2011030805453



> …
> “A no-fly zone is the robust man’s option,” one administration official said. “But what is it going to do to the balance of power in Libya?” With the Libyan government’s assault concentrated on ground rather than air power, “it doesn’t change it internally so it favors the rebels. It doesn’t do much humanitarian good.”
> 
> “It makes us feel good,” the official said, and has some symbolic value in potentially frightening Gaddafi into giving up. “But what . . . if it doesn’t work? Are you prepared to take the next step? We haven’t had that debate yet, in part because we thought it was going to happen really quickly.”
> 
> NATO maintained a no-fly zone over the disputed province of Kosovo for three years, while numerous atrocities occurred below, before sending its bombers to Serbia. In Libya, an imminent humanitarian catastrophe would be the best legal basis, short of a U.N. resolution, for a no-fly zone or other intervention, U.S. and European officials said. But such judgments are inherently subjective, said one official.
> 
> “This is the question,” he said. “How many people being killed constitutes sufficient grounds?”



Nowhere near enough so far, in my view. Also relevant:

Libya’s helicopter forces are greatest threat, U.S. Marine chief says
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/08/senate.hearing.libya/

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Edward Campbell

“How many people being killed constitutes sufficient grounds?”

When did people getting killed ever count for anything? How many million black Africans have been killed in Congo, Liberia, Cote d'Ivoire and so on in the past few years? That doesn't count as "grounds" for anything. The *only* "grounds' for intervention in Libya are: _vital interests_ and, in Libya, _vital interests_ = oil for Europe.

Let's have no hand wringing about the deaths if innocents being "grounds" for anything; that's rank hypocrisy.

If we're going to intervene in Libya - send Western sailors, soldiers and air force people into harm's way - then let's be honest about the *only* good reason for doing that: *our national self-interest*. If our, Canadian, nation self interest includes supporting our allies in a Libyan _intervention_ then so be it, but we must not risk our, Canadian, lives and treasure just become some innocent civilians are being slaughtered - we've never done so in the past and this would be a bloody poor time and place to start.


----------



## MarkOttawa

> we've never done so in the past



Actually we did in Kosovo in 1999, without in fact any good reason.  And Chretien had his Congo bungle in the jungle--except the problem was solved before we could actually do anything.  Then there was Somalia...

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Jed

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> Actually we did in Kosovo in 1999, without in fact any good reason.  And Chretien had his Congo bungle in the jungle--except the problem was solved before we could actually do anything.  Then there was Somalia...
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa



Each one of these interactions did not do anything for Canadian National interest, and in fact, probably brought on some portion of discredit to us, as a Nation.


----------



## GAP

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> “How many people being killed constitutes sufficient grounds?”
> 
> When did people getting killed ever count for anything? How many million black Africans have been killed in Congo, Liberia, Cote d'Ivoire and so on in the past few years? That doesn't count as "grounds" for anything. The *only* "grounds' for intervention in Libya are: _vital interests_ and, in Libya, _vital interests_ = oil for Europe.
> 
> Let's have no hand wringing about the deaths if innocents being "grounds" for anything; that's rank hypocrisy.
> 
> If we're going to intervene in Libya - send Western sailors, soldiers and air force people into harm's way - then let's be honest about the *only* good reason for doing that: *our national self-interest*. If our, Canadian, nation self interest includes supporting our allies in a Libyan _intervention_ then so be it, but we must not risk our, Canadian, lives and treasure just become some innocent civilians are being slaughtered - we've never done so in the past and this would be a bloody poor time and place to start.



I don't see Italy, nor France....the two major recipients of Libyan oil even on the scene, let alone leading the charge to change the regime..... in addition to which, I also notice the total lack of discussion by the potential replacement government regarding anything at all about keeping the contracts Gadhafi bargined for...valid...change of government....all bets are off...


----------



## MarkOttawa

No USN carrier for Libya for now:

No Sale on Libyan No Fly Zone -- So Far
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a3ea1416a-86d8-48f4-a400-d44e0509902a



> The heads of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps confirmed today (March 8) that two Navy amphibious warfare ships with a Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) are being stationed in the Mediterranean Sea close enough to Libya to take action if ordered by the White House.
> 
> Gen. James Amos, the Marine Corps commandant, said 400 Marines of the 1st Battalion, 2nd Marine Regiment have joined troops of the 26th MEU aboard the U.S.S. Kearsarge (LHD3) and the U.S.S. Ponce (LPD15). But he and Adm. Gary Roughead, the chief of naval operations, said there were no immediate plans for U.S. Intervention in the Libyan crisis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photo: USS Kearsarge Website
> http://www.kearsarge.navy.mil/Site%20Pages/Ship%20Photos.aspx
> 
> Replying to questions from the Senate Armed Services Committee, Amos said the ships are equipped with AV-8A Harrier jump jets, attack and cargo helicopters, including V-22 Osprey til- rotor helos, and landing craft.
> 
> Roughead added that the vessels are equipped with missiles that can strike land targets, as well as medical teams and operating room facilities,
> 
> The ships and Marines are equipped to handle everything from “a raid, amphibious assault to non-combat evacuation,” Amos said.
> 
> But both commanders were reluctant to say it would be relatively easy to impose a No Fly Zone over Libya.
> 
> Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the senior Republican on the committee got Amos to acknowledge Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi's air defenses are “modest.” The top Marine said the “greatest threat” was probably Libyan helicopters. McCain, along with Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), has been advocating imposition of a no-fly zone to prevent Qaddafi's forces from attacking rebels and aircraft in the eastern part of the country. The air attacks have blunted advances by rebels seeking to topple Qaddafi, who has ruled Libya for more than 40 years.
> 
> McCain prodded Amos into confirming that Qaddafi's air defense systems were mostly older Soviet-style surface-to-air missiles, concentrated at four air bases in and around the Libyan capital of Tripoli.
> 
> But Amos said success for the warring Libyan parties relies on more than simply controlling the airspace. “I think it's more than aviation. It's complicated,” Amos said.
> 
> “No one is saying a No Fly Zone is uncomplicated,” Lieberman conceded during his turn questioning the Navy and Marine Corps leaders.
> 
> Roughead said there has been no military-to-military communication between the U.S. and the Libyan rebels. He added that the aircraft aboard the Kearsarge and Ponce do not have the electronic warfare (EW) technology, like the EA 6B Prowler, that can jam Libyan air defense systems. The closest ship with EW-equipped aircraft is the *carrier U.S.S. Enterprise currently in the Red Sea. Roughead said there are no plans to shift the Big E to the Mediterranean* [emphasis added].
> 
> He told Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) that “entering into combat operations*” would be a precursor to any No Fly Zone because it would be necessary to suppress or destroy any air defense or radar warning systems...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

Good piece by UK Chief of the General Staff, 2006-2009

Libya: A no-fly zone is no way to deal with Libya
Britain should steer clear of another military intervention in the Middle East , writes Richard Dannatt.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8371987/Libya-A-no-fly-zone-is-no-way-to-deal-with-Libya.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Edward Campbell

Jed said:
			
		

> Each one of these interactions did not do anything for Canadian National interest, and in fact, probably brought on some portion of discredit to us, as a Nation.



In each of the cases Mark cited the government of the day _perceived_ the action to be in the national (or the government's political) interest. I recall the "bungle in the jungle" (2003) Prime Minister Chretien was scurrying around trying to find UN "missions" for Canada in Africa. Sadly, actually maybe happily, Chretien did not have the political capital to carry the thing off and all we are left with is an image of Gen Baril, briefcase in hand, walking forlornly down a rural road - looking for a mission, I presume.


----------



## Old Sweat

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> In each of the cases Mark cited the government of the day _perceived_ the action to be in the national (or the government's political) interest. I recall the "bungle in the jungle" (2003) Prime Minister Chretien was scurrying around trying to find UN "missions" for Canada in Africa. Sadly, actually maybe happily, Chretien did not have the political capital to carry the thing off and all we are left with is an image of Gen Baril, briefcase in hand, walking forlornly down a rural road - looking for a mission, I presume.



And the late Colonel Strome Galloway (ret) of The RCR in a letter to the editor describing a picture in the Ottawa Citizen of Baril, LGen Roy and BGen Cox shambling along in combat clothing as "looking more like a cook house detail than a group of senior officers." 

In my opinion, this is the time for prudence, not "feel good" reactions. There are more important issues to grasp our attention, most of which, I fear, have yet to arise.


----------



## MarkOttawa

More from _AW&ST_:

Libyan Air Defenses Would Fade Fast
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:b5d2af1a-9b89-40d6-acb6-ee7a623098a0&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## kstart

GAP said:
			
		

> I don't see Italy, nor France....the two major recipients of Libyan oil even on the scene, let alone leading the charge to change the regime..... in addition to which, I also notice the total lack of discussion by the potential replacement government regarding anything at all about keeping the contracts Gadhafi bargined for...valid...change of government....all bets are off...



I suspect this is a key factor.  

Gadhafi had plans to Nationalize foreign oil in Libya:  http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110131/gadhafi-threatened-nationalizing-petro-canada-110131/

Bad investment with a nutty dictator and regime, the slightest slight and he's on a tyrade.

It seems political, the 'provisional government' (which is still just a council?) may be ambivalent about securing those deals with foreign investors, it looks like it could be the internal politics and optics of appealing to Western countries, and their foreign investment interests.  This seems to be a self-lead pro-democracy movement, power for the people, I don't think they want to give power away to the West to have over them. . .?  But there seem to be competing reports, some say_ yes, help us_, some say, _no, stay away_?  Without that unification of voice, it might result in UN/Nato stepping back. . .?

But here they are also mobilized to act, so is it a wait for a unified rebel/pro-democracy voice. . .?


----------



## MarkOttawa

But not in the Med.:

Navy keeping two carriers in Middle East for most of year
http://www.stripes.com/news/navy-keeping-two-carriers-in-middle-east-for-most-of-year-1.137137



> The Navy has increased its Middle East presence by positioning two aircraft carriers there simultaneously for at least nine months a year for the foreseeable future, military officials said earlier this month.
> 
> The need for an additional carrier arose from requirements for combat air support for the surge of troops into Afghanistan, coupled with the need for tactical air support for U.S. forces in Iraq and the U.S. commitment to the Iraqi government to maintain air superiority until the Iraqi air force can take over, said Lt. Col. Mike Lawhorn, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command.
> 
> “We had these three needs come up relatively close to one another, and the way it was determined to meet the needs was to put another carrier” in the region, he said.
> 
> Two carriers, the USS Carl Vinson and USS Enterprise, have been in the region since early and mid-February, respectively, supporting missions in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Enterprise is in the Red Sea supporting maritime security operations, said Lt. Frederick Martin, a 5th Fleet spokesman in Bahrain. The Vinson replaced the USS Abraham Lincoln, which had been solo in the Middle East region.
> 
> But dedicating carrier-based aircraft for Iraq missions is a misuse of strained naval assets, said Loren Thompson, a defense industry consultant and member of the libertarian Lexington Institute think tank.
> 
> “There is little need to support America’s shrinking military role in Iraq with sea-based aviation,” Thompson said. “The United States has access to air bases in Kuwait, Turkey and other nearby nations that would make reliance on aircraft carriers a misuse of scarce assets.”
> 
> Of the *Navy’s 288 ships* [emphasis added], 118 currently are deployed. Five of the Navy’s 11 aircraft carriers are deployed or conducting sea trials in preparation for deployments...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## CougarKing

France recognizes the rebel government, giving them further llegitimacy:


link



> *France became the first country to formally recognize Libya's newly created interim governing council Thursday, saying it plans to exchange ambassadors with the opposition group trying to oust longtime leader Moammar Gadhafi.*
> 
> People in the eastern city of Benghazi, where the rebel council is based, honked and cheered to celebrate the announcement, Reuters reported.
> 
> "It breaks the ice," said Mustafa Gheriani, an opposition spokesman. "We expect Italy to do it, and we expect England to do it."
> 
> France's announcement comes as NATO defence ministers gathered in Brussels, where they will discuss the growing crisis in the north African nation.
> 
> *Both sides in Libya are lobbying for support from Western countries as their leaders debate whether to protect the rebels from Gadhafi's air force by putting a no-fly zone over some or all of the country. Britain and France have backed the rebels' calls for a no-fly zone, but the U.S. Obama administration has expressed deep reservations about involvement in another conflict in the greater Middle East.
> 
> Gadhafi has vowed to fight any attempt to impose a no-fly zone on the north African nation.*
> 
> Ahead of Thursday's meeting, NATO said it had started round-the-clock surveillance of the air space over Libya, and British Foreign Secretary William Hague said a meeting of EU foreign ministers would discuss how to isolate the regime.
> 
> Meanwhile, Germany said it froze billions in assets of the Libyan Central Bank and other state-run agencies. The U.S., U.K., Canada other countries have also frozen Gadhafi's assets.
> 
> "The international assets that are being frozen does make a difference for the money that's out of the country," CBC's Adrienne Arsenault said from the capital of Tripoli. "But it's also important to remember that Gadhafi has amazing reserves of cash within this country.
> 
> "He can last for quite some time while the international community continues to debate what it's going to do."
> 
> *Clashes in Ras Lanouf
> Arsenault noted there were reports of ongoing clashes between Gadhafi loyalists and rebel forces over the Mediterranean oil port of Ras Lanouf.
> 
> "The government is intent on saying it has not lost control of the oil," she said, noting there is speculation that the government will ramp up its efforts to seize and maintain control of valuable oil facilities.
> 
> Rebel fighters load ammunition into an anti-aircraft machine-gun as Libyan air force fighter jets fly overhead of Ras Lanuf on March 8. (Roberto Schmidt/AFP/Getty).Rebel forces beat a retreat from the strategic oil port on Thursday, heading back to opposition territory in the east as Gadhafi's army pounded the town with artillery, The Associated Press reported.
> 
> One opposition fighter said government forces were raining rockets or tank shells on the city in what appeared to be preparation for a full-scale advance.
> 
> Shells hit a series of buildings as Gadhafi's tanks moved further along Libya's main Mediterranean coastal road than they have been since the rebels seized most of the country's east.
> 
> The main hospital in Ras Lanour was hit by artillery or airstrikes, opposition forces said, prompting rebel forces to move staff and patients to nearby towns. Gebril Hewada, a doctor on the opposition's health committee in the main eastern city of Benghazi, said no staffers were hurt, but he didn't know about patients.
> 
> In the west, Gadhafi claimed victory in recapturing Zawiya, the city closest to the capital that had fallen into opposition hands.*
> Arsenault said there were reports of continued clashes in the city Thursday and noted that the reports of government control of Zawiya are in dispute.
> 
> Casualties rising
> Meanwhile, the president of the international Red Cross said doctors are seeing a dramatic rise in the number of casualties in Libya, including many civilian deaths.
> 
> Jakob Kellenberger said Thursday in Geneva that local doctors over the past few days saw "a sharp increase in the number of casualties arriving at hospitals in Ajdabiya and Misrata," where there has been heavy fighting and airstrikes.
> 
> His comments come after Gadhafi accused Western media of overblowing the number of casualties during the uprising, which aims to oust the longtime Libyan leader.
> 
> Kellenberger said that in Misrata, 40 patients were treated for serious injuries and 22 dead were taken there. He said the Red Cross surgical team in Ajdabiya operated on 55 wounded this past week and "civilians are bearing the brunt of the violence."
> 
> The aid organization is cut off from access in western areas including Tripoli, said Kellenberger, but he believes those are "even more severely affected by the fighting" than eastern rebel-held territories.
> 
> *The UN estimates more than 200,000 people have fled Libya to escape the violence.*
> 
> Pro-democracy demonstrations have been pushing for change since mid-February. Gadhafi, who has been in power since 1969, has consistently rejected calls to step aside and has blamed al-Qaeda and Western infiltrators for the unrest in Libya.


----------



## MarkOttawa

LewMac:

Libya would never be just a no-fly zone (usual copyright disclaimer)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/Somnia/article1935668/



> ...
> A much better comparison could be made with the inaccurately labelled no-fly zone imposed by NATO over Serbia during Kosovo’s attempt to break away in 1999. Inaccurate, because the intervention went well beyond closing the airspace over Serbia to all but NATO aircraft. It started with the targeting of Serbia’s air defences but quickly escalated to an all-out bombing campaign – initially against military and security targets, then adding strategic targets such as oil refineries and major bridges.
> 
> NATO made daily claims that civilian targets weren’t included. But I visited a number of apartment buildings that had been destroyed (along with many of their occupants), none of which were within 50 kilometres of a military or strategic target. Was this the intent during the opening stages of the bombing campaign? I certainly hope not. But once you decide to militarily intervene in another country’s civil conflict, you have to be prepared to escalate even if it’s the wrong thing to do, because quitting your commitment when the initial plan fails is just not on.
> 
> Odds are, the same scenario would unfold in Libya if a no-fly zone were enforced. Unfortunately, Col. Gadhafi doesn’t need his air force to prevail, so its grounding or destruction would merely shift the fighting to the backs of his army...
> 
> ...countries enforcing any no-fly zone would be unable to ignore the carnage below them. Backed into a corner, their political leaders would be forced to escalate and authorize attacks against the Libyan army – thereby becoming, in effect, the opposition’s air force. By so doing, they would assume a much larger role in Libya’s future, including reconstruction of the damage they inflicted.
> 
> Don’t get me wrong, I’m no fan of Col. Gadhafi. But I’m also no fan of political decisions driven by well-meaning military undertakings with the naive belief they will be short term and successful. As the saying goes, “In for a penny, in for a pound.”
> 
> _Retired major-general Lewis MacKenzie was the first commander of UN peacekeeping forces in Sarajevo._



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## tomahawk6

France runs the risk of losing access to Libyan oil if Gaddafi holds on to power - and its clear the rebels are on the ropes. If NATO puts up a no fly zone, that is the only thing that would save the rebels. A likely result is Gaddafi holding power in the west and the rebels holding the eastern part of the country. Of course a wild card would be the Egyptian Army moving into Libya to make Libya part of Egypt - there is precedent for that.


----------



## GAP

That has all kinds of unsavory implications.....


----------



## Edward Campbell

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> France runs the risk of losing access to Libyan oil if Gaddafi holds on to power - and its clear the rebels are on the ropes. If NATO puts up a no fly zone, that is the only thing that would save the rebels. A likely result is Gaddafi holding power in the west and the rebels holding the eastern part of the country. Of course a wild card would be the Egyptian Army moving into Libya to make Libya part of Egypt - there is precedent for that.




Oil is a globally traded, _fungible_ commodity - if Libyan oil is off the market then Nigerian or Venezuelan or Canadian oil is available. The price will go up but, with a tiny handful of exceptions, like Russia, those with oil to sell will get it to those with money to pay. 

I think the division of Libya into (at least) two states, one under Egyptian 'protection,' is possible, even likely. 

I doubt the US led West has either the will or the way to intervene in any useful way.


----------



## GAP

The "West" isn't going to intervene....The US has no vested interest, Europe does not have the gonads, the rest don't care.


----------



## tomahawk6

Libyan oil is sold to Europe. I guess France could make up any shortfall with Russian oil/gas.


----------



## GAP

This pretty much is spot on................

 What the anti-war left sowed in Iraq, it is now reaping in Libya
Article Link
Jonathan Kay  Mar 11, 2011 – 2:52 PM ET

Eight years ago, on Feb. 15, 2003, protestors in as many as 60 countries took to the streets to oppose the then-imminent Iraq War. Total crowd estimates range as high as 30-million. In Rome alone, turnout was 3-million-strong, making it the biggest anti-war rally in history.

Those protestors didn’t stop the Iraq War. But they did help shape the overwhelmingly negative international response to it around the world. Though Iraq now is on the road to peace and democracy, and the American troop presence there is dwindling, leftists still insist that the campaign was a neo-imperialist “war for oil.” Europeans and Canadians, in particular, were appalled at the “unilateral” nature of the American action; and the issue caused a major schism within members of NATO.

It wasn’t until the election of Barack Obama in 2008 that trans-Atlantic relations were truly repaired. In fact, many of the leftists who voted for Mr. Obama did so precisely because they thought America needed a more conciliatory voice, and a more multilateral, less muscular approach, on the world stage.

Fast forward two years from Mr. Obama’s inauguration, and one can draw a straight line from this new “soft power” foreign policy to Washington’s paralysis over what to do in Libya, where the regime in Tripoli is waging scorched-earth warfare on the country’s rebel forces.

At this stage, it seems the only thing that can stop Col. Gaddafi’s rampaging forces is the sort of quick, unilateral military intervention that fell out of fashion after the Iraq War. But, having made a fetish of international law, multilateralism, and the Security Council’s moral authority in 2003, many world leaders — including, apparently, Mr. Obama — are afraid to act in 2011, lest a bloody or prolonged operation invite the familiar chorus of accusations involving oil, imperialism and Islamophobia.

In other words: What the humanitarian, anti-war left sowed in Iraq, it is now reaping in Libya.
end


----------



## CougarKing

The Libyan rebel leader pleads for a no-fly zone:

link



> BENGHAZI, Libya - *A rebel leader pleaded Saturday with the international community to approve a no-fly zone over Libya as Moammar Gadhafi's forces gained strength in the east, securing a key port city and oil refinery.
> 
> Mustafa Abdul-Jalil*, the head of the opposition's interim governing council, also expressed disappointment over the failure to act by the United States and other Western countries, which have expressed solidarity with the rebels in their fight to oust Gadhafi but stopped short of approving any military action.
> 
> "If there is no no-fly zone imposed on Gadhafi's regime, and if his ships are not checked then we will have a catastrophe in Libya," Abdul-Jalil told The Associated Press in an interview.
> 
> *Abdul-Jalil's comments came as the Arab League held an emergency meeting to discuss the possibility of imposing no-fly zone over Libya to protect the civilian population from the Gadhafi regime's fighter jets. But the Arab League's member states are divided over how to deal with the Libyan crisis, signalling it would be a tough debate.
> 
> The European Union, which has said any such decision would need sufficient diplomatic backing from the Arab League and other regional organizations, sent its foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, to Cairo for the meeting*.
> 
> *Another rebel commander, meanwhile, conceded defeat after pro-Gadhafi forces drove out pockets of fighters who had maintained a tenuous hold around oil facilities in Ras Lanouf, 380 miles (615 kilometres) southeast of the capital, Tripoli.
> 
> Gen. Abdel-Fattah Younis, who was the country's interior minister before he defected to the rebel side, acknowledged Saturday that Gadhafi's forces now control both the town and the oil refinery in Ras Lanouf.
> 
> The rebels had captured the city a week ago in a major victory as they pushed westward along the Mediterranean coastline toward Tripoli. Their retreat from the city reverses that advance and threatens other rebel positions in their eastern stronghold.*
> President Barack Obama said Friday the United States and the world community are "slowly tightening the noose" on the Libyan leader and will keep up the pressure. He would not, however, commit to intervening at any cost, warning of potential perils in military action. The U.S. and other Western powers have instituted sanctions, frozen assets and provided humanitarian aid.
> 
> The Obama administration has said a no-fly zone may have limited impact, and there is far from international agreement on it.
> 
> It would require U.S. and possibly allies' aircraft to first attack Libya's anti-aircraft defences, a move tantamount to starting war.
> 
> Gadhafi has warned the United States and other Western powers not to intervene, saying thousands in his country would die and "we will turn Libya into another Vietnam."
> 
> (...)


----------



## MarkOttawa

Terry Glavin lets loose:

Americans: Singes Mangeurs De Fromage (Cheese-Eating Surrender Monkeys).
http://transmontanus.blogspot.com/2011/03/americans-singes-mangeurs-de-fromage.html



> How soon we have forgotten all the fun the Yanks had at the expense of the French, the maitre d'Axis Des Weasels. And this time around nobody is asking for anything even remotely like an Iraq-scale invasion, or an Afghanistan-like reconstruction and counterinsurgency effort. Nobody is asking for a rerun of the Punic Wars, or American "boots on the ground,' or shock, or awe. Still, the Handsome President cringes, even as the French say allons-y...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

Eliot Cohen gives the great power view in the _WSJ_:

Washington's Dithering on Libya
Why are top defense and intelligence officials disparaging military action and publicly predicting Gadhafi's survival?
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22New%20administrations%20anticipate%20foreign%20policy%22&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=nws:1&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wn



> New administrations anticipate foreign policy as if it will be baseball or football—a complicated team sport, bound by rules, at which they will succeed by dint of individual skill, clever plays and their all-knowing coach. They suit up, only to discover that their sport will be rafting on a uncharted river in full flood, filled with rocks and whirlpools, through which the frantic crew paddles in opposite directions.
> 
> Thus too the Obama administration. It came into office planning resets, nuclear zeroes and Israeli-Palestinian peace. It finds itself instead coping with a vast revolution of politics, society and thought in the Arab world—unforeseen and unforeseeable, fraught with opportunity and danger.
> 
> For the moment, the administration has survived several rapids—ditching Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak in some confusion and with embarrassing but not indecent haste; nudging the ruler of Bahrain into reform without quite pitching him overboard; and, thus far, avoiding a complete capsizing of the boat in Yemen.
> 
> But with regard to Libya it has made mistakes that could haunt this country for years to come. The administration prides itself on the president's unhurried deliberation, his reluctance to act before considering all the angles, his strategic silences and extended consultations. But steer a raft on a wild river that way, and you end up in the water.
> 
> From the outset there were three possible outcomes in Libya: Moammar Gadhafi could go quickly, he could go slowly, or he could stay. The best chance of helping him go quickly would have been an unambiguous declaration of intent to see him off, and the willingness to lead a military effort—most likely a no-fly zone—to help Libyan rebels overthrow his regime.
> 
> There was momentum a few weeks ago as one town after another fell to enemies of the regime. A stream of defections, betrayals and surrenders seemed to spell Gadhafi's doom. The time to intervene is when a small push can have the greatest psychological effect, even if military planners would prefer to do it only after orchestrating a three-week air-defense suppression campaign...
> 
> ...The only question now is whether Gadhafi goes slowly, over months, or not at all. Senior American intelligence officials inconveniently observed the other day in front of Congress that the latter seems the likely outcome. What will happen if they are right?
> 
> The administration will have put itself in the position of willing the ends, but not the means—a humiliating position for a great power...
> 
> This is a disaster for the people of Libya. It is a moral and political calamity for a generation of Western leaders whose reactions to Rwanda and Srebrenica consisted of ineffectual squeaks of dismay. It may deflect the Arab awakening into directions that will horrify us. And it says dangerous things about American foreign policy. Unless it is reversed, the administration's Libya policy will convince the world that the U.S. is a feeble friend and an ineffectual foe, paralyzed by its own ambivalence.
> 
> _Mr. Cohen teaches at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies.
> [ http://www.sais-jhu.edu/faculty/directory/bios/c/cohen.htm ]
> He served as counselor of the State Department during the last two years of the George W. Bush administration. _



Plus a lengthy presentation of the other view:

Gen. Wesley Clark says Libya doesn't meet the test for U.S. military action
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/11/AR2011031107048.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

Start of a post at the CDFAI's _3Ds Blog_:

The Indispensable Military?
http://www.cdfai.org/the3dsblog/?p=139



> Suppose one agrees that something military must be done in Libya regarding Col. Gadhafi.  It seems to me a telling, and sad, indicator of international realities that any such forceful action appears effectively impossible without considerable participation by US armed forces.
> 
> The Americans spend far more on defence, in total and per capita, than EU members.  Very many criticize the US, often severely, sometimes stridently, for what they judge an American obsession with military strength...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## a_majoor

There will be no intervention or Progressive "International Brigade" to save the day, so:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/03/13/what-if-qaddafi-wins/



> *What if Qaddafi Wins?*
> Michael J. Totten 03.13.2011 - 6:51 AM
> 
> If something doesn’t change soon, Muammar Qaddafi will kill his way back into power over all Libya’s territory. His forces are retaking rebel positions. The opposition is crumbling. And it looks like the United States and Europe will stand back and just let it happen.
> 
> This isn’t the first time an Arab tyrant has made a startling comeback after an uprising nearly swept him away. Saddam Hussein lost control of most of Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War, but tens of thousands of dead bodies later, he was firmly and ruthlessly back in the saddle.
> 
> There are good arguments against getting involved. Not even the most hawkish interventionist would have chosen a war against Qaddafi a month ago. There aren’t many worse human-rights abusers out there, though there are some. And there are certainly countries where the West has more national interests at stake, the most obvious being Iran. But let’s not pretend there won’t be consequences beyond the shores of Tripoli if Qaddafi butchers his way back to Benghazi.
> 
> He’ll emerge meaner and more isolated than ever and hell-bent on revenge. We can forget about going back to the status quo ante when his relations with others were more or less “normal.” Whatever reluctance he felt against acting out will be eroded, if not lost entirely, now that he knows the West has little appetite to move against him, even when he is cornered and at his most vulnerable.
> 
> If the only Arab rulers to be deposed by revolution are the nominally pro-American “moderates,” while the mass-murdering state sponsors of terrorism hang on, change indeed will be coming to the Middle East and North Africa, but it won’t be the change we were hoping for. One thing, however, will not have changed an iota: the Middle East will be governed by violence just as it always has.
> 
> If the Caligula of North Africa survives by fighting to the death and prevailing, he will surely inspire the other hard rulers to take the same strategy, especially after the humiliating and mostly nonviolent defeats of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and Tunisia’s Ben Ali. The killers of the resistance bloc — Iran’s Islamic Republic, Bashar al-Assad’s Baath Party in Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Hamas in Gaza — won’t likely be overthrown by peaceful demonstrations but by massive internally  or externally driven wars.


----------



## WingsofFury

Just throwing this out there...

Arab League wants a No Fly Zone put in place for Libya.  Some countries in the Arab League have pretty decent air forces and could thus enforce a no fly zone over the Libyan skies.

Does anyone think that, if the UN authorizes the zone, that NATO should stay out of the area and let the countries of the Arab League enforce it?

Saudi Arabia - 166 F-15's, 87 Tornado IDS (ground attack), 24 Typhoon F3's
Jordan - 55 F-16's, 23 Mirage F1's
UAE - 79 F-16's, 68 Mirage 2000's


----------



## Journeyman

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> Washington's Dithering on Libya
> Why are top defense and intelligence officials disparaging military action and publicly predicting Gadhafi's survival?


Because Libya does not matter to the US; Libyan oil matters to Italy and France...and we're getting gouged at the gas pumps despite our not importing Libyan oil....but geo-strategically, Libya does not matter.



			
				WingsofFury said:
			
		

> Arab League wants a No Fly Zone put in place for Libya.
> 
> ...Saudi Arabia - 166 F-15's, 87 Tornado IDS (ground attack), 24 Typhoon F3's


The Saudis are focused on a problem, with _actual_ strategic value to the west, on their door-step. With the Gulf Cooperation Council deploying troops to Bahrain, most of which are Saudi Arabian, they're unlikely to support any ops elsewhere. Stabilizing the Gulf region is a much greater concern just now.


----------



## GAP

Well, why doesn't Italy and France, who DO have war planes, just go in and help....oh....nevermind....I forgot that jets don't have reverse.....


----------



## larry Strong

GAP said:
			
		

> Well, why doesn't Italy and France, who DO have war planes, just go in and help....oh....nevermind....I forgot that jets don't have reverse.....



Cause their governments don't have these:


----------



## krustyrl

:nod:

BaaaaZingggg.!


----------



## sean m

As we know there are some U.N countries who want to intervene with the conflict going on in Libya and others who do not want to intervene. These countries include; China,  Russia,  India, Germany, United  States ,  Iran

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8383630/Libya-G8-dismiss-military-intervention.html

It is impossible to fathom why  most of these supposedly democratic countries are unable to to have any desire to do anything while people are being blown up. Classic American Bull  ****  when they only intervene when it directly impacts them. The Germans know all too damn well what it takes to commit genocide.  Even if these countries dont intervene; The Brits and French seem willing to commit to some sort of action, I *feel* that Canada should help in this regard.

The Chinese and Russians have never cared about any other countries problems and are only interested in what is best for them  financially and in terms of other benefits . So they can they can go  back to their  lairs of  feces called "countries" and rot.  India is solely looking to advance their position so they can stay in the same position as the previous two countries. Iran is trying to act tough and make threats with no meaning to them. 

Here  are some of the phrases included in this article which are aggravating
"We do not want to get sucked into a war in North Africa. We want to avoid any slippery slope in this direction,"   Guido Westerwelle, Germany's foreign minister

Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, had a "private and candid" conversation with Mahmoud Jibril, a Libyan opposition representative,

There is a reference in another article which states the G8 member were conversing about the Libyan situation over lunch or some other meal time.

It is absolutely infuriating that these damn politicians have the time to have "candid" conversations and nice lunchtime meetings while their are innocent civilians dying in countless numbers in Libya. This is a horrendous scar against the human species if an atrocity like this occurs in this age and nothing is done about. These God Damn! countries need to stop blabbing and start saving lives!


This article states what could be a reason why China Russia and India do not want a  no fly zone.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Pull in your horns there buckwheat. This is not the fault of the US. Have you even read any of the other posts here. Go bust the UN's chops, or Europe's or the other ME and Asian countries.

People are so quick to condemn when they intervene and those same people are the first to bitch when the US doesn't do what you want.

Hypocrites make me sick.


----------



## Edward Campbell

sean m said:
			
		

> As we know there are some U.N countries who want to intervene with the conflict going on in Libya and others who do not want to intervene. These countries include; China,  Russia,  India, Germany, United  States ,  Iran
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8383630/Libya-G8-dismiss-military-intervention.html
> 
> It is impossible to fathom why  most of these supposedly democratic countries are unable to to have any desire to do anything while people are being blown up. Classic American Bull  ****  when they only intervene when it directly impacts them. The Germans know all too damn well what it takes to commit genocide.  Even if these countries dont intervene; The Brits and French seem willing to commit to some sort of action, I *feel* that Canada should help in this regard.
> 
> The Chinese and Russians have never cared about any other countries problems and are only interested in what is best for them  financially and in terms of other benefits . So they can they can go  back to their  lairs of  feces called "countries" and rot.  India is solely looking to advance their position so they can stay in the same position as the previous two countries. Iran is trying to act tough and make threats with no meaning to them.
> 
> Here  are some of the phrases included in this article which are aggravating
> "We do not want to get sucked into a war in North Africa. We want to avoid any slippery slope in this direction,"   Guido Westerwelle, Germany's foreign minister
> 
> Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, had a "private and candid" conversation with Mahmoud Jibril, a Libyan opposition representative,
> 
> There is a reference in another article which states the G8 member were conversing about the Libyan situation over lunch or some other meal time.
> 
> It is absolutely infuriating that these damn politicians have the time to have "candid" conversations and nice lunchtime meetings while their are innocent civilians dying in countless numbers in Libya. This is a horrendous scar against the human species if an atrocity like this occurs in this age and nothing is done about. These God Damn! countries need to stop blabbing and start saving lives!
> 
> 
> This article states what could be a reason why China Russia and India do not want a  no fly zone.




As I have explained, several times, China has a long standing policy of (almost) always opposing any foreign interference (which is what intervention is) in the "internal affairs" of other states. The basis for this pretty consistent Chinese policy (which they cheerfully violate, now and again, when it suits them) is that China rejects any and all "interference' (e.g. criticism) of Chinese "internal affairs' (e.g. human rights). But it is, thanks to its consistency, an intellectually defensible policy - which is rather more than one can say for the policies of Russia, India or America.


----------



## aesop081

sean m said:
			
		

> It is impossible to fathom why  most of these supposedly democratic countries are unable to to have any desire to do anything while people are being blown up.



To the contrary, if one were to examin how the world actualy works, the reasons are very apparent.



> Classic American Bull  ****  when they only intervene when it directly impacts them.



yes, blame the Americans. They started this after all......they must have. Shame on them.



> The Germans know all too damn well what it takes to commit genocide.



It is tad early to invoke Godwin's law isn't it ?



> I *feel* that Canada should help in this regard.



And do........what ?



> The Chinese and Russians have never cared about any other countries problems and are only interested in what is best for them  financially and in terms of other benefits .



Like most other countries. Just like this one.



> "We do not want to get sucked into a war in North Africa. We want to avoid any slippery slope in this direction,"   Guido Westerwelle, Germany's foreign minister



This is a valid concern. It is why i do not support Canadian involvement.



> These God Damn! countries need to stop blabbing and start saving lives!



You need to step back and look at things with less emotion and more practicality.

For a HUMINT hopeful, you sure like to fly off the handle well before analyzing things.


----------



## Journeyman

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> *You need to step back* and look at things with less emotion and more practicality.


_Comme d'habitude_.....everyone's got opinions -- not everyone has informed opinions.


----------



## sean m

recceguy said:
			
		

> Pull in your horns there buckwheat. This is not the fault of the US. Have you even read any of the other posts here. Go bust the UN's chops, or Europe's or the other ME and Asian countries.
> 
> People are so quick to condemn when they intervene and those same people are the first to ***** when the US doesn't do what you want.
> 
> Hypocrites make me sick.



Sorry, But when innocent lives are on the line I feel that their should be no debating whether or not their should be an intervention. All these people want is to have the lives we have, yet they are dieing because of it. How would any of us feel if this were happening here to us, it is conceivable to realise the fear and anguish as well as anger these people must be feeling. You are absolutely right in terms of this crisis is not the fault of the Unites States. Yet the fact that they are the most powerful nation on earth has an impact on what military interventions are pursued.  All they would have to say is we support military intervention in Libya against this dictator. I feel this would encourage other nations to get involved as well. You are again absolutely right that the U.N. should be involved, which is why I feel the United States should publicly support military intervention. It is my belief this would put pressure on the U.N. to do something as well. Yet instead they choose not to support the innocent people, while they declare themselves to be a shining example of democracy. Every nation who does not commit to or encourage military action is at fault for what ever occurs. I feel this should be a joint nation endeavour which would promote the idea that injustice and dictatorship is no longer tolerated. It is my belief that if an intervention such as this were to occur, it could be huge for the region and any future popular uprising.  I believe that this conflict wouldn’t require the type of long term military action as in Iraq and Afghanistan.  It is evident that war is never simple, yet with human rights abuses such as the one in Libya occur the need for war is ever more necessary. I feel it is the right and necessary thing to do.  I am not trying to sound like some delusional ass, I have traveled to parts of the world and seen truly what “real life” is like and this is my basis for my beliefs.  You as well as many individuals on the sight again have a huge amount of knowledge and again have contributed far more than me. It just seems that these governments are not looking at the human toll of this conflict. To many abuses of human rights have gone on unchecked in the past and present, Let us not make this another one.


----------



## aesop081

sean m said:
			
		

> Sorry, But when innocent lives are on the line I feel that their should be no debating whether or not their should be an intervention.



There should be debate anytime military force is considered for use in another sovereign nation.



> It is my belief this would put pressure on the U.N. to do something as well.



Far from it. China oposes intervention and China has veto. Do you want the US to intervene without UNSC approval ?



> it could be huge for the region



Beware of the law of unintended consequences. What is "huge" today can rapidly turn into "more western imperialist intervention" tomorow.




> I believe that this conflict wouldn’t require the type of long term military action as in Iraq and Afghanistan.



Quiet the bold pronouncement. You are basing this on....what ?



> I have traveled to parts of the world and seen truly what “real life” is like and this is my basis for my beliefs.



I don't think Cancun, Mexico counts in this context.


----------



## sean m

The United nations as well as each nation independently should put more pressure on what China does.  You of course know a large amount about China's policies, don't you think that more should be done to stop their enactions of various violations of rights of all those in their nation both human and animal. Even though they are a rising super power in various avenues, this I feel is the only intellectual aspect about their policies. Because they have what other nations want they can do what ever they feel like. Don;t you think that democratic nations should deal with China's disregard for the rights of man. I feel that it is ridiculous, if it were not for us and other nations China would not have prospered so since they would not have dealings with these wealthy nations. So I feel if we can make them rich we can also change their policies if we actually try. Yet of course this involves business and money which people do not like to interfere with sadly. What do you and everyone else think about what should be done with these nations who don''t want to come to the aide of the citizens of Libya?




			
				E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> As I have explained, several times, China has a long standing policy of (almost) always opposing any foreign interference (which is what intervention is) in the "internal affairs" of other states. The basis for this pretty consistent Chinese policy (which they cheerfully violate, now and again, when it suits them) is that China rejects any and all "interference' (e.g. criticism) of Chinese "internal affairs' (e.g. human rights). But it is, thanks to its consistency, an intellectually defensible policy - which is rather more than one can say for the policies of Russia, India or America.


----------



## aesop081

sean m said:
			
		

> What do you and everyone else think about what should be done with these nations who don''t want to come to the aide of the citizens of Libya?



Nothing.

They, just like Canada, have a sovereign right to decide what actions their country shall take, if any.

I suppose you would like to invade China too.


----------



## Edward Campbell

sean m said:
			
		

> Sorry, But when innocent lives are on the line I feel that their _sic_ should be no debating whether or not their should be an intervention ...




I know I'm repeating myself, but why Libya? Yes "innocent civilians" being killed by the dozens, hundreds, perhaps even thousands but what about the thousands and, indeed, mill.ions, in black Africa? They, obviously, didn't and still don't matter, so what makes Libyans different? Lighter skins?

And what about Bahrain? I know the Saudis are intervening, on the side of the (minority) government, but, *hell's bells*, Saudi Arabia is the at the root of the bloody problem, not part of the solution. Instead of worrying about Libya, let's invade Bahrain as a prelude to dismantling the House of Saud - now _that_ is a worthy foreign policy objective.


----------



## Journeyman

sean m said:
			
		

> You are absolutely right in terms of this crisis is not the fault of the Unites States. Yet the fact that they are the most powerful nation on earth  has an impact on what military interventions are pursued.


So while it's no longer their fault, you believe they are obligated to be the world's policeman? If the people who are benefitting from Libyan oil (ie - Europe) don't care enough to intervene, why should the US?



> It is my belief this would put pressure on the U.N. to do something as well.


Like what?!



> .....which would promote the idea that injustice and dictatorship is no longer tolerated...[edit]..I am not trying to sound like some delusional ass


Make as many wishes as you want, injustice and dictatorship is tolerated...therefore....



> It is my belief that if an intervention such as this were to occur, it could be huge for the region  and any future popular uprising.  I believe that this conflict wouldn't require the type of long term military action as in Iraq and Afghanistan.


Yes, a US-led intervention _would_ be huge for the region -- absolutely. Western troops on the ground would be a lightning rod; it would attract every jihadist and wanna-be martyr from throughout the Islamic crescent. Saying you believe this intervention wouldn't require long-term military action further indicates your lack of understanding of general military history, let alone this current conflict. Any Western leader may be able to "declare" victory after 100 hours....but the troops would not be home by Christmas.


I believe that your "beliefs" -- regardless of the feel-good intent -- are naive, ill-informed, and would prove even more ruinous than the current situation.



Edit: Oh, and I see you want the UN to sort out China while we're at it.   :


----------



## sean m

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> To the contrary, if one were to examin how the world actualy works, the reasons are very apparent.
> 
> *yes, blame the Americans. They started this after all......they must have. Shame on them.
> *
> Again,  I am not stating that they started this confrontation. But they should do more to promote and instigate military aide by the United Nations to help the citizens of Libya being ruthlessly attacked
> 
> It is tad early to invoke Godwin's law isn't it ?
> Okay My reference to genocide is off, Yet I feel this crisis is more that just a common abuse of human rights, you have to admit that at least.
> 
> And do........what ?
> 
> Join with the United nations,  support the movement towards democracy. The ousting and arrest of Muammar  Qaddafi (this may sound like juvenile thinking to you, yet these hostilities have proven further that Qaddafi is unfit to lead and should be punished for his crimes against humanity
> 
> Like most other countries. Just like this one.
> 
> I think Canada has shown much fore effort to help those in need than Russia or China. With Respect since you have made a great contribution to this country with your service, but I feel that your comments insults our country by comparing it to China and Russia in this regard
> 
> This is a valid concern. It is why i do not support Canadian involvement.
> So then nothing will change and human rights will continue to go on unimpeded in this country and others. the abuses during  WWII  did not stop Canada or the other nations from intervening even when it turned to war.
> 
> 
> You need to step back and look at things with less emotion and more practicality.
> 
> For a HUMINT hopeful, you sure like to fly off the handle well before analyzing things.
> 
> I believe that it is necessary to look at any situation such as this with emotion as well as practicality. Since I feel that  in order to judge accordingly of the proper intervention a person needs both.
> 
> In terms of analyzing things I feel that I have done the best I could in terms of the resources available. I do no yet have any military experience yet but I feel that I have done the best with what I have  and examing the facts. Considering the fact I am 21 I feel that I am more learned in terms of what is going on in the world, and can review in practically is better than most of my peers


----------



## George Wallace

sean m said:
			
		

> ............... Considering the fact I am 21 I feel that I am more learned in terms of what is going on in the world, and can review in practically is better than most of my peers



Ah!  This explains a lot.  I am sure you really don't want to know what it explains to us though.


----------



## Edward Campbell

sean m, you said: _"Qaddafi is unfit to lead and should be punished for his crimes against humanity."_ I agree; he can get right in line behind Mugabe and about a dozen others ... of course we'll need to invade intervene in Zimbabwe, first, then we could work our way North, state worthy of our attention following state needing our attention, until, in about a century or two, we arrive in Libya.


----------



## Journeyman

sean m said:
			
		

> In terms of analyzing things I feel that I have done the best I could in terms of the resources available.


You have done absolutely ZERO analysis.

You railed against the US, China, and Russia...wringing your hands and gnashing your teeth....decrying inadequate UN action while invoking the ghost of Nazi genocide. I suspect you don't actually know the meaning of the term "analysis." 



> I feel that I am more learned in terms of what is going on in the world, and can review in practically is better than most of my peers


Then we are well and truly fucked.


----------



## aesop081

sean m said:
			
		

> Okay My reference to genocide is off,



"Off" is not what i was thinking.



> So then nothing will change and human rights will continue to go on unimpeded in this country and others. the abuses during  WWII  did not stop Canada or the other nations from intervening even when it turned to war.



You need to re-read your history.


----------



## sean m

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I feel that if the U.N. were to involve themselves in this conflict, that they would be seen less as attacking a sovereign nation than attempting to remove a dictator.  Considering the Libyan people have asked for help
> 
> I believe military interventions have been done without U.N. approval prior.  China has continued to disregard laws set up by international community, so they can do what they want freely? I belive the West and other nations should intervene without approval, considering that the countries who are rejecting the UN to intervene are those with economic interests in the current regime
> 
> I feel that Libya has more infastructure than a country like Afghanistan. The people, if I have read correctly do not seem to be extremely religiously radical. There does not seem to be a huge inter tribal or racial conflict in the country. Though considering Gaddafi is Bedouin either
> they might cause problems or problems might occur do to their support of him. The same with the Africans their since there have been sub saharan mercenaries supporting gaddafi.. Again this is my belief.
> 
> I have never been to cancun mexico. I have done volunteer construction work in: costa rica and Kenya. Please dont take me for some spoiled brat who does not know anything when I have traveled and read alot more than my peers


----------



## George Wallace

sean m

If you can't figure out how to post properly, you will find that your posts will be removed.  Either edit them to make them make sense, or delete them.  I am sure, down the line at some time in the future CDN Aviator does not want to have your words showing up as his.


George
army.ca Staff


----------



## sean m

I want to help bring about a more democratic world wear people have the same quality of life we do here. I do not want military intervention yet if it is necessary to bring about real change then I feel it should not be over looked




			
				CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Nothing.
> 
> They, just like Canada, have a sovereign right to decide what actions their country shall take, if any.
> 
> I suppose you would like to invade China too.


----------



## sean m

Sorry Sir, I made a mistake there. Won't happen again.  I am sorry Mr. CDN aviator




			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> sean m
> 
> If you can't figure out how to post properly, you will find that your posts will be removed.  Either edit them to make them make sense, or delete them.  I am sure, down the line at some time in the future CDN Aviator does not want to have your words showing up as his.
> 
> 
> George
> army.ca Staff


----------



## Edward Campbell

sean m said:
			
		

> Sorry Sir, I made a mistake there. Won't happen again.  I am sorry Mr. CDN aviator




It would help if, instead of apologizing (in a manner than _looks_ sarcastic to me), you went back and corrected your bloody mistake.


----------



## aesop081

sean m said:
			
		

> I feel that if the U.N. were to involve themselves in this conflict, that they would be seen less as attacking a sovereign nation than attempting to remove a dictator.  Considering the Libyan people have asked for help



What is it about "veto' that escapes you ?



> I believe military interventions have been done without U.N. approval prior.



Indeed. Witness Iraq in 2003. The world realy rallied behind the US on that one........... :




> I belive the West and other nations should intervene without approval,



The results of that are predictable.



> I feel that Libya has more infastructure than a country like Afghanistan.



So we should intervene only in better-developed countries ? Interesting idea........




> I have never been to cancun mexico. I have done volunteer construction work in: costa rica and Kenya. Please dont take me for some spoiled brat who does not know anything when I have traveled and read alot more than my peers



By your age i had already served my first tour of duty in one of the world's less pleasant places. I had already learned that grand idealism usualy fails to face reality. You did construction work, i watched people kill themselves and the world try to get in the middle.


----------



## sean m

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I know I'm repeating myself, but why Libya? Yes "innocent civilians" being killed by the dozens, hundreds, perhaps even thousands but what about the thousands and, indeed, mill.ions, in black Africa? They, obviously, didn't and still don't matter, so what makes Libyans different? Lighter skins?
> 
> And what about Bahrain? I know the Saudis are intervening, on the side of the (minority) government, but, *hell's bells*, Saudi Arabia is the at the root of the bloody problem, not part of the solution. Instead of worrying about Libya, let's invade Bahrain as a prelude to dismantling the House of Saud - now _that_ is a worthy foreign policy objective.



I have been in Africa and have learned about some of the cultures there. There needs to be intervention everywhere where people are being oppressed not matter what their skin colour is.  Africa is the epitome of an areas which requires military intervention which develops true democracy and human rights. Yet many Western interests in business Politics and other areas have an interest in the condition of the continent as it is. I feel right now we should focus on the countries who peoples are attempting and paying for with their lives to obtain freedom and democracy.  Hopefully this sentiment will continue on into Africa.  Bahrain is the same situation as Libya and yes you are right we should help the democratic process in that nation. Invade I feel is not the right word considering we are attacking the government not the nation or people as a whole. If this were to help undermine the royal Saudi family then great, this would lead to steps in the right direction for the Saudi People as well


----------



## sean m

Can someone please state how to fix that problem please I do not know what to search to help modify the problem




			
				E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> It would help if, instead of apologizing (in a manner than _looks_ sarcastic to me), you went back and corrected your bloody mistake.


----------



## sean m

Journeyman said:
			
		

> So while it's no longer their fault, you believe they are obligated to be the world's policeman? If the people who are benefitting from Libyan oil (ie - Europe) don't care enough to intervene, why should the US?
> Like what?!
> Make as many wishes as you want, injustice and dictatorship is tolerated...therefore....
> Yes, a US-led intervention _would_ be huge for the region -- absolutely. Western troops on the ground would be a lightning rod; it would attract every jihadist and wanna-be martyr from throughout the Islamic crescent. Saying you believe this intervention wouldn't require long-term military action further indicates your lack of understanding of general military history, let alone this current conflict. Any Western leader may be able to "declare" victory after 100 hours....but the troops would not be home by Christmas.
> 
> 
> I believe that your "beliefs" -- regardless of the feel-good intent -- are naive, ill-informed, and would prove even more ruinous than the current situation.
> 
> 
> Edit: Oh, and I see you want the UN to sort out China while we're at it.   :



 I think every democratic 1st world nation should act in a way as policemen in order to bring about the results which are the same as our situation

It is tolerated because nothing is done about it, with recent events hopefully that could change


Of course there would be resistance from the radicals in the Muslim world. The West is already hated for the current operations. I never stated I thought that the intervention would be short, just that I believe it would be less long as the two current areas the west is involved in militarily, which I gave my reasons for.  You give the possible negative set backs yet you cannot deny that there is a chance that they results could be positive for both the west and democratic movement of Libya I admitted to the fact I do not know an extreme amount there is to know about tactics, that is why I read and attempt to learn. Did you have a great amount of knowledge at 21?


----------



## aesop081

sean m said:
			
		

> Can someone please state how to fix that problem please I do not know what to search to help modify the problem



can a mod sort this out for him, before he make things even worse ??


----------



## sean m

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Ah!  This explains a lot.  I am sure you really don't want to know what it explains to us though.



Yes I really do want to know what it explains to you, could you please explain I feel it is important in order to know what is important to grow on


----------



## Fishbone Jones

You've been given a pile of good and justifiable reasons that we, they, us are not intervening at this time. Get yourself and your white stallion down off of that lofty, ivory tower and have a good solid look at the world.

And to paraphrase a member here "In that world, the sky is blue"


----------



## Journeyman

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> can a mod sort this out for him, before he make things even worse ??


I explained it to him by PM....to no avail. Perhaps fixing a post is more difficult than sorting out the UN, US, China, Russia, Libya, and now, Saudi Arabia.


----------



## aesop081

sean m said:
			
		

> The West is already hated for the current operations.



Your solution to that is *more* intervention ??



> yet you cannot deny that there is a chance that they results could be positive



It may very well be positive but i question wether that is worth the investment in Canadian lives and treasure that would be required. it is easy for you to say "intervene" because you are not at risk of being one of those who will have to do it.



> I admitted to the fact I do not know an extreme amount there is to know about tactics,



make no mistake, you have no knowledge whatsoever.



> Did you have a great amount of knowledge at 21?



I had much to learn at 21. I also had experienced things you cant begin to imagine. I have experienced alot of the real world since and my perspective is based on that.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Time for a pro-vivisectionist league?

sean m: Your response to this?

The Indispensable Military?
http://www.cdfai.org/the3dsblog/?p=139



> Suppose one agrees that something military must be done in Libya regarding Col. Gadhafi.  It seems to me a telling, and sad, indicator of international realities that any such forceful action appears effectively impossible without considerable participation by US armed forces.
> 
> The Americans spend far more on defence, in total and per capita, than EU members.  Very many criticize the US, often severely, sometimes stridently, for what they judge an American obsession with military strength.
> 
> Yet.  Libya is close to Europe and far from the US (and Canada).  It is Europe that fears a mass migrant influx and loss of oil (along with arms contracts with Libya).  The EU in terms of population and GDP is quite equivalent to the US.  Its members still have numerically very large armed forces, technically far more advanced than Col. Gadhafi’s.
> 
> At the same time many in the EU (and in Canada) see themselves, socially and morally, even economically, as an alternative beacon to the “shining city on a hill”.  But when something military may be required EU members (as a Union, as part of NATO, or in some coalition of their own) are unable, unprepared, and ill-equipped in fact to do much of anything on their own.
> 
> There are relevant colloquial phrases: talking the talk or walking the walk; all hat and no cattle.  As for Canada, consider the unfolding of our Afghan military mission and our humanitarian frigate somewhere near, or even in, the Med.
> 
> Give the Americans a break...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## a_majoor

Sean, consider the following:

The Canadian Forces are pretty much at max capacity now with just one battlegroup deployed in Afghanistan. Where is the manpower and logistical support for a Lybian adventure going to come from? Since the Canadian public isn't exactly brimming with enthusiasm over our efforts to build schools, establish civil infrastructure and civic institutions and protect the rights of women and children in Afghanistan (to the extent the NDP have called us war criminals in the past and the Legacy media ignored the completion of a two lane highway, 4000 micro loans and a project to make the hospital in Kandahar city more hygienic in my tour alone), where is the public support for intervention?

Come to think of it, in the 1930's, people were willing to go fight for what the thought was right (see the International Brigades. Canadian Communists raised one for the Spanish Civil War). Where are the people lining up to "do the right thing" in the absence of State action?

The answers add up to a big "no". We have no resources, nor the public support (which IS what political will actually is) to do so. There may be even worse consequences down the road if we don't intervene (see up thread), but for now the Canadian and world public seem willing to accept the risk. The _real_ world sucks. Deal with it.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Is sean m concerned to the death over _Cote d'Ivoire_?
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-03/14/c_13778314.htm

Why not? No TV? Not a nice world out there, keep those national interests (however calculated) in mind.

sean m: What about those thousands killed by India in Kashmir?  There are, one supposes, foreign (and defence) policy, er, trade-offs for Canada--as well as those stemming from emotion and lack of knowledge.  Tough world in reality:
http://unambig.com/kashmir-and-the-great-game-and-double-standards/

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Old Sweat

Lorne Gunter, in the Full Comment section of the online National Post, is critical of President Obama's action, or rather inaction, towards Libya. It is reproduced under the Fair Comment Provisions of the Copyright Act.

Lorne Gunter: After Libya, Western credibility is shot

Lorne Gunter  Mar 16, 2011 – 12:14 PM ET | Last Updated: Mar 16, 2011 12:35 PM ET 



All hail the glorious ruler

It’s said that Teddy Roosevelt used to enjoy quoting  a West African saying, “Speak softly, but carry a big stick.” To the extent that the current U.S. president, Barack Obama, has a foreign policy doctrine, it would have to be the exact opposite, “Shoot your mouth off, but carry no stick whatsoever.”

Just look at the disaster the U.S. and the Western allies have created in Libya.

In early March, Mr. Obama insisted that the murderous Libyan strong man, Col. Muammar Gaddafi, “step down from power and leave” Libya immediately. Everyone, including Gaddafi, thought that meant that if he didn’t depart, the U.S. was prepared to use some level of force to make him go. Shortly after the president utter his threat, it was reported that Col. Gaddafi was trying to negotiate his exit with the rebel forces that, at that time, seemed certain to depose him.

But then there was no no-fly zone imposed by the U.S. or NATO. And there were no arms shipments to the rebels. A few automatic weapons and some grenades might have tipped the balance in the war.

The U.S. and its allies have aircraft carriers and air force bases within easy striking distance of Libya. With little effort (and little risk to their flyers), they could have pinned Col. Gaddafi’s jets on the ground and silenced his anti-aircraft batteries. They likely, too, could have restricted his use of helicopter gunships.

Imposing a no-fly zone had European and Arab League approval. It’s true the two major multilateral organizations the U.S. wanted to sign-off on no-fly before it put it a zone in place — the UN Security Council and NATO’s governing council — are both still dithering over whether to approve such a move. But independently, the French, the Brits and the Arab League have nodded their support.

No one would have truly complained. There may have been some public posturing against U.S. Imperialism and the usual rot by leaders in the Arab world and elsewhere, but privately, almost no one likes Gaddafi — not even his fellow Arab leaders. So there would have been little real opposition to a U.S. move.

But President Obama is the new Jimmy Carter — a sanctimonious do-gooder, who makes all kinds of high-toned moral pronouncements, but then never follows through. He did the same when Iranian protesters threatened to overthrow the mad mullahs of Tehran in the spring of 2009. He wished them well, then abandon them to the thugs and guns of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose blatant theft of a democratic election had sparked the protests in the first place.

Mr. Obama might be forgiven for missing his opportunity in Iran. After all, he was new in office then. But he is two years into his job now, and Libya was a much cleaner opportunity. It’s easier for U.S. forces to get to than Iran and far less capable of throwing up resistance to U.S. military efforts.

Even the ouster of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak shows Mr. Obama’s fecklessness, in a way. Had Mr. Mubarak not chosen to go on his own, he might still be in power. He didn’t have the army on his side — as Col. Gaddafi appears to — but then the Egyptian protesters didn’t take up arms, either, as their Libyan counterparts have.

My point is, nothing Mr. Obama did seems to have decided events in Egypt. The Egyptians took care of their own problem. Had it been left up to the American president, Mr. Mubarak might well have chosen a Gaddafi-like crackdown and succeeded in keeping power.

It is said that the U.S. has faltered because as bad as Mr. Gaddafi is, the Obama administration feared the rebels might well have been worse; they might have turned out to be extreme Islamists who are pro-al Qaeda.

That’s certainly possible. But it’s hard to see how they could have been much worse than the Colonel, who at one time was a more enthusiastic sponsor of anti-Western terrorism than even Iran.

Whatever their intent, the rebels might have been grateful to the West, too, for helping free them from a corrupt and brutal dictator. At the very least, having seen Western might used against their foe, they may have been reluctant to test that might again by permitting their country to become a staging ground for terror attacks against Western targets.

The problem now is that no one in Libya feels any gratitude towards the West. And no one around the world fears the Americans.

Both the rebels and Col. Gaddafi will be angry with the West, especially the United States. And no one in any other country will take American threats or pressure seriously. American pronouncements about democracy and freedom and free and fair elections will be assumed to be just so much hot air.

The world may moan about American unilateralism. The French may sniff, and the Brits and Germans and others may wring their hands about American disdain for the UN and other international collectivist organizations. Still, everyone looks to follow the American lead. If the U.S. takes a firm stance and backs its up, others fall into step. They may not always like it, but they do it. And there is a certain stability in international affairs that comes from U.S. clarity and decisiveness.

Now, thanks to Barack Carter, we’re back to the point where the worst, most vehemently anti-Western elements feel emboldened. Meanwhile, moderate and pro-Western elements are afraid to stick their heads up because they are justly concerned the Americans won’t back them up. Iran has been lost for a generation thanks to Jimmy Carter’s unwillingness to stand up for moderate, democratic forces in the face of Ayatollah Khomeini’s Islamic revolution. Now in Libya and elsewhere there is a real chance of a repeat under the vacillating Mr. Obama


----------



## MarkOttawa

HMCS CHARLOTTETOWN is now officially fighting terrorism:

Operation SIRIUS 
http://www.cefcom-comfec.forces.gc.ca/pa-ap/ops/sirius/index-eng.asp

Funny, I haven't seen the Colonel's gov't or military added to this list:
http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/prg/ns/le/cle-eng.aspx

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## aesop081

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> Operation SIRIUS




 :rofl: OP NO SMILING lives ..........


----------



## MarkOttawa

Arms export "Oops!"‏--I'm assuming the horrid source is actually right:

Canadian-made armoured vehicles enter Bahrain
http://www.ceasefire.ca/?p=7585

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Dissident

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> :rofl: OP NO SMILING lives ..........



I am SIRIUS. And don't call me Shirley.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

Nobody is going to intervene in Libya, if the French, Italians, and Brits were really serious about a No-Fly Zone they would have done it themselves, its basically in their backyard.  Fact is, the US along with every other Western country is trying their hardest to extract themselves from a long standing war, not start a new one.  With the precarious economic situation the United States and many other nations (Great Britain) find themselves in, more foreign wars and interventions is something Western governments are going to look to avoid.


----------



## The Bread Guy

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> Arms export "Oops!"‏--I'm assuming the horrid source is actually right:
> 
> Canadian-made armoured vehicles enter Bahrain
> http://www.ceasefire.ca/?p=7585


It appears the move got ALL PARTY support in 1991 - kinda hard for the opposition to complain now, eh?


----------



## Journeyman

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> *Arms export "Oops!"‏--I'm assuming the horrid source is actually right:*
> 
> Canadian-made armoured vehicles enter Bahrain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *It appears the move got ALL PARTY support in 1991 - kinda hard for the opposition to complain now, eh? *
Click to expand...


milnews....are you discussing a potential "Opposition Party" complaint.....or "opposition" by some blogger who hates all Conservative party defence acquisitions...such that he'd base his _scandal-mongering_ headline on a _ceasefire.ca_ article?   :

Shame he doesn't realise that Bahrain...unlike Libya....matters.


----------



## CougarKing

> link
> 
> 
> TRIPOLI/BENGHAZI (Reuters) - *Libyan troops pushed forward toward the insurgent stronghold of Benghazi on Thursday and launched air raids on its outskirts as Washington raised the possibility of air strikes to stop Muammar Gaddafi's forces.
> 
> But the international debate on what action to take may have dragged on too long to help the anti-Gaddafi uprising, now struggling to hold its ground one month after it started.
> 
> Libyan state television said government troops had taken Zueitina*, an oil port on the coastal highway 130 km (80 miles) from Benghazi, but the rebels said they had surrounded the pro-Gaddafi units on the approaches to the town.
> 
> Similarly, a rebel spokesman denied a state television report that government troops were on the outskirts of Benghazi itself, the city where the revolution started.
> 
> However, residents of the city and a rebel spokesman reported air strikes on the outskirts, including at the airport. Libyan state television had said earlier that gunfire and explosions could be heard at the airport.
> 
> Clashes around Ajdabiyah, a strategic town on the coast road, killed around 30 people, Al Arabiya television reported.
> 
> *On the approaches to Ajdabiyah, burned-out cars lay by the roadside while Libyan government forces showed the foreign media artillery, tanks and mobile rocket launchers -- much heavier weapons than those used by the rebels.
> 
> In Libya's third city, Misrata, about 200 km (130 miles) east of Tripoli, rebels and residents said they were preparing for a new attack by Libyan troops, who had shelled the coastal city overnight. A government spokesman said Gaddafi's forces expected to be in control of Misrata by Friday morning.*
> 
> *The United States, previously cool on the idea of a foreign military intervention, said the U.N. Security Council should consider tougher action than a no-fly zone over Libya.*
> 
> "We are discussing very seriously and leading efforts in the Council around a range of actions that we believe could be effective in protecting civilians," U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said in New York late on Wednesday.
> 
> "The U.S. view is that we need to be prepared to contemplate steps that include, but perhaps go beyond, a no-fly zone."
> 
> Washington had initially reacted cautiously to Arab League and European calls for a no-fly zone over Libya, with some officials concerned it could be militarily ineffective or politically damaging.
> 
> Diplomats at the United Nations told Reuters that the United States, Britain and France now supported the idea of the council authorizing military action such as air strikes to protect civilian areas.
> 
> Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she hoped the Security Council would vote "no later than Thursday."
> 
> She said Gaddafi seemed determined to kill as many as Libyans as possible, and that "many different actions" were being considered.
> 
> Russia, China, Germany, India and other council members are either undecided or have voiced doubts about the proposal for a no-fly zone. Italy, a potential base for military action, ruled out military intervention in the oil-exporting country.
> 
> A U.S. official said he could not confirm any discussion of a plan to attack Libyan forces. In theory, he said, military action could be directed not only at Gaddafi's air force, but at artillery and communications systems too.
> 
> The U.S. change appeared to be driven by the worsening plight of the rebels, who are fighting to end 41 years of rule by Gaddafi and have set up a provisional national council in Benghazi.
> 
> Their ill-equipped forces have been routed by troops backed by tanks, artillery and war planes from towns they had seized in the early days of the uprising.
> 
> ARMY ADVANCES
> 
> Gaddafi, in an interview with the French daily Le Figaro, said his troops' aim was to liberate the people from "the armed gangs" that occupy Benghazi.
> 
> "If we used force, it would take just a day. But our aim is to progressively dismantle the armed groups, through various means, such as encircling cities or sending negotiators."
> 
> Asked if dialogue with the rebels was possible, he repeated his assertion that they were linked to the al Qaeda Islamic militant group.
> 
> "These are not people with whom we aim to talk, as al Qaeda does not talk with anybody."
> 
> On the fate of the rebel leadership, he said: "It is quite possible they will flee. Anyway, it's not really a structure. It has no value."
> 
> A statement on Al-Libya state television told people in Benghazi that the army was on its way.
> 
> "It urges you to keep out by midnight of areas where the armed men and weapon storage areas are located," it said.
> 
> One civilian reached by phone from Tobruk, Hisham Mohammed, said: "People are okay here. There is a bit of tension, a little fear of air strikes, but most people are fine."
> 
> Two aid agencies -- the International Committee of the Red Cross and Medecins Sans Frontieres -- have withdrawn their workers from Benghazi due to safety concerns.
> 
> BENGHAZI AND TOBRUK ROADS
> 
> The exact state of affairs in Ajdabiyah, 150 km (90 miles) south of Benghazi on the Gulf of Sirte, was unclear on Thursday morning. Parts of it appeared to have changed hands several times in the past 48 hours, a recurring feature of the war for control of the towns strung along the North African coast.
> 
> Osama Jazwi, a Benghazi doctor, said that when he left Ajdabiyah late on Wednesday, rebels had controlled the city and fighting was still going on.
> 
> At one point, Gaddafi's forces had cut the road from Adjabiyah to Tobruk, but then rebels cleared them from it.
> 
> But another civilian in Benghazi, who asked not to be named, said Ajdabiyah had fallen.
> 
> "I know people there. There are many people leaving Ajdabiyah, coming through Benghazi and heading for the border."
> 
> (Additional reporting by a Reuters reporter in Benghazi, Michael Georgy in Tripoli, Mariam Karouny and Tarek Amara in Tunisia, Louis Charbonneau and Patrick Worsnip at the United Nations; Editing by Giles Elgood and Kevin Liffey)


----------



## WingsofFury

sean m said:
			
		

> Considering the fact I am 21 I feel that I am more learned in terms of what is going on in the world, and can review in practically is better than most of my peers.



I think that out of all your posts, this one bothers me the most and I'll tell you why.

If you are, as you state, more learned in terms of what is going on in the world than your peers at the age of 21, then they might consider you to be a leader.  This means that they may look at your opinion as "gospel truth", and think that it's the only true accurate reflection of the situation.

If that is the case, then you should really ensure that you don't speak out about things which you don't understand fully* and when you post on websites like this unless it first involves reading everything and developing a deeper understanding not only of the topic at hand but the history and relevant situations which can be used to defend your viewpoint.

If this isn't done, then as one other poster said, we really are screwed.


----------



## nuclearzombies

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/u-pushing-air-strikes-no-fly-zone-libya-20110317-100831-148.html


A change of tune: US now pushing for a no fly zone, and airstrikes on Ghadaffi's forces.. This ought to be interesting,  op:


----------



## Privateer

The UN Security Council approves a no-fly zone:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/03/17/libya-red-cross031711.html


----------



## observor 69

New York Times

March 17, 2011
U.N. Approves Airstrikes to Halt Attacks by Qaddafi Forces
By DAN BILEFSKY and KAREEM FAHIM
UNITED NATIONS — The United Nations Security Council approved a measure on Thursday authorizing “all necessary measures” to protect Libyan civilians from harm at the hands of forces loyal to Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi. 

 The measure allows not only a no-fly zone but effectively any measures short of a ground invasion to halt attacks that might result in civilian fatalities. It comes as Colonel Qaddafi warned residents of Benghazi, Libya, the rebel capital, that an attack was imminent and promised lenient treatment for those who offered no resistance. 

“We are coming tonight,” Colonel Qaddafi said. “You will come out from inside. Prepare yourselves from tonight. We will find you in your closets.” 

Speaking on a call-in radio show, he promised amnesty for those “who throw their weapons away” but “no mercy or compassion” for those who fight. Explosions were heard in Benghazi early Friday, unnerving residents there,  Agence-France Presse reported. 

The United States, originally leery of any military involvement in Libya, became a strong proponent of the resolution, particularly after the Arab League approved a no-fly zone, something that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called a “game changer” 

 With the recent advances made by pro-Qaddafi forces in the east, there was a growing consensus in the Obama administration that imposing a no-fly zone by itself would no longer make much of a difference and that there was a need for  more aggressive airstrikes that would make targets of Colonel Qaddafi’s tanks and heavy artillery — an option sometimes referred to as a no-drive zone. The United States or its allies might also send military personnel to advise and train the rebels, an official said. 

In the most strident verbal attack on Colonel Qaddafi to date by an American official, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Thursday that the Western powers had little choice but to provide critical military backing for the rebels. “We want to support the opposition who are standing against the dictator,” she told an applauding audience in Tunisia on Thursday. “This is a man who has no conscience and will threaten anyone in his way.” 

She added that Colonel Qaddafi would do “terrible things” to Libya and its neighbors. “It’s just in his nature. There are some creatures that are like that.” 

The Qaddafi government responded to the potential United Nations action with threats. 

 “Any foreign military act against Libya will expose all air and maritime traffic in the Mediterranean Sea to danger and civilian and military facilities will become targets of Libya’s counter-attack,” it said in a statement carried on Libyan television and the official news agency, JANA, Reuters reported. “The Mediterranean basin will face danger not just in the short-term, but also in the long-term.” 

More at LINK


----------



## Privateer

> “Any foreign military act against Libya will expose all air and maritime traffic in the Mediterranean Sea to danger and *civilian and military facilities will become targets of Libya’s counter-attack*,” it said in a statement carried on Libyan television and the official news agency, JANA, Reuters reported. “The Mediterranean basin will face danger not just in the short-term, but also in the long-term.”



Stay safe, CHARLOTTETOWN.


----------



## MarkOttawa

France, UK and US for--main western victors of WW II; Russia, China, Germany, India and Brazil abstained.  Rather a last gasp of the old world order and lord knows where it will all end.  I expect bombs within a very short time and probably special forces on the ground.
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=37800&Cr=libya&Cr1=
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/17/libya-united-nations-air-strikes-live

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Edward Campbell

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> France, UK and US for--main western victors of WW II; Russia, China, Germany, India and Brazil abstained.  Rather a last gasp of the old world order and lord knows where it will all end.  I expect bombs within a very short time and probably special forces on the ground.
> http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=37800&Cr=libya&Cr1=
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/17/libya-united-nations-air-strikes-live
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa





Russia, China, Germany and India were all *MAJOR* combatants in World War II - for China the war began in 1937, maybe 1931, if you count Manchuria as Chinese.


----------



## MarkOttawa

"western victors"

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Edward Campbell

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> "western victors"
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa




Yes, fair enough, but the others hardly "abstained." India, like Canada, was a whole helluva lot more important than France.


----------



## Haletown

word is leaking that Canada will contribute 6 x CF-18's to the no fly effort.

Would be nice to have F-35's right now  . . . .


----------



## PPCLI Guy

Haletown said:
			
		

> word is leaking that Canada will contribute 6 x CF-18's to the no fly effort.
> 
> Would be nice to have F-35's right now  . . . .



Why exactly?  What possible use is 5th generation stealth technology in imposing a no fly zone, given the state of Libya's AD and its Air Force?


----------



## MikeL

New article posted up recently confirming the deployment of 6x CF18s.
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110317/cf-libya-canada/


----------



## Haletown

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Why exactly?  What possible use is 5th generation stealth technology in imposing a no fly zone, given the state of Libya's AD and its Air Force?



Please tell us what the state of the Libyan Air Force and Air Defense is . . .


----------



## Old Sweat

Having kicked around the military plans and operations side in NDHQ, albeit a bunch of years ago, I would bet that "we" have a very good idea of the capability of the Libyan air defences.


----------



## PPCLI Guy

Haletown said:
			
		

> Please tell us what the state of the Libyan Air Force and Air Defense is . . .



I assumed that you knew something I didn't, and that is why you recommended the F-35 as the aircraft of choice.


----------



## The Bread Guy

More on CF-18's:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/canadian-jets-to-help-enforce-no-fly-zone-over-libya/article1945738/singlepage/#articlecontent

Stay safe, all.


----------



## Infanteer

Considering how merde things were going for the Rebel forces on the ground, it seems like this is an effort to bolster them with a Kosovo effect "Don't worry, we'll come!"


----------



## George Wallace

Haletown said:
			
		

> Please tell us what the state of the Libyan Air Force and Air Defense is . . .



Time sensitive info as there have been defections to Malta in the last few days:


Five less aircraft:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wikileaks-files/libya-wikileaks/8294662/LIBYAN-AIR-FORCE-JET-CRASHES-AT-AIRSHOW.html


> *LIBYAN AIR FORCE JET CRASHES AT AIRSHOW
> *
> 
> Friday 18 March 2011
> 
> Passed to the Telegraph by WikiLeaks 9:32PM GMT 31 Jan 2011
> Ref ID: 09TRIPOLI812
> 
> Date: 10/8/2009 16:29
> 
> Origin: Embassy Tripoli
> 
> Classification: CONFIDENTIAL
> 
> Destination: 09TRIPOLI805
> 
> Header: VZCZCXRO5653PP RUEHBC RUEHDE RUEHDH RUEHKUK RUEHROVDE RUEHTRO #0812 2811629ZNY CCCCC ZZHP 081629Z OCT 09FM AMEMBASSY TRIPOLITO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5354INFO RUEHEE/ARAB LEAGUE COLLECTIVERUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS PRIORITY 0846RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 1175RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PRIORITY 0090RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME PRIORITY 0626RUEHVT/AMEMBASSY VALLETTA PRIORITY 0457RUEHPG/AMEMBASSY PRAGUE PRIORITY 0001RHEHAAA/NSC WASHINGTON DCRUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON DCRUEHTRO/AMEMBASSY TRIPOLI 5901
> 
> Tags: PGOV,LY,ECON,EINV,EPET,PREL,MCAP
> 
> 
> C O N F I D E N T I A L TRIPOLI 000812 SIPDIS STATE PLEASE PASS TO NEA/MAG; ENERGY FOR GINA ERICKSON; COMMERCE FOR NATE MASON E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/8/2019 TAGS: PGOV, LY, ECON, EINV, EPET, PREL, MCAP SUBJECT: LIBYAN AIR FORCE JET CRASHES AT AIRSHOW REF: TRIPOLI 805 CLASSIFIED BY: Yael Lempert, A/DCM, U.S. Embassy Tripoli, U.S. Department of State. REASON: 1.4 (b), (d)
> 
> 1.(C) On October 7, a Libyan MiG-23 fighter jet crashed during a demonstration flight at the third annual Libyan Aviation Expo (LAVEX). According to a British businessman attending the expo at Mitiga Airbase (a Libyan military facility, and former U.S. airbase), the aircraft was performing its maneuvers and then suddenly plunged to the ground. It was flying so low to the ground that the two pilots had no time to eject. The cause of the crash is unknown but, according to our contacts, the jet was "very old." Some believe it may simply have run out of fuel. After the crash, which occurred in the late morning, all other demonstration flights were cancelled.
> 
> 2.(C) The aircraft crashed into a residential area about two kilometers from observation platforms at LAVEX. The official Libyan press agency reported that three people on the ground were wounded. Highlighting the lack of credibility that governmental news sources have with normal Libyans, rumors are circulating throughout Tripoli that the government is not reporting the true casualities, and that actually, between one to twelve Libyans were killed. A military protocol official told us that the jet hit a house that was under construction, wounding three workers. A cellphone video of the crash scene posted on YouTube, shows a mass of people gathered around a mass of rubble with no apparent emergency personnel on site.
> 
> 3.(C) Comment: At the expo, Libya's aging air force - which is only slowly recovering from years of unreliable maintenance and lack of spare-parts when Libya was under international sanctions - was on full display. The crash of the jet tragically highlighted the weaknesses of Libya's military airfleet. Despite Libya's obvious need to procure new planes internationally, our contacts report that many high-level foreign delegations to LAVEX, including the Chief of Staff of the French Air Force, were unable to secure meetings with senior Libyan officials, presumably since during the expo, most of the government was summoned to the southern oasis town of Sebha for festivities marking the 50th anniversary of the Free Officer Movement (reftel). This is yet another demonstration of how business in Libya is subject to the whims of its unpredictable leader. POLASCHIKJA



http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=133940091


> *Libya Air Force Jets In Malta, Pilots Seek Asylum
> *
> by The Associated Press
> 
> VALLETTA, Malta February 21, 2011, 12:49 pm ET Two Libyan air force jets landed in Malta on Monday and their pilots asked for political asylum amid a bloody crackdown on anti-government protesters in Libya, a military source said.
> 
> The two Mirage jets landed at Malta International Airport shortly after two civilian helicopters landed carrying seven people who said they were French. A military source familiar with the situation said the passengers had left in such a hurry that only one had a passport.
> 
> The source, who insisted he not be identified further, said the jet pilots — both Libyan air force colonels — had communicated from the air that they wanted political asylum. They had left from a base near Tripoli and had flown low over Libyan airspace to avoid detection, the source said.
> 
> The aircraft remained at Malta's airport, away from the commercial area, while the pilots and helicopter passengers were being questioned by airport immigration officials, the source said.
> 
> After a week of protests, anti-government unrest spread Monday to the capital Tripoli with clashes in Tripoli's main square for the first time. European governments and oil and gas companies were evacuating their citizens.



http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/libya/af-modernization.htm


> *Libyan Air Force Modernization*Over half of Libya's combat aircraft were thought to be in storage following the chronic shortage of spare parts for Soviet-era equipment, which in any event was rapidly becoming obsolete. In July 2007 Libya concluded a deal with Alenia Aermacchi to overhaul SF-260OWL primary trainers in service with the Libyan air force. In late 2006, a deal was concluded with the French concern Astrac for the upgrading of Mirage F1 fighter aircraft.
> 
> Much of the Soviet-era equipment needed to be replaced including MiG-21 and MiG-23 fighters. In 2004, Rosoboronexport made deliveries of military equipment to 59 countries and procured armaments for UN purposes. Russia successfully expanded its cooperation with such countries as Venezuela, Morocco, Libya and Algeria in the recent years. A Russian delegation participated in the first international conference/exhibition in Libya entitled "Airport - New Technology" which took place in Tripoli on May 14-19, 2005.
> 
> On 10 December 2007 Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi started a five-day official visit to France. French media said his visit will focus on arms supplies, in particular the purchase of Rafale fighters, manufactured by France's largest aircraft maker Dassault Aviation. Paris also intended to help Libya in building a nuclear reactor. Gaddafi's visit to Paris, his first in the past 30 years, ran December 10-15. He met twice with French President Nicolas Sarkozy - on December 10 and 12 at the Elysee Palace.
> 
> In arms sales to Tripoli, Russia has encountered tough competition with Western nations since the UN lifted sanctions against Libya in 2003, after Qaddafi announced he would halt the national nuclear weapons program and later accepted responsibility for the 1998 terrorist bombing over Lockerbie in Scotland, agreeing to pay compensation to the victims' families. France is anxious to sell Tripoli 18 Rafale fighter aircraft worth 2.5 billion euros (about $4 billion).
> 
> Libya's fighter aviation - Soviet-era MiG-21 and MiG-23 jets - have outlived their usefulness. However, no contracts for the delivery of Russian-made state-of-the-art air defense systems and combat aircraft to Libya should be expected in the foreseeable future. Business daily Vedomosti said 16 April 2008 that Russia wanted to sell 12 Su-35 Flanker multirole fighters and Tor-M2E short-range missile systems to Libya, and offer spare parts and maintenance services for Soviet-era military hardware. An aircraft industry source quoted by the daily confirmed the deal was almost ready, but said the majority of contracts could only be initialed in Libya as the two countries had failed to reach an agreement on the African state's Soviet-era debt, which Russia earlier put at about $3.5 billion.
> 
> Russia wrote off Libya's US$4.5 billion Soviet-era debt in exchange for "multibillion dollar" contracts in a move that could potentially ease the way towards the signing of a series of defence export accords. The announcement - reported by Russian state information service RIA Novosti on 17 April 2008 - coincided with Russian President Vladimir Putin's visit to Libya and followed the 14 April 2008 announcement that the two countries were discussing military contracts valued at a total of USD2.5 billion. Jane's reported that the list of materiel included "several squadrons" of Russian anti-aircraft missile system, the S-300 PMU2 Favorit; about 20 Tor-M1 and Buk-M1-2 anti-aircraft missile systems; two aircraft squadrons - one Mikoyan MiG-29 SMT and one Sukhoi Su-30MK - and several dozen Mil Mi-17, Mi-35 and Kamov Ka-52 helicopters.
> 
> By 2010 the Libyan Air Force had at least 25 MiG-21 and 125 MiG-23 fighter jets, a number of Su-22 and Su-24 attack aircraft, combat helicopters and military transport planes. Libya had expressed an interest in MiG-35 [multirole fighter], Su-35 [multirole fighter], advanced attack helicopters, and air defense systems. Russia was expecting to resume traditional contacts with Libya in sales of military aircraft] in the near future. Russia had signed and had started the implementation of a contract with Libya on the overhaul of Su-24 attack aircraft in service with the Libyan air force.
> 
> Russia’s military industrial complex could lose up to $4 billion once the international community introduces sanctions against Libya and weapons supply to the country becomes unlawful. Libya is one of the most considerable buyers of Russia’s weapons in North Africa and the Middle East. The already-signed arms deals between Moscow and Tripoli amount to $2 billion, while deals for another $1.8 billion are in the final stage of readiness. In January 2010 the two sides agreed on supply of Russia’s small arms, six operational trainers Yak-130 and some armored vehicles for total of $US 1.3 billion. Russia's Irkut Corporation aimed to deliver the first three of six Yak-130 advanced jet trainers on order to Libya by the end of 2010. The remaining aircraft would be delivered at the beginning of 2011. Tripoli has an option for additional aircraft. The contract was signed at the beginning of 2009.
> 
> Libya has been supposed to become the first country to get Su-35 fighter jets, the contract to buy 15 jets for $800 million is fully accorded and ready to be signed. Tripoli also expressed interest in buying 10 Ka-52 Alligator assault helicopters, two advanced long range S—300PMU2 Favorit air defense missile system and about 40 short range Panzir C1 air defense complexes for a total over $1 billion.


----------



## The Bread Guy

What Italy could bring to the table (original in Italian here, clunky Google English translation (below) here):


> Italy and 'ready to provide air bases and to help implement the' no fly zone 'authorized by the UN: and' what is learned from qualified sources, which state that are already 'been planned several options that will now be assessed with other international partners.  The Defence Minister, Ignazio La Russa, has always said that Italy intends to have''a leading role''and reiterated tonight that''there will deduct our duties'': This means, first, the provision of air bases no longer 'merely for purpose' of humanitarian need, as already 'is the beginning of the crisis to Sigonella, but also for genuine military purposes.  As many experts agree, the implementation of a no-fly zone on Libya should start with an attack,''in the sense - says the former Air Force Chief of Staff Leonardo Tricarico - the need to neutralize enemy air defense means, in other words' destroying radar and missile sites.  Us this ability ', so-called SEAD, that' 'suppression of enemy air defenses,' we have it and it 'consists of the Tornado fighter: we did in Kosovo together with the Germans and after three days no more flying' an airplane Serbian .''
> 
> Of course, and 'soon to say whether Italy will put' actually available to these air assets, possibly together with the F-16 and Eurofighter, suitable for patrolling and surveillance, as well as airplanes AV8, of which he 'equipped the aircraft carrier Cavour .  One thing that is taken for granted and, indeed, the provision of air bases, especially those of south-central, and for the redeployment of aircraft to other countries for logistical assistance.   AWACS radar planes, for instance, could be located in Trapani, which 'specifically equipped for this type of aircraft, but foundations are eligible to host hunting everything from Grazzanise at Gioia del Colle.  Could be used in case of need ', or even in Lampedusa or Pantelleria.  There 'then another capacity' fundamental, still remembers the General Tricarico,''which has to do with intelligence and which 'has Italy: this is the Cosmo-SkyMed satellite constellation and that' fully operational and has a performance superior to any other existing system. Thanks to these satellites you can 'have a photographic representation applicant with very high definition, the best there is in circulation today.''  For the same purpose can also be used unmanned aircraft (drones) 'Predator', which have a large degree of autonomy and could be driven from their base at Amendola, in Puglia.


----------



## Haletown

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> I assumed that you knew something I didn't, and that is why you recommended the F-35 as the aircraft of choice.



nope . .   I thought you knew 

I just think having modern kit is better for our young men & women who are the pointy end of our stick.  It is much more than stealth . . .  the integrated sensor suite and comm/nav systems alone make it a better choice.  A modern aircraft has a better chance of getting the job done and getting the person in it back safely.

Getting the soldier/airman/sailor home alive is a good thing.


Doesn't really matter what our enemies are equipped with.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

Haletown said:
			
		

> nope . .   I thought you knew
> 
> I just think having modern kit is better for our young men & women who are the pointy end of our stick.  It is much more than stealth . . .  the integrated sensor suite and comm/nav systems alone make it a better choice.  A modern aircraft has a better chance of getting the job done and getting the person in it back safely.
> 
> Getting the soldier/airman/sailor home alive is a good thing.
> 
> 
> Doesn't really matter what our enemies are equipped with.



CF-18s are more than a match for a third world, poorly maintained, air force.  







I'd imagine quick work will be made of Gadhafi's air force and his air defense network, once thats complete, let the bombing begin.  I really don't think the West is going to let Gadhafi recover, their is just too much at stake.  Rest assured we will be bombing his ground forces into oblivion before long.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Stymiest said:
			
		

> CF-18s are more than a match for a third world, poorly maintained, air force.





			
				Haletown said:
			
		

> Doesn't really matter what our enemies are equipped with.



At the risk of sounding like an old fart, let's remember this (like any mission) is not a zero-risk mission.  I'll be happy to see anyone who might deploy return safe and sound, but it's not over until its over - and it hasn't even begun yet.  Wouldn't want to jinx it, would one?


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

touche salesman  ;D


----------



## PPCLI Guy

Haletown said:
			
		

> nope . .   I thought you knew
> 
> I just think having modern kit is better for our young men & women who are the pointy end of our stick.  It is much more than stealth . . .  the integrated sensor suite and comm/nav systems alone make it a better choice.  A modern aircraft has a better chance of getting the job done and getting the person in it back safely.
> 
> Getting the soldier/airman/sailor home alive is a good thing.
> 
> 
> Doesn't really matter what our enemies are equipped with.



That sounds good in here, but will actually be detrimental to getting ANY new equipment.  As much as we might like to agree that "only the best" is the only morally defensible position, it is not shared by the majority of our employers (ie the taxpayer) who, rather sensibly, tries to balance out the competing demands for the coin of the realm.


----------



## old medic

http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/03/17/draft.resolution.on.libya.pdf

The UN resolution
Self explanitory link.


----------



## Kalatzi

II find it interesting that NO mention was made of our potential involvment prior to the UN announcement. 

No discussion in Parliament as in most previous cases involving deployments????

It would have been a rubber stamp, I suspect. 

Just wondering what happened to all the`let them sort it ot themsselves`` from this thread. 

I wish all the best, but feel we`ve been snokkered by the `Libyan Loon`,  again.


----------



## willellis

Kalatzi said:
			
		

> II find it interesting that NO mention was made of our potential involvment prior to the UN announcement.
> 
> No discussion in Parliament as in most previous cases involving deployments????



FYI, we do have a dedicated maritime operation in the region now. Not sure if that was the "involvement" that you were referring to.


----------



## aesop081

Haletown said:
			
		

> Would be nice to have F-35's right now  . . . .



Sure would be not in any way critical. The Libyan AD, while not completely useless, is not much of a threat. It will be dealt with swiftly, no F-35s needed. There are many ways to skin the SEAD/DEAD cat.........not all of them require putting a jet inside someone's MEZ.


----------



## a_majoor

Reaction:

http://volokh.com/2011/03/17/ecstatic-crowds-in-libya-celebrating-imminent-use-of-u-s-military-force-against-gaddafi/



> *Ecstatic crowds in Libya celebrating imminent use of U.S. military force against Gaddafi*
> David Kopel • March 17, 2011 7:08 pm
> 
> U.N. Security Council Resolution passes 10–0. Live feed from Benghazi on Al Jazeera English. The Resolution authorizes “all necessary measures” except military occupation of Libya. By my reading, the authorization includes destruction of Gaddafi’s anti-aircraft defenses, and of his air force and its mercenary pilots. As President Reagan once said, “We begin bombing in five minutes.” I hope.
> 
> UPDATE: Wall Street Journal reports that Egyptian army is shipping arms to the Libyan “rebels.” Which is to say, to the legitimate government of Libya. As the Declaration of Independence affirms, the only legitimate governments are those founded on the consent of the governed. Accordingly, the Gaddafi gang was never a legitimate government, merely a large gang of criminals who controlled a big territory. The French government’s diplomatic recognition of the legitimate Libyan government reflects this fact. @liamstack reports that France says it will be ready within hours to fly over Libya. @lilianwagdy says that Libyans in France are chanting “Zanga Zanga, Dar Dar, We will get you Muamar!” Vive la France! Vive Sarkozy! Vive les droits de l’homme!


----------



## willellis

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Sure would be not in any way critical. The Libyan AD, while not completely useless, is not much of a threat. It will be dealt with swiftly, no F-35s needed. There are many ways to skin the SEAD/DEAD cat.........not all of them require putting a jet inside someone's MEZ.



I really don't want to get into another pissing contest with you, but what do you mean by the Libyan SAM's not being much of a threat? They have the continents second largest AA network, and just going from what you stated to me, if you remember:

"To be a threat, something has to have both intent and capability.

Iran has intent......the ships constitute capability.


.....threat."

I am not aware of the caps and lims of the AD net, but it seems to be a bit of contradiction.

Again, I am not being an a*%, but I would benefit from a bit more detail.


----------



## willellis

PM'd. Thanks again.


----------



## old medic

Radically varying reaction from the Gadaffi camp


http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110318/local/tripoli-ready-for-ceasefire-but-wants-to-discuss-how



> Libya is ready for a ceasefire with the rebels battling Muammar Gaddafi, but wants to discuss in advance how it would be implemented, deputy foreign minister Khaled Kaaim said in Tripoli last night.
> 
> "We are ready for this decision (a ceasefire) but we require an interlocutor to discuss how to implement it," Kaaim told a news conference shortly after the UN Security Council voted to permit "all necessary measures" to impose a no-fly zone, protect civilian areas and impose a ceasefire.
> 
> Gaddafi's supporters were defiant, however. A crowd burst into a Tripoli hotel used by journalists to voice their defiance of the UN.




vs. 
the article Baden Guy quoted from last night
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/99510/post-1027057.html#msg1027057


> “We are coming tonight,” Colonel Qaddafi said. “You will come out from inside. Prepare yourselves from tonight. We will find you in your closets.”
> 
> Speaking on a call-in radio show, he promised amnesty for those “who throw their weapons away” but “no mercy or compassion” for those who fight. Explosions were heard in Benghazi early Friday, unnerving residents there,  Agence-France Presse reported.





http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/03/201131720311168561.html



> ...............However, Bays added that it was "worth injecting a note of caution" into the current excitement, as Gaddafi's troops were still standing firm.
> 
> The resolution came just a few hours after Muammar Gaddafi, the embattled Libyan leader, warned residents of Benghazi that his forces would show "no mercy" in an impending assault on the city.
> 
> "The matter has been decided ... we are coming," he said in a radio address on Thursday.
> 
> The Libyan leader called pro-democracy fighters in Benghazi "armed gangsters" and urged residents to attack them, saying: "You all go out and cleanse the city of Benghazi.
> 
> "We will track them down, and search for them, alley by alley, road by road ... Massive waves of people will be crawling out to rescue the people of Benghazi, who are calling out for help, asking us to rescue them. We should come to their rescue."
> 
> 'We will be crazy too'
> 
> In an interview broadcast just before the Security Council voted on the resolution, Gaddafi dismissed the body's actions.
> 
> "The UN Security Council has no mandate. We don't acknowledge their resolutions," he told the Portuguese public Radiotelevisao Portuguesa.
> 
> He pledged to respond harshly to UN-sponsored attacks. "If the world is crazy, we will be crazy too," he said.
> 
> Speaking to reporters in Tripoli after the vote, Khalid Kaim, the Libyan deputy foreign minister, took a conciliatory tone, offering to negotiate a ceasefire with the rebels.
> 
> "We are ready for this decision (a ceasefire) but we require an interlocutor to discuss how to implement it," Kaim told a news conference.
> 
> "We discussed last night with the UN envoy (for Libya, Jordan's Abdul Ilah Khatib) and asked legitimate questions on the application of a ceasefire," he said.
> 
> Kaim indicated that Libya would "react positively to the UN resolution, and we will prove this willingness while guaranteeing protection to civilians."
> 
> Diplomats indicated that air strikes from a coalition led by Britain, France and the United States could be imminent; however, the UN resolution rules out sending foreign ground troops.
> 
> Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, said "This resolution demands an immediate ceasefire and a complete end to violence and attacks against civilians,
> 
> "The security council has authorised the use of force, including enforcement of a no-fly zone to protect civilians and civilian areas targeted by Colonel Gaddafi, his intelligence and security forces and his mercenaries," Rice said.
> 
> Earlier the Libyan defence ministry warned that "any military operation against Libya will expose all air and maritime traffic in the Mediterranean to danger."
> 
> "Any civilian or military moving traffic will be the target of a Libyan counter-offensive," the official Jana news agency quoted the defence ministry spokesman as saying..........................


----------



## nuclearzombies

S-crew the Libyan loyalists. I'm sending cash to the rebels to help them. Go Libyan rebels Go!


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12787739

Libya 'to halt military action
Courtesy BBC World News Service
18 March 2011



> Libya's government is declaring an immediate ceasefire, hours after a UN Security Council resolution backed a no-fly zone over the country.
> 
> Libyan Foreign Minister Mussa Kussa said the ceasefire was intended "to protect civilians".
> 
> The UN resolution supported "all necessary measures" to protect civilians, short of an occupation.
> 
> Western powers had been discussing how to enforce the no-fly zone.
> 
> Before the announcement of the ceasefire, fighting between troops loyal to Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi and rebel forces was reported to be continuing.


----------



## The Bread Guy

More from Al Jazeera English, shared with the usual caveats:


> Libya has announced it will halt all military operations in the country following a decision by the United Nations Security Council to back a no-fly zone over the country.
> 
> Moussa Koussa, the Libyan foreign secretary, said his government was interested in protecting all civilians and foreigners in a statement televised on Friday.
> 
> "We decided on an immediate ceasefire and on an immediate stop to all military operations," he said, adding "[Libya] takes great interest in protecting civilians".
> 
> Koussa said because his country was a member of the United Nations it is "obliged to accept to UN Secutiry Council's resolutions".
> Read the Libya Live Blog
> 
> Anita McNaught, Al Jazeera's correspondent in Tripoli, said "This is a very carefully crafted statement, very deliberate, almost forensic.
> 
> "Clearly the Libyans have been pouring over their United Nations charters to decide which bits to disagree with and on the whole they can't find very much."
> 
> "My hunch is that it is an effort to buy time because the Libyans I think have been taken completely by surprise by this sudden resurgence of an [international] consensus on action."
> 
> Tony Birtley, Al Jazeera's reporter in Benghazi, said pro-democracy fighters in the eastern rebel stronghold were positive but cautious about the announcement.
> 
> France also said it was remaining wary.
> 
> "We have to be very cautious. He [Gaddafi] is now starting to be afraid, but on the ground the threat has not changed," Bernard Valero, foreign ministry spokesman told the Reuters news agency.
> 
> (....)
> 
> The announcement came after Britain said it was about to start sending fighter jets and surveillance aircraft to military bases in the Mediterrranean in preparation for a no-fly zone.
> 
> David Cameron, the UK prime minister, said Tornado and Typhoon jets would be deployed imminently along with surveillance and re-fuelling planes ....



Look at what else has happened....


> .... U.S. crude oil futures prices fell in volatile trading Friday after Libya declared a ceasefire to comply with a United Nations resolution passed overnight authorizing Western-led attacks to protect civilians.  U.S. crude had earlier pushed above $103 a barrel after the United
> Nations authorization on Libya and with tensions remaining elevated in the oil-exporting Middle East.  In London, Brent crude LCOc1 also reversed and fell on the Libya news ....


----------



## old medic

Very hard to tell from media reports 

Despite this Koussa's claims, this is in the globe and mail this morning;

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/libya-announces-ceasefire-as-west-threatens-strikes-within-hours/article1947039/


> .............rebels pleaded for foreign aid before time ran out. They said the city of Misrata was being pounded by government forces on Friday morning.
> 
> France, a leading advocate of military action, said it was cautious about the ceasefire announcement and that the “threat on the ground has not changed.”
> 
> “We will judge him by his actions not his words,” U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron told BBC TV. .................




France and UK spearhead 'no-fly zone' in Libya 
http://www.france24.com/en/20110318-cameron-sarkozy-lead-no-fly-zone-effort-libya-benghazi

France is to host talks on Saturday with senior politicians to discuss what course of action to follow in Libya. The UK's Prime Minister David Cameron says Britain will send fighter jets "in the coming hours" to enforce the no-fly zone. 



> AP - Prime Minister David Cameron says Britain will send Typhoon and Tornado fighter jets “in the coming hours” to help enforce a no-fly zone over Libya.
> 
> Cameron told lawmakers Friday that Britain will join a U.N.-authorized operation to stop Moammar Gadhafi from launching “a brutal attack using air, land and sea forces” on the rebel-held city of Benghazi.Prime Minister David Cameron says Britain will send Typhoon and Tornado fighter jets “in the coming hours” to help enforce a no-fly zone over Libya.
> 
> Cameron told lawmakers Friday that Britain will join a U.N.-authorized operation to stop Moammar Gadhafi from launching “a brutal attack using air, land and sea forces” on the rebel-held city of Benghazi.
> 
> Cameron says the move is about saving lives and protecting people in Libya and insists it was “not about choosing the government of Libya.”
> 
> Britain, France and NATO were holding emergency meetings Friday after the United Nations approved a no-fly zone over Libya. Cameron says Britain, France and Arab nations are to meet Saturday in Paris on no-fly zone..................


----------



## The Bread Guy

.... via _Globe & Mail_:


> Prime Minister Stephen Harper said allied countries are encouraged by a last-minute cease-fire announcement in Libya, but that the military deployment in the area will continue to maintain pressure on the Gadhafi regime.
> 
> “The situation in Libya remains intolerable,” Mr. Harper told reporters as he argued in favour of further action to prevent more slaughters. “For that threat (of military action) to remain credible, adequate military forces must be in place.”
> 
> Confirming that Canada will send CF-18 fighters jets in response to this week’s UN Security Council resolution, Mr. Harper said that Canada’s position during the crisis in Lybia has been “strong and decisive,” including the evacuation of Canadian citizens and calls for Moammar Gadhafi to step down.
> 
> “One either believes in freedom, or one just says one believes in freedom,” he said. “The Libyan people have shown by their sacrifice that they believe in it. Assisting them is a moral obligation upon those of us who profess this great ideal.”
> 
> Before speaking to the media, Mr. Harper consulted with opposition leaders. He said Parliament will discuss the matter next week and will be consulted again if the deployment lasts more than three months ....


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

I was just reading the CBC, the same posters who continuously voiced their concern over the worlds inaction are now angered by Mr. Harper's desire to send Canadian Aircraft into harms way.  

Justme posted 





> Why is Mr harper so eager to get into every war possible? These wars are costing us a fortune when we Canadians are already heavily in debt (>$500Billion).
> 
> While I'm glad for this UN security council approved initiative, The EU, Middle east and US can easily take care of this without Canada.
> 
> Please stop burning my tax dollars.



God these people make me laugh: "the world should do something about Libya, just make sure it doesn't involve us"


----------



## The Bread Guy

PM's statement in full:


> “Good morning.
> 
> “Since the crisis in Libya first began, Canada has taken a strong and decisive position.
> 
> “Working closely with our allies, we have evacuated Canadian citizens, put in place tough sanctions, and called on the Gaddafi regime to stop the bloodshed and immediately step down.
> 
> “Despite these actions, the situation in Libya remains intolerable.
> 
> “Last night, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution endorsing immediate action to protect Libyan citizens from the threat of further slaughter.
> 
> “Canada, in cooperation with our allies and other members of the international community, worked to gain support for this resolution.
> 
> “We will now take the urgent action necessary to support it.
> 
> “As a consequence, the Government has authorized the deployment of CF-18 fighter jets to join the HMCS Charlottetown in the region.
> 
> “If Colonel Gaddafi does not comply with this Security Council Resolution, Canadian Armed Forces working with other like-minded nations will enforce the resolution.
> 
> “We are encouraged by late-breaking news that, in response to the threat of military action, the Libyan regime has declared a ceasefire.
> 
> “However, for that threat to remain credible, adequate military forces must be in place.
> 
> “Our deployment will therefore proceed.
> 
> “I have spoken with the leaders of the Opposition parties to advise them of the Government’s decision and to indicate we will consult Parliament next week.
> 
> “I also indicated we will seek Parliament’s approval before extending the deployment beyond three months.
> 
> “I will just add this:
> 
> “One either believes in freedom, or one just says one believes in freedom.
> 
> “The Libyan people have shown by their sacrifice that they believe in it.
> 
> “Assisting them is a moral obligation upon those of us who profess this great ideal.
> 
> “Thank you.”


----------



## old medic

Alot of the short quotes being used from this Koussa  make him appear reasonable.
It's interesting to see some of the longer quotes.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/middleeast/la-fg-libya-cease-fire-20110319,0,3782581.story



> "It's very strange and unreasonable that the Security Council would allow the use of military power, and there are signs that this might indeed take place," Kusa told reporters. "This goes clearly against the U.N. charter and is a violation of the national sovereignty of Libya."





> The details of the declared ceasefire were not clear. Kusa, who announced the cessation of hostilities before reporters, did not take any questions.




From the same article:


> ....The resolution quickly had an effect. Eurocontrol, which monitors aviation traffic, disclosed that Libya had stopped all flights around the country, Reuters reported.
> 
> Longtime Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi has insisted for days in interviews that almost the entire world supports him, except for a few nations such as France and Britain. But on Friday, even Turkey and Ukraine — which Libya had counted as an ally — declared their support for the no-fly zone. Denmark, a NATO member, announced Friday that it would dispatch six F-16 fighter jets and a military transport plane to help enforce the no-fly zone and to protect civilians, the Danish paper Politiken reported.


----------



## benny88

OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper says Canada will send CF-18 fighter jets to help enforce a no-fly zone over Libya, despite Moammar Gadhafi's ceasefire declaration.

Canada's six war planes will join an international effort authorized by the United Nations Security Council on Thursday night.

"If Col. Gadhafi does not comply with this Security Council resolution, Canadian armed forces working with other like-minded nations will enforce this resolution," Harper said.

The deployment will likely involve about 125 people to support the jets.

"One either believes in freedom or one just says one just believes in freedom. The Libyan people have shown by their sacrifice that they believe in it. Assisting them is a moral obligation upon those of us who profess this great ideal." - Stephen Harper


More at link

http://www.680news.com/news/national/article/199398--canadian-war-planes-poised-to-enforce-libyan-no-fly-zone-harper



Anyone know where they might be based?


----------



## GAP

Italy


----------



## Acer Syrup

Image as of June 28, 2009

http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=32.092996,20.262035&z=17&t=h&hl=en


----------



## The Bread Guy

CF-18s on their way soon....


> Chief of the Air Staff, Lieutenant-General André Deschamps, will bid farewell to the departing CF-18s and crew today.
> 
> Date: 18 March 2011
> Time: Between 12-noon and 2:00 p.m.
> Location: 3 Wing Bagotville, at Hangar 3.
> 
> Media are invited to attend the event.


Bonne chance!


----------



## CougarKing

> link
> 
> 
> 
> *Libya declares cease-fire after UN no-fly zone vote; rebels say shelling goes on in 2 cities*
> 
> TRIPOLI, Libya - Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa says Libya is declaring an immediate cease-fire and stopping all military operations.
> 
> Friday's decision comes after the U.N. voted to authorized a no-fly zone and "all necessary measures" to protect the Libyan people, including airstrikes.
> 
> Koussa says the cease-fire "will take the country back to safety" and ensure security for all Libyans.
> 
> But he also criticized the authorization of international military action, calling it a violation of Libya's sovereignty.


----------



## The Bread Guy

.... on UNSC res'n:


> NATO welcomes the United Nations Security Council Resolution. The Resolution sends a strong and clear message from the entire international community to the Ghaddafi regime: stop your brutal and systematic violence against the people of Libya immediately.
> 
> NATO is now completing its planning in order to be ready to take appropriate action in support of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, as part of the broad international effort.  There is an urgent need,  firm support from the region  and a clear UN mandate for necessary international action. Allies stand behind the legitimate aspirations of the Libyan people for  freedom, democracy and human rights.


----------



## brihard

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> .... on UNSC res'n:



Another step down the seemingly emergent direction of NATO's new raison d'etre: the U.N.'s enforcement arm...


----------



## MarkOttawa

F-22s for Libya?

Operational Planning for Libya's No-Fly Zone Continues
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a8aeba351-fffb-4d60-8c31-2736697f30ce&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest



> The UN approved a no-fly zone, the Libyan government declared a ceasefire and the fighting continued. As a result, planning and preparations for setting up the aerial screen over Libya continue.
> 
> While aircraft and helicopters in flight will be considered legitimate targets, airfields, aircraft on the ground or military vehicles such as tanks will not be attacked as long as they are not firing at or electronically tracking coalition aircraft.
> 
> “The operation will be reactive, not proactive and involve many of the same forces as the first Gulf War [1991],” says a retired U.S. Air Force chief of staff. “The no-fly operation will not be conducted as an offensive against airfields and surface-to-air missile sites. It will be strictly air-to-air unless a SAM radar starts tracking coalition aircraft. There may be some cyberoperations and a Global Hawk involved.”
> 
> U.S., British and French officials have demanded that Arab League and NATO provide forces for what is now planned as an all-air force operation. The United Arab Emirates flying block 60 F-16Cs and Oman with block 50 F-16C are considered likely participants. They would supplement British and French aircraft perhaps as many as two squadrons of U.S. F-22s, says the former chief of staff.
> 
> The U.K. says it is readying Typhoon and Tornado fighters for a quick deployment. The RAF’s Typhoons, like the F-22s, have been operational for some time but this would be the first deployment to a combat zone for both.
> 
> Support aircraft would include U.S. tankers, 2-3 E-8C Joint-Stars radar surveillance aircraft, 2 EC-130 Compass Call standoff electronic attack platforms and enough E-3 AWACS to establish two round-the-clock orbits in Libya – one in the east and the other in the north. RAF Nimrod R1 signals intelligence aircraft have be reprieved from retirement to participate.
> 
> Sigonella AB and Aviano AB in Italy are likely basing sites for the intervention force. Egypt may also offer basing for coalition aircraft.
> 
> France already has a fighter force in place in Corsica for the twice yearly Serpentex exercise. Although its primary purpose is to train for coalition close air support operations in Afghanistan, the operation includes three Rafales, 13 Mirage 2000s and three Mirage F1CRs, working in an English-speaking coalition environment.
> 
> F-22s at Langley AFB, Va. have been undergoing stealth treatment, avionics and engine upgrades over the last week. U.S. and British electronic surveillance of  the Libyan military over the last three weeks will have provided the latest communications and control data to update the stealth fighter’s sensors for both offensive and defensive actions.
> 
> Lockheed Martin officials added some insight into the pace of operations at Langley, noting “a deployment-intensive pace.” It noted the F-22s deployed to the UAE last year. When these 5th generation fighters shift locations, company employees specializing in avionics, systems engineering, low observables maintenance and mission planning go with the force.



No mention of our Hornets, nor it seems by Pres. Obama in TV statement this afternoon:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8391753/Libya-Barack-Obama-says-all-civilian-attacks-must-stop.html



> ...
> He stressed that US forces would be acting in concert with the British, French and Arab states...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Haletown

Interesting . . the UN resolution is for a No Fly zone and to do what is needed to protect civilians.

That could mean bombing Libyan army ground assets.


----------



## MarkOttawa

An interesting message from a friend very knowledgeable of the region:



> Suez Turned Upside Down‏
> 
> If anyone should be turning in their graves, it must be Eisenhower and Pearson. Suez has been turned upside down. The US is forced to go along with an ill-conceived  Anglo-French adventure in the Muddled East, and Canada rushes in to contribute to the attack force.  Maybe Germany and Russia will offer to send peacekeepers to interpose - if G'daffy has indeed initiated a ceasefire.  Khrushchev's shade, while doubtless miffed that Russia has abstained on, rather than vetoed Resolution 1973, can take quiet comfort that while the world watches Libya, King Abdullah will do unto Bahrain as he himself did unto Hungary (assuming the Iranians don't choose to upset that little applecart by sending "volunteers" to help the Bahraini Shi'ites).



Then there's Yemen where pretty serious killing is going on:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/18/yemen-police-massacre-45-protesters

I still don't understand the frenzy and fury over Libya--unless it's embarrassment over the past, and emotion a la "Get Milosevic" over Kosovo.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

By the way, whatever happened to the "Harper Doctrine" that CF deployments overseas (at least combat ones) should be approved by the Commons?  Since the House is not sitting obviously not possible right now, but what about when it comes back on Monday?  And why are the Opposition not demanding such a vote?  The principles of Canadian politicians are terribly flexible.  Amazing, eh?

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Haletown

Well France gets a big whack of its oil from Libya and Sarko is way down in the polls so I can see why he/France  wants to "Go Suez".

The good news in your  Suez analogy is that this time Israel won't get involved.


----------



## je suis prest

The Prime Minister consulted with the opposition party leaders and has indicated he will ask for a resolution from Parliament if the deployment in Libya appears to be greater than three months.  That doesn't seem to be much of a departure, if any, from previous government committments on the issue.


----------



## old medic

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> By the way, whatever happened to the "Harper Doctrine" that CF deployments overseas (at least combat ones) should be approved by the Commons?  Since the House is not sitting obviously not possible right now, but what about when it comes back on Monday?  And why are the Opposition not demanding such a vote?  The principles of Canadian politicians are terribly flexible.  Amazing, eh?
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa



This was in many newspapers and up on media sites this morning.



> Reuters
> 18 March 2011
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42150418/ns/world_news-americas
> 
> OTTAWA — Canada is encouraged by reports that Libya has declared a ceasefire with rebel forces, but Ottawa will still send fighter jets to the region to help enforce a United Nations no-fly zone, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said on Friday.
> 
> Officials said six CF-18 jets would leave for the region later on Friday to join a Canadian frigate that is already there.
> 
> Harper spoke shortly after Libya said it would halt all military operations to protect its civilians and comply with a U.N. resolution authorizing a no-fly zone.
> 
> "We are encouraged by late-breaking news that, in response to the threat of military action, the Libyan regime has declared a ceasefire," Harper said in a statement.
> 
> "However, for that threat to remain credible, adequate military forces must be in place. Our deployment will therefore proceed."
> 
> Domestic media said 200 support staff will also be dispatched to the region.
> 
> Harper, whose minority Conservative government does not control the House of Commons, said he would consult with opposition legislators on the move next week.
> 
> "We will seek Parliament's approval before extending the deployment beyond three months," he said.



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/calling-libyan-strife-intolerable-pm-dispatches-fighter-jets/article1947174/



> ............“One either believes in freedom, or one just says one believes in freedom,” he said. “The Libyan people have shown by their sacrifice that they believe in it. Assisting them is a moral obligation upon those of us who profess this great ideal.”
> 
> Before speaking to the media, Mr. Harper consulted with opposition leaders. He said Parliament will discuss the matter next week and will be consulted again if the deployment lasts more than three months. .............


----------



## 57Chevy

I can understand the position of the Russian Federation regarding the no-fly zone seeing that a substantial quantity, if not all, of the Libyan air defence systems were produced and provided by their own country.
The Chinese position of overall non-interference is plain enough to see.
However, their combined effort not to exercise their veto power sends a clear message concerning the humanitarian issue.

Brazil is likely pressurized from within the South American continent from possible neighbourly backlashes.

And India sits on the fence. They have not removed their citizens out of harms way and not only do they cater to their own non-interference policy, but they do not want to lean to closely toward any democratic nation.

Germany on the other hand is simply an embarrassment to the European Union.

Canada can proudly stand shoulder to shoulder with with the best of nations on this UN resolution, and perhaps a seat in that body may surprisingly become available in the next round.



Photo: Libyan Missile systems


----------



## Edward Campbell

57Chevy said:
			
		

> ...
> Canada can proudly stand shoulder to shoulder with with the best of nations on this UN resolution, and perhaps a seat in that body may surprisingly become available in the next round.




Yes, indeed, we can stand shoulder to shoulder in a place that doesn't matter to anybody while the Saudis crush dissent make Bahrain safe for Wahhabi Islam - further solidifying that medieval sect's hold on the region.


----------



## aesop081

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Yes, indeed, we can stand shoulder to shoulder in a place that doesn't matter to anybody while the Saudis crush dissent make Bahrain safe for Wahhabi Islam - further solidifying that medieval sect's hold on the region.



It will be interesting how we justify not intervening in other places in the near future.


----------



## observor 69

Harper heads to Paris meeting on Libya
Canada commits 6 CF-18 fighter jets to help enforce UN no-fly zone over Libya
By Meagan Fitzpatrick, CBC News Posted: Mar 18, 2011 10:22 AM ET Last Updated: Mar 18, 2011 5:48 PM ET 


Prime Minister Stephen Harper is heading to Paris on Friday night to attend a summit with other world leaders to discuss the ongoing crisis in Libya.

The meeting on Saturday will be hosted by French President Nicholas Sarkozy.

The announcement of Harper's trip to Paris came soon after six CF-18 fighter jets were deployed Friday afternoon from a Quebec military base to help enforce the United Nations no-fly zone over Libya.

The jets took off in snowy weather from CFB Bagotville, along with 150 personnel. Two C-17s from CFB Trenton are being used to transport the personnel. CBC News has learned the CF-18s, pilots and support personnel will be based, at least for now, at Trapani, Italy, an air base in the western part of Sicily.Harper announced Friday morning his government authorized the deployment to support the UN resolution passed late Thursday declaring a no-fly zone over Libya and authorizing the use of "all necessary measures" to stop attacks on Libyan civilians.

The Liberals, NDP and Bloc Québécois all indicated their support for the deployment soon after it was announced.

"The message given by Canada is a strong one and the Canadian Forces are prepared to respond," Lt.-Gen. Andre Deschamps, chief of the air staff, told a news conference at the base before the planes departed. 

"This departure means that Canada is fully engaged in this important mission and you can expect to be put into operations once you arrive in theatre," Dechamps told the departing crew. "I have full confidence in you and you will make a difference and do us proud."

Canada is sending at least six of the fighter jets to the Mediterranean to enforce a UN-mandated no-fly zone over Libya. Canadian PressThe CF-18 jets will be positioned in the region, joining the HMCS Charlottetown that is currently stationed in the Mediterranean Sea.

Situation 'remains intolerable': PM
When Harper announced the deployment, he said Canada has taken a "strong and decisive" position on Libya and to date actions have included evacuating Canadian citizens, imposing sanctions, and calling on Moammar Gadhafi to step down.

"Despite these actions, the situation in Libya remains intolerable," said Harper, adding that Canada worked to gain support for the UN resolution. "We will now take the urgent action necessary to support it," he said.

The prime minister said the government is encouraged by reports of a ceasefire in Libya in response to the threat of military action. For the threat to remain credible, however, adequate military forces need to be in place, he said.

"Our deployment will therefore proceed," Harper said.

"One either believes in freedom or one just says one believes in freedom. The Libyan people have shown by their sacrifice that they believe in it. Assisting them is a moral obligation upon those of us who profess to believe in this great ideal," he said.

Harper did not take questions from reporters after making his statement.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/03/18/pol-harper-libya.html


http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&tab=wl


----------



## 57Chevy

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Yes, indeed, we can stand shoulder to shoulder in a place that doesn't matter to anybody while the Saudis crush dissent make Bahrain safe for Wahhabi Islam - further solidifying that medieval sect's hold on the region.



Hence Germany's embarrassment to the EU. Historically, the Mediterranean Sea belongs to Europe. Germany and the EU should be the first in line to seek democratic governance in the region. The Mediterranean Sea is the southern flank to Europe. An overall radical Islamic foothold in the region could spell a European political and economic disaster.


----------



## MarkOttawa

The Doctrine, from "Stand Up for Canada", the Conservative Party’s election platform for the 2005/2006 campaign (p. 45):
http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes2006/leadersparties/pdf/conservative_platform20060113.pdf



> Make Parliament responsible for exercising oversight over the conduct of Canadian foreign policy and the commitment of Canadian Forces to foreign operations.



The whole document makes rather quaint reading these days.  Even more so this from 2004:
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/content/lop/researchpublications/prb0006-e.htm



> ...
> After the election of a minority Parliament on 28 June 2004, the opposition parties once again put forward the idea of votes on Canadian participation in armed conflicts.  On 9 September, the leaders of the opposition parties – Stephen Harper of the Conservative Party of Canada, Gilles Duceppe of the Bloc Québécois, and Jack Layton of the New Democratic Party – announced they would be seeking a series of changes to the Standing Orders of the House of Commons.  Among these, they said “MPs should be allowed to vote on all opposition motions, including on the ratification of international treaties and on Canadian participation in armed conflicts… .”



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Im a jumper para paul

Mr Gadaffi's days are numbered for sure. Really needs to happen to stabilize the area to bring the price of oil back down.


----------



## The Bread Guy

old medic said:
			
		

> This was in many newspapers and up on media sites this morning.


... as well as in the text of the PM's remarks:


> I have spoken with the leaders of the Opposition parties to advise them of the Government’s decision and to indicate we will consult Parliament next week.
> 
> I also indicated we will seek Parliament’s approval before extending the deployment beyond three months.



In other news, can you say "potential human shields?":


> Pro-Gaddafi tanks are inside Libya's rebel stronghold of Benghazi, a BBC journalist has witnessed, as the city came under attack.
> 
> A jet appears to have been shot down over the city in spite of a declared ceasefire and a UN no-fly resolution.
> 
> World leaders are due to meet in Paris to discuss military action.
> 
> The rebel leader has appealed to the international community to stop the pro-Gaddafi bombardment, but the government denies claims of attacks.
> 
> "Now there is a bombardment by artillery and rockets on all districts of Benghazi," Mustafa Abdul Jalil told Al Jazeera television. "There will be a catastrophe if the international community does not implement the resolutions of the UN Security Council.
> 
> "We appeal to the international community, to the all the free world, to stop this tyranny from exterminating civilians." ....


More on that from the BBC here and Bloomberg wire service here.


----------



## old medic

Gadhafi warns against intervention, strikes rebels

The Associated Press
19 March 2011
copy at http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110319/libya-fighting-saturday-110319/



> BENGHAZI, Libya — Moammar Gadhafi warned international forces they would "regret" intervening in Libya and his troops attacked the heart of the 5-week-old uprising on Saturday, swarming the first city seized by the rebels with shells, gunfire and warplanes.
> 
> "Where is France, where is NATO?" cried a 50-year-old woman in Benghazi. "It's too late."
> 
> Leaders from the Arab world, Africa, the United States and other Western powers were holding urgent talks in Paris on Saturday over possible military action after the Libyan government, apparently hoping to outflank the effort, declared a cease-fire.
> 
> On Saturday, a warplane was shot down over the outskirts of the key rebel-held city of Benghazi, sending up a massive black cloud of smoke. An Associated Press reporter saw the plane go down in flames and heard the sound of artillery and crackling gunfire in the distance.
> 
> Before the plane went down, journalists could hear what appeared to be airstrikes from it. Rebels cheered and celebrated at the crash, though the government denied a plane had gone down -- or that any towns were shelled on Saturday.
> 
> The fighting galvanized the people of Benghazi, with young men collecting bottles to make gasoline bombs. Some residents dragged bed frames and metal scraps into the streets to make roadblocks.
> 
> At a news conference in the capital, Tripoli, the government spokesman read letters from Gadhafi to President Barack Obama as well as others involved in the international effort.
> 
> "Libya is not yours. Libya is for the Libyans. The Security Council resolution is invalid," he said in the letter to French President Nicolas Sarkozy, British Prime Minister David Cameron, and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon. "You will regret it if you dare to intervene in our country."
> 
> To Obama, the Libyan leader was slightly more conciliatory: "If you had found them taking over American cities with armed force, tell me what you would do."
> 
> Government spokesman Ibrahim Musa said the rebels are the ones breaking the cease fire by attacking military forces.
> 
> "Our armed forces continue to retreat and hide, but the rebels keep shelling us and provoking us," Musa told The Associated Press. ................


continues at link


----------



## old medic

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> The Doctrine, from "Stand Up for Canada", the Conservative Party’s election platform for the 2005/2006 campaign (p. 45):
> 
> The whole document makes rather quaint reading these days.  Even more so this from 2004:



It made quaint reading then too. It was never realistic. Time doesn't stand still when parliament isn't sitting.


----------



## old medic

Air strikes target rebel-held Benghazi, media reports say 
http://www.france24.com/en/20110319-rebel-held-benghazi-under-fire-air-strikes-libya-government-denies


> AFP - Libya's rebel stronghold of Benghazi came under attack on Saturday morning, with at least two air strikes and sustained shelling of the city's south sending thick smoke into the sky.
> 
> Multiple explosions could be heard from the centre of the city, as a military plane flew low overheard, and the southern skyline was dominated by  plumes of black smoke.
> 
> Retaliatory mortar fire sounded, and on the roads pick-up trucks mounted with machine guns could be seen, after a night in which explosions and gunfire sounded continuously.
> 
> The first air strike came at 7:20 GMT (0520 GMT) and the second followed around 20 minutes later, but the identity of the planes carrying out the strikes could not be immediately identified.
> 
> At 8:17 am local time, a series of several small explosions, possibly from Katyusha rockets, produced at least seven smaller columns of black smoke south of the city.
> 
> At 8:40 am local time, a military plane could be heard flying low over the centre of the city, and several loud explosions were heard shortly afterwards.



Video, with audio of Moussa on the phone with AFP denying everything
http://www.france24.com/en/node/5153990








http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2011-03/60248702.jpg


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

I like the Libyan's use of the "Delay" in talking about a ceasefire, while meanwhile continuing to push forward into Benghazi  iper:

Any good attack needs a deception plan after all


----------



## Mike Baker

From Twitter Breaking News;

"French planes enter Libyan airspace, Al Arabiya reports, citing military source"


----------



## GAP

Apparently, the insurgents shot down their own plane...CTV....


----------



## PuckChaser

Im a jumper para paul said:
			
		

> Mr Gadaffi's days are numbered for sure. Really needs to happen to stabilize the area to bring the price of oil back down.



People are making too much money off the price of oil, it won't drop. Libya had no real oil influence on North American markets, speculators just drove the price up when they had an excuse to do it.


----------



## MarkOttawa

I think Matthew Fisher of Postmedia News is on the money:
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Libya+ceasefire+cover+sealing+rebel+towns/4470881/story.html



> ...
> Canada's contribution to the no-fly zone will be modest and largely symbolic. The half dozen or so CF-18 Hornets being sent are most likely to be based in Sicily, which is only about 450 kilometres north of Tripoli...
> 
> ...
> It was not for want of trying that Canada's fighter pilots have been the only ones from a major NATO country to have not had a chance to fly in Afghanistan. Fact-finding visits to the big airfield at Kandahar were conducted as far back as 2006 to verify that Canada's refurbished 30-year old Hornets were suitably equipped to be based there. But Ottawa never came close to sending them.
> 
> In explaining why they were not sent, the Harper government has repeatedly stated that NATO had never asked for them. This explanation was disingenuous in the extreme. NATO never formally asked Ottawa for such a contribution because every time the alliance put out feelers, as it always does before making "official" requests, it was loudly told to forget it.
> 
> According to government and military sources, Ottawa's skittishness over committing "fast air" assets to the UN-sanctioned mission in Afghanistan, while sending thousands of ground troops into harm's way there, was largely based on the Harper government's reluctance to face the political fallout from "collateral damage," if Canadian jets killed Afghan civilians.
> 
> A second consideration was that operating a squadron of fighter jets in Kandahar would have cost nearly as much again as the billions of dollars that Canada was spending on ground forces there [that seems rather excessive].
> 
> The reservations that the Harper government had regarding sending fighter jets to Afghanistan, apparently do not apply in Libya, where Prime Minister Stephen Harper said on Friday that the situation had become "intolerable."
> 
> However, having decided to only send a few aircraft, Canada's role in what will be a politically and militarily complex Anglo-French-led operation in North Africa will, perforce, be peripheral.



As I wrote elsewhere in early January:
http://www.cdfai.org/the3dsblog/?p=69



> ...
> Our government, for its part, has not been willing to employ our CF-18s in Afghanistan to support the CF and allied forces there even though urged to do so by our allies. Too fearful of political and media reaction if a bomb or missile killed some civilians accidentally, don’t you know...



One might add that no-one yet seems to have thought much about bombs going a bit astray in Libya; in any event the likelihood of much negative media coverage from that is pretty minimal at this time.  Who cried when Col. Gadhafi's infant daughter was killed by a US bomb in 1986, along with some other civilians?  By the way the French were not exactly co-operative at that time--_autres temps, autres moeurs_.
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/us-bombs-libya

As Mr Fisher suggests, our Hornets' participation is largely symbolic: to show Canada is "doing something" for the domestic audience, and to seek favour with the big boys by joining the game (F-16s are coming from Denmark, and maybe Norway).
http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/8050/World/Region/Denmark,-Norway-prepare-contribution-to-Libya-acti.aspx
http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews/idAFLDE72H0B620110318
The government may also, perhaps to be overly cynical, have in back of mind a demonstration of possible future need for the F-35's stealth strike capabilities.

The Liberals and NDP, for their part, support the government's actions (see end here), giving full political cover:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/canada/Canada+joins+Libya+zone/4470418/story.html
they would have opposed strenuously deploying  CF-18s to Afghanistan. 

Meanwhile it's early days for foreign intervention in Libya.  Where it will all end knows only God.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## The Bread Guy

How soon can CF-18's be in the fight?


> .... *In a statement the PMO said in an e-mail that the jets still needed time to get ready.
> 
> "Canadian fighter jets have just reached the region and will require two days to prepare for any missions."
> 
> This should take approximately 48 hours* ....



From BBC Live coverage:


> # The first shots have been fired in Libya by French military jets enforcing the no-fly zone voted for by the UN
> # French aircraft are preventing forces loyal to Libyan leader Col Gaddafi from attacking the rebel-held city of Benghazi, French President Nicolas Sarkozy says after a meeting of world leaders in Paris
> # French aircraft also flew over "all Libyan territory" on reconnaissance missions, according to French military sources
> *# Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte tells journalists he believed British, French and Canadian aircraft would launch the first airstrikes, a BBC correspondent reports*
> # Earlier, Pro-Gaddafi forces launched an assault on Benghazi, a BBC journalist witnessed. A jet appears to have been shot down over the city



This from the French Defence Ministry (Google English - original in French here):


> The Paris summit brings together leaders of the March 19 European, Arab and North America, opened the way for an international military intervention.  Air operations involving French aircraft are already committed.  Following the summit, held March 19 at the Elysee Palace in Paris to support the Libyan people, with representatives of Arab and Western countries, the President of the Republic, Nicolas Sarkozy, paved the way for international military intervention on Libyan territory.  "Together, we decided to enforce the Security Council resolution," said the French head of state. "Our air force will oppose any attack aircraft of the Kadhafi cons the people of Benghazi. Already our planes prevent air attacks, already had other, French, are ready to intervene against armored threaten unarmed civilians, "he added.  According to Nicolas Sarkozy, Colonel Qaddafi may "still avoid worse," according to resolution 1973 the Security Council of the United Nations, adopted March 17, 2011.  "The door of diplomacy will reopen when the attacks cease," he said.  The French defense minister, Gerard Longuet said in a statement, said he, on behalf of the President of the Republic, army chief  initiated the implementation of military air operations over Libya. "The commitment, today, of French military forces, must protect the civilian population from attacks by forces of Colonel Gaddafi, for the establishment of a particular fly zone in airspace Libya, "the statement said.


----------



## old medic

French planes attack armored vehicles in Libya
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/304835



> The French air force is said to have destroyed several armored vehicles today in the first attacks launched against pro-Gaddafi forces. French aircraft had been the first to be sent over Libya after the no-fly zone was put into operation earlier today.
> The announcement was made by the French Defense Ministry, says Le Figaro, which added that the French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle is to set sail on Sunday from Toulon on France's Mediterranean coast.
> These attacks are the first since the French air force began overflying Libyan territory earlier today. Another Defense Ministry source says that African Union negotiators were preparing to discuss the situation with the now-embattled Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. News channel Al Jazeera had said that those vehicles destroyed were tanks, that which the Ministry refused to comment.
> The BBC reported that the French air force was being used to take out tanks and artillery and that France had also deployed a surveillance aircraft and two frigates to help to enforce an "exclusion zone."............


----------



## old medic

Agency France Press Live feed 

AFP: the US is launching a cruise missiles strike on Libya, according to media reports. 

Operation Odyssey Dawn


----------



## MarkOttawa

What the US military may have for Libya, March 19:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/sc-dc-0320-obama-libya-20110319,0,5864834.story



> ...
> Obama said that the United States will use its "unique capabilities" to help the enforce a no-fly zone over Libya. These include cruise missiles, radar jamming equipment and high-tech AWACS radar planes that can gather intelligence and coordinate air traffic.
> 
> But some diplomats and defense experts have said they believe it will nonetheless be difficult for the Pentagon to avoid broad involvement in many aspects of the operations, including in the use of fighter aircraft.
> 
> Many aircraft are likely to be needed to take out Libya's air defenses. The round-the-clock air patrols needed to enforce a no-fly zone also require many aircraft...
> 
> The U.S. Navy announced Friday that it is sending a group of assault ships to the Mediterranean.
> 
> The three ships, lead by the assault ship Bataan, will ferry a unit of Marines, helicopters and surgical teams from ports in Virginia.
> 
> Air missions could be flown from U.S. and North Atlantic Treaty Organization bases in the southern Mediterranean.
> 
> U.S. ships in the Mediterranean include an amphibious assault group, three destroyers and a nuclear-powered submarine, the Providence, capable of launching Tomahawk cruise missiles.
> 
> There are no U.S. aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean at the moment. The carrier Enterprise is currently out of combat range from Libya, conducting air support operations in Afghanistan from the Arabian Sea.



The Bataan is in effect an aircraft carrier for the Marine Corps and deploys 6-8 Harrier fighter bombers.
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/wasp/

As many as the number of Hornets we are sending.  Note also that 6 Danish F-16s have arrived at Sicily, along with 4 Spanish Hornets to Italy. 
http://www.news1130.com/news/world/article/199799--danish-f-16s-land-in-sicily-canada-us-jets-in-region-for-military-action-against-libya
Norway is sending 6 F-16s too.  
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Norway-deputes-six-warplanes-to-Libya-action/Article1-675451.aspx
So far it seems no combat aircraft contribution from Italy.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-bc-libya-miliarybuildup-glance,0,5873365.story

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## vonGarvin

57Chevy said:
			
		

> Germany on the other hand is simply an embarrassment to the European Union.


Germany has already done enough in Libya, many would argue:


----------



## MarkOttawa

The days of _zerstörte amerikanische panzer_ at Tobruk (via galea hortus):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfXVIfm0DjI

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Germany has already done enough in Libya, many would argue:



haha one could make the same case for Italy


----------



## old medic

U.S., Coalition Attack Libya Air-Defense Systems With `Operation Odyssey’
By Tony Capaccio 
19 March 2011
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-19/u-s-coalition-attack-libya-air-defense-systems-with-operation-odyssey-.html



> U.S. and coalition vessels and aircrafts attacked Libya’s air defense systems in the opening phase of “Odyssey Dawn” the international operation to establish a no-fly zone, military officials said today.
> 
> A coalition of as many as 25 U.S., Canadian, and Italian vessels, including the USS Mount Whitney command vessel, led an attack that included U.S. Tomahawk cruise missiles and aerial jamming, according to a Pentagon official who spoke on the condition he not be identified.
> 
> The military armada includes three Navy submarines, the USS Florida, USS Scranton, and USS Providence, according to the Pentagon. The Florida is also equipped to carry Navy Seal commandos for ground operations.
> 
> Targets included four Libyan airfields near Tripoli and air defense sites in the east, the official said. The official declined to speculate on the duration of the air defense suppression operation.


----------



## SevenSixTwo

110 Tomahawk missles holy crap!

That's 62 million dollars in an instant.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Perhaps even more to the Musso point:






Mark
Ottawa


----------



## 57Chevy

Germany's shameful abstention :facepalm:
by Iain Dale / 18 Mar 2011 

Membership of the UN Security Council comes with responsibilities. It's time for Germany to stop abstaining and shoulder their share of the burden

I am a complete Germanophile. I studied German, I speak the language and have lived in the country, albeit many years ago. German culture is to be admired, and the German people are among the nicest and kindest I have ever met. But the country as a whole still carries the burdens of the past upon its very broad shoulders. It shrinks from any hint of aggressive military involvement, knowing that the sight of German soldiers marching to war is something some would find difficult to stomach.

But at some point, Germany needs to understand something. It can’t be a leading member of the international community if it abstains on the big questions. Its economic size and population give Germany international responsibilities which it ought to have the courage to meet. But on Thursday night it abstained on the UN resolution for a no fly zone over Libya, and at the earlier EU Summit it prevented the EU coming to a united position.

Germany is a member of the UN security council at the moment. To abstain on a motion like the one on Thursday ought to be seen as a national embarrassment. Instead, Angela Merkel will probably receive domestic plaudits. If the international community needed proof that Germany has become an intrinsically pacifist country, this provided it. Some may see that as a good thing. I don’t.

Britain has acted in its own national interest, but also provided international leadership. Germany has acted in cowardice and sent a message to the world that it doesn’t feel it has any international responsibilities.

A third of the German flag is taken up by the colour yellow. Perhaps that proportion should be expanded.


----------



## old medic

> Prime Minister David Cameron said on Saturday to news “Tonight, British forces are in action over Libya”



source: http://news.lalate.com/2011/03/19/operation-odyssey-dawn-u-s-tomahawk-cruise-missiles-strike-libya/

More to come no doubt


----------



## old medic

You can bet the old Kadaffi claim of attacks hitting civilian areas are being made.
How long till he pretends to have another daughter that was killed ?


----------



## old medic

Libya: Coalition launches attacks 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12796972



> More than 110 missiles have been fired by the UK and US, officials at the Pentagon say.
> 
> UK Prime Minister David Cameron has confirmed that British planes are in action over Libya. Earlier, French planes destroyed Libyan vehicles.
> 
> Western planes bombed targets in the capital, Tripoli, said the AFP news agency, quoting witnesses and state TV.
> 
> US President Barack Obama, speaking during a visit to Brazil, said the US was taking "limited military action" as part of a "broad coalition".
> 
> "We cannot stand idly by when a tyrant tells his people there will be no mercy," he said.
> 
> He repeated that no US ground troops would take part.
> 'Necessary'
> 
> A British submarine has fired a number of missiles at Libyan air defence targets, the Ministry of Defence said.
> 
> Mr Cameron said that launching military action against Libya was "necessary, legal and right".
> 
> Libyan state TV reported that what it called the "crusader enemy" had bombed civilian areas of Tripoli, as well as fuel storage tanks supplying the western city of Misrata.
> 
> Sources in Tripoli told BBC Arabic that the attacks on the city had so far targeted the eastern areas of Sawani, Airport Road, and Ghasheer. These are all areas believed to host military bases.
> 
> The action came hours after Western and Arab leaders met in Paris to agree how to enforce the UN resolution, which allows "all necessary measures" to protect civilians from forces loyal to Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi.
> 
> A French plane fired the first shot in Libya at 1645 GMT on Saturday, destroying its target, according to a military spokesman. .....


----------



## vonGarvin

57Chevy said:
			
		

> Germany's shameful abstention :facepalm:
> by Iain Dale / 18 Mar 2011
> 
> Membership of the UN Security Council comes with responsibilities. It's time for Germany to stop abstaining and shoulder their share of the burden
> 
> I am a complete Germanophile. I studied German, I speak the language and have lived in the country, albeit many years ago. German culture is to be admired, and the German people are among the nicest and kindest I have ever met. But the country as a whole still carries the burdens of the past upon its very broad shoulders. It shrinks from any hint of aggressive military involvement, knowing that the sight of German soldiers marching to war is something some would find difficult to stomach.


I, Technoviking, share something in common with Mr. Dale.  I am a complete Germanophile.  I too studied German.  I too speak the language and I too have lived in the country, and yes, many years ago.  But in the quote below, in which he mocks the nation, I figured that any person who studied German (technically, _Germanistik_, or a study of the German Language and Literature at the University of Western Ontario in my case, I'm suprised that his German influence failed him in this:


			
				57Chevy said:
			
		

> *A third of the German flag is taken up by the colour yellow*. Perhaps that proportion should be expanded.


He's wrong, of course.  That part of the flag, referred to as "yellow", is in fact gold.  Any student of German History and its repeated attempts at unification of the many German States that existed prior to Germany ought to know this.  You see, the _Schwarz, Rot, Gold_ of the flag is a two-hundred year old symbol of _German_ unity (as opposed to Prussian, Bavarian, Saxon, etc).  These colours come from the Lützow Free Corps, who fought against the French.   Their uniforms were black, with red trim and gold buttons.  These colours then became representative of German unification efforts throughout the 1800s, and was first chosen as the colours of Germany during the Weimar Republic, replacing the more familiar Black and White of Prussian influence of the "second Reich".  

So, Mr. Dale may feel that Germany ought to do more, and he may be right.  But his childish attempt to call the Germans "yellow" is ill-placed and mocks the history of those soldiers from some 200 years ago.


----------



## The Bread Guy

More tidbits from Al Jazeera English's live blog (highlights mine):


> .... #
> 10:12pm
> 
> *The Pentagon says that the UAE and Qatar will also be involved in military operations in Libya, but will announce their involvement themselves.
> 
> The operation falls under the operational command of the US African Command, under General Carter Hamm. Tactical execution is being run out of the USS Mount Whitney, Admiral Sam Locklear commanding.
> 
> Off the coast of Libya, there are: 11 vessels from Italy, 11 from the US (including three submarines, each with 100 missiles on board), one from the UK, one from France and one from Canada.
> 
> The no-fly zone will encompass Tripoli, Sabha, Natoura, Misurata and Benghazi.*
> #
> Timestamp:
> 10:10pm
> 
> Barack Obama, the US president, has just made short comments on the initiation of military operations. He says that the US is "proud that we are acting as part of a coalition", and that the coalition was "answering the calls of a threatened people".
> #
> Timestamp:
> 9:59pm
> 
> Reuters reports that no major coalition strikes have been initially planned around the opposition stronghold of Benghazi.
> 
> Operations in the first phase are currently aimed at degrading the Libyan government's air defences.
> 
> 
> #
> Timestamp:
> 9:53pm
> 
> Al Jazeera's correspondent Kimberly Halkett was present at a Pentagon briefing on operations in Libya. She reports that the US is targetting Integrated Missile Defence Systems along the Libyan coast.
> 
> Those strikes are the first wave, where the US is in the lead of coalition efforts which involve France, Italy, the United Kingdom and Canada.
> 
> The US will be in control for an unspecified period of time, but then will transfer control to coalition forces. Currently operations of the Joint Task Force are being run from the USS Mt Whitney. There are about 25 ships and submarines present in Mediterranean that will be taking part in operations ....


----------



## old medic

I suspect there are a lot more ships there, or enroute than the Al Jazeera article lists.  I can count 3 RN ships from this article in The Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8393128/Libya-British-forces-fire-missiles-at-Gaddafi.html


> Tomahawk missiles were launched from a Trafalgar class submarine off Libya. .................
> 
> Over the next few days more Nato ships will begin to converge on Libya with the aim of enforcing a naval blockade.
> 
> Royal Navy frigate HMS Westminster is already off the Libyan coast while HMS Cumberland, also a frigate, is in the Mediterranean.


----------



## The Bread Guy

From the AFRICOM web page here:


> At the direction of President Obama and Secretary of Defense Gates, U.S. Africa Command is commanding U.S. military support for the international enforcement of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 to protect the Libyan people.
> 
> Earlier today, coalition military aircraft began entering Libyan airspace to enforce UNSCR 1973. This evening, U.S. military forces under my command began conducting operations in support of this multi-national effort.
> 
> The U.S. military joins international partners who are seeking to halt the aggression in Libya. Our goals are simple: We want to protect innocent civilians, prevent attacks against civilian communities, and deter mass atrocities.
> 
> Our national civilian leaders and their international counterparts have defined clear objectives for our military actions: A cease-fire must be implemented and all attacks against civilians must stop. Troops must stop advancing against Benghazi and must be pulled back from Ajdabiya, Misrata, and Zawiya. Water, electricity, and gas supplies must be turned on to all areas. Humanitarian assistance must be allowed to reach the people of Libya.
> 
> In support of the above objectives, our immediate military goals are to prevent further attacks by regime forces on Libyan citizens and opposition groups, especially in and around Benghazi, and to degrade the Qadhafi regime’s capability to resist an internationally patrolled no-fly zone.
> 
> I have directed everyone in my command to take all available steps to reduce and minimize the potential for harming civilians in our operations, and I want to emphasize again that we have no intention of deploying ground troops to Libya.
> 
> The men and women of United States Africa Command and those serving with Joint Task Force ODYSSEY DAWN are amazingly dedicated and are serving with great distinction. It is my honor to serve alongside them. Our nation as well as the many nations represented in our coalition, are, indeed, fortunate to have such dedicated professionals in our ranks.
> 
> General Carter Ham
> Commander, United States Africa Command (AFRICOM)


----------



## observor 69

Samuel J. Locklear To Command Operation Odyssey Dawn In Libya 

U.S. Navy Adm. Samuel J. Locklear will command Operation Odyssey Dawn, according to the American Forces Press Service.
CNN reports that Locklear will command the initiative aboard the USS Mount Whitney in the Mediterranean Sea. The ship is reportedly joining vessels from Italy, Canada, the United Kingdom and France to carry out the operation. 

More here :
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/19/operation-odyssey-dawn-us_n_838009.html#33_locklear-will-command-operation


----------



## old medic

Moammar Kadafi's thinning human shield
'We never get scared,' says one of the supporters in Tripoli speaking of allegiance to Libya's leader in the face of international threats. And then the rumors start.

By Borzou Daragahi, Los Angeles Times
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-kadafi-20110320,0,3713774.story

Reporting from Tripoli, Libya—


> It was to be a human shield, a massive gathering of Moammar Kadafi's supporters at his Bab Azizia compound, and the Libyan leader was to give a late-night speech of defiance against the international forces arrayed against him.
> 
> They would stand by their beloved Brother Leader at the same compound destroyed by President Reagan's airstrikes in 1986. Even if the bombs came sailing down. Even if the entire place went up in flames.
> 
> "I'm here to support Moammar Kadafi and to oppose the threats of the West," said Ghazal Muftah, a 52-year-old grandmother in a camouflage army jacket and hijab, or head scarf, among about 400 or so gathered around the ruler's vast and well-protected residence. "If they want to hit Moammar Kadafi, they have to hit us. We are all Moammar Kadafi."
> 
> Rap music slamming Al Jazeera and BBC's coverage of Libyan events blared from loudspeakers. Men and women danced and swayed to African and Arabian rhythms. A line of security officials formed to hold back the crowds as they pressed forward. Young men waved green flags denoting support for Kadafi's Libya. A banner showed a crowd of men wearing green bandannas spraying pesticide on rats, the term Kadafi uses to describe rebels in the east.
> 
> "Colonialism will never be back again in Libya," said one poster in English.
> 
> It was a bizarre and somewhat macabre celebration, given that Western forces had already dropped a couple of bombs to halt Kadafi's attacks on Libyan rebel strongholds.
> 
> But to those in this crowd, only terrorists had been killed in the weeks of civil strife across the country, and the threats of the Westerners were just empty rhetoric.
> 
> "I'm here because I love Moammar Kadafi," said Fatih Mohammad, a 17-year-old high school student with a toothy smile. "I'm ready for war. Anyway, they won't dare to challenge us."
> 
> None of those gathered admitted to taking part in the panicked preparations that people the world over take ahead of war. There was no talk of stocking up on rice or water. No plans to leave the city for a relative's home in the countryside.
> 
> These people, explained shopkeeper Mohammad Hadi, were brave people. He had even brought his 10-year-old daughter, Hadeel, for the human chain.
> 
> "So what if they bomb?" he said. "We never get scared. If there was any fear, these people would never come here."
> 
> "We are here," said medical student Salah Mohammad, 24, "to be with the leader of our revolution, even if we die."
> 
> Cellphones began to ring. A hush fell over the crowd. People began to whisper to one another. Cruise missiles were being fired at Tripoli. Those sitting in a grassy area quickly got up and began heading for the exit.
> 
> More followed, until the human chain thinned out to a few dozen people standing in the chill before the balcony where Kadafi was supposed to address them.
> 
> But the Brother Leader was nowhere to be seen. He would address Libyans later by telephone, from an undisclosed location.




Edit to add in the following article:

Libya crisis: Gaddafi's regime arranges Tripoli crowds to denounce foreign military intervention 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8392872/Libya-crisis-Gaddafis-regime-arranges-Tripoli-crowds-to-denounce-foreign-military-intervention.html

An interesting read about staged protests and the junk appearing on libyan t.v.


----------



## Haletown

Reports are "more than 100" Tomahawks launched  . . . .


----------



## GAP

They're hitting Tripoli again...CNN is calling it breaking news, but all you can see is a few AAA tracers, and a lot of shooting....al la Bagdad......


----------



## MarkOttawa

TECHNOVIKING: I share your concern about dumping too much on the Germans, esp. after all the rest of the West has done, or tried to do, to achieve the current results.  I think though that this was the official flag of the _Zweites Reich_, with red:







More here:
http://www.southbear.com/vexillology/vexillograms/national/germany.html
http://www.loeser.us/flags/wwi.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## willellis

Haletown said:
			
		

> Reports are "more than 100" Tomahawks launched  . . . .



112 says the sources of the BBC.


----------



## vonGarvin

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> TECHNOVIKING: I share your concern about dumping too much on the Germans, esp. after all the rest of the West has done, or tried to do, to achieve the current results.  I think though that this was the official flag of the _Zweites Reich_, with red:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More here:
> http://www.southbear.com/vexillology/vexillograms/national/germany.html
> http://www.loeser.us/flags/wwi.html
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa


Yes, forgot the red.  I was thinking the prominence of black/white.  Yes, red in there as well, which is why the third Reich went with those colours as well, I suppose.

But though we like to joke about the Germans, let us remember that until rather recently there was a piecew in the German constitution that forbid the use of the Bundeswehr "overseas" (im Ausland).  I believe that the Balkans was the first operational deployment of German troops outside of Germany since 1945.  It is still an issue for them to employ their own troops: see Afghanistan.

So, had they supported the resolution, they would then fully expect to deploy forces to support.  That is something that still affects the German psyche, especially since this is in a former operational theatre of German forces.


----------



## Cloud Cover

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> More tidbits from Al Jazeera English's live blog (highlights mine):



UAE? An Emirates A380 no doubt, raining cluster munitions consisiting of disabled blackberry's and sour grapes   >>>>


----------



## old medic

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8393300/Libya-US-admiral-brings-the-fight-to-Gadaffi.html



> The Pentagon said that 110 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAM) fired by British and US forces were supported by a French air strike on tanks and armoured vehicles in what has been described as the “kinetic” phase of the operation – bombing to take out Libya’s anti-aircraft defences.
> 
> Further attacks by British Tornado GR4 ground attack aircraft, based at RAF Marham in Norfolk, were expected over the night. RAF Marham is home to 9 and 31 Squadrons, which are equipped with air-launched anti-radiation missiles, which home in on the radiation emitted by enemy radar, and Storm Shadow missiles, used to target command and control bunkers and radar stations.
> 
> Detailed targeting of Libya’s military infrastructure has been taking place all week using satellite imagery and sorties flown by British and US surveillance aircraft, which have been monitoring movement and communication between Gaddafi’s forces. The commander of the multi-national operation was last night named as Adml Samuel Locklear, pictured, the commander of the Allied Joint Force based in Naples, Italy. Adml Locklear gave the order to crush Col Muammar Gaddafi’s military machine and enforce a no-fly zone after a summit of world leaders in Paris. Striking at Libya’s radar systems and anti-aircraft defences is the first phase of the attack.
> 
> During this part of the operation, combat sorties will also be flown by US Navy aircraft, including F-18 Super Hornets from the carrier USS Enterprise, which is in the Red Sea, and by aircraft from the French carrier Charles de Gaulle, which was in the port of Toulon.
> 
> USS Mason, the guided missile destroyer, and USS Providence, a submarine also armed with TLAMs, and a range of anti-radiation missiles, are expected to be called into action during this phase of the operation, shortly before the RAF goes in.





CNN live blog
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/19/libya-live-blog-gadhafi-to-obama-sarkozy-butt-out/?hpt=T1



> Britain's Royal Air Force the RAF has launched Stormshadow missiles from a number of Tornado GR4 fast jets as part of a series of coordinated coalition strikes against Libya, the Ministry of Defense said.
> 
> "We made clear that if Gaddafi did not comply with the UN Security Council Resolution 1973, it would be enforced through military action. Our Armed Forces have therefore participated in a co-ordinated international coalition strike against key military installations," defense secretary Liam Fox said in a statement.
> 
> "The fast jets flew 3,000 miles from RAF Marham and back making this the longest range bombing mission conducted by the RAF since the Falklands conflict," he said. "HMS Westminster is off the coast of Libya and HMS Cumberland is in the region ready to support operations. Typhoon aircraft are also standing by to provide support."


----------



## The Bread Guy

Clarification of who's in charge, via Defense.gov:


> .... *Operation Odyssey Dawn is under the command of Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, commander of U.S. Africa Command. Navy Adm. Samuel J. Locklear III is the commander of Joint Task Force Odyssey Dawn aboard the command ship USS Mount Whitney. Locklear commands U.S. naval forces in Europe and Africa, as well as NATO Allied Joint Forces Command.*
> 
> “We anticipate the eventual transition of leadership to a coalition commander in the coming days,” Gortney said. Still, even with the transition, the U.S. military will continue to provide support, communications and logistics to coalition forces.
> 
> “Our mission now is to shape the battle space in such a way that our partners can take the lead in execution,” he said.
> 
> Forces will assess the results of the strikes in the coming hours, and that will shape operations for the future, Gortney said. This will take some time, he added, with Global Hawk unmanned aerial aircraft and national technical means providing the information needed.


----------



## old medic

http://www.afp.com/afpcom/en/taglibrary/thematic/actuality



> ......"We should treat with some caution some of the things we see on Libyan state television," Finance Minister George Osborne told BBC television. "The targets last night were very specifically military targets" linked to air defences.
> 
> UN chief Ban Ki-moon said on Sunday that Kadhafi was feeling the "unified will" of the international community through the military campaign.
> 
> "He has been killing his own people. He declared that he will search house to house and kill all the people. That is unacceptable," the UN secretary general told AFP in Paris..............






> WASHINGTON — Three US B-2 stealth bombers have dropped 40 bombs on a major Libyan airfield, CBS News reported early on Sunday.
> There was no immediate official confirmation of the attack.





http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fgw-libya-fighting-20110321,0,1245310.story


> .....Later Sunday morning, Kadafi returned to state television airwaves to vow "we will win the battle," and "oil will not be left to the USA, France and Britain."
> 
> "You are transgressors, you are aggressors, you are beasts, you are criminals," Kadafi continued. "Your people are against you, there are demonstrations everywhere in Europe and the U.S. against this aggression on the innocent Libyan people. The people are with us. Even your people are with us.".....



http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/20/libya.civil.war/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1


> Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- Libyan ruler Moammar Gadhafi promised "a long-drawn war" Sunday after an international coalition hammered the nation's air defense as part of an operation to enforce a no-fly zone.
> 
> Gadhafi said the strikes were a confrontation between the Libyan people and "the new Nazis."...........



http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/20/libya-live-blog-allied-airstrikes-continue-against-gadhafi-forces/?hpt=T1


> [8:23 a.m. Sunday ET, 2:23 p.m. Sunday Libya] A military convoy near Benghazi in eastern Libya was destroyed by multiple airstrikes, leaving charred bodies, tanks and trucks, CNN's Arwa Damon reported from the scene.
> 
> – A no-fly zone in Libya is "effectively in place," U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen told CNN.
> 
> [6:53 a.m. Sunday ET, 12:53 p.m. Sunday Libya] Forces loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi were shelling the city of Misrata on Sunday, using tanks, artillery and cannons, a witness said. Rebels in the city were fighting back, the witness said. There was no immediate word on casualties.
> 
> [6:36 a.m. Sunday ET, 12:36 p.m. Sunday in Libya] Nineteen U.S. warplanes, including stealth bombers and fighter jets, conducted strike operations in Libya on Sunday morning.  The warplanes included Marine Corps Harrier Jets, Air Force B-2 stealth bombers, and F-15 and F-16 fighter jets, according to Lt. Cmdr. James Stockman of U.S. Africa Command. It is the next phase in the operation that started Saturday with the launch of more than 110 Tomahawk Cruise missiles from U.S. and British warships and subs.


----------



## CougarKing

> link
> 
> 
> PARIS (Reuters) - *France sent an aircraft carrier toward Libya on Sunday and its warplanes carried out further operations over the north African country, armed forces and defense officials said.*
> The *Charles de Gaulle *  carrier, the flagship of the French fleet, left the southern port of Toulon at around 1200 GMT, carrying around 1,800 crew members and some 20 aircraft.
> 
> *The carrier was accompanied by an attack submarine, several frigates and a refueling ship, defense officials said.*
> "The French operations continue," said a source at armed forces headquarters. "French planes are in place (over Libya)."
> 
> President Nicolas Sarkozy's government, alongside Britain, was at the forefront of a campaign to win U.N. backing for a no-fly zone over Libya and to build an international coalition for military strikes to enforce it.
> 
> French planes fired the first shots on Saturday in the campaign to force Muammar Gaddafi's troops to cease fire and end attacks on civilians.
> 
> FILLIP FOR SARKOZY
> 
> France's leadership in the diplomatic and military arenas appeared to have rallied public opinion behind President Nicolas Sarkozy, whose approval ratings have been languishing near record lows ahead of presidential elections early next year.
> 
> Elections for local councilors this Sunday and next will provide the last litmus test before the 2012 vote [ID:nLDE72F0ID].
> 
> Even former prime minister Dominique de Villepin, one of Sarkozy's bitterest political critics, applauded the government's role.
> 
> "France has, in these circumstances, been true to its ideals," he told the Journal du Dimanche newspapers.
> 
> Some cautioned, however, that the attacks could bring repercussions in terms of domestic security.
> 
> "We're preparing for all eventualities," Britain's ambassador in Paris, Peter Westmacott, told Europe 1 radio. "He (Gaddafi) has been involved in a lot of terrorist activities in the past. We can't rule anything out."
> 
> (Writing by Daniel Flynn; editing by Mike Peacock)


----------



## Edward Campbell

I like to think I'm a pretty good reader and I'm not so old that I cannot understand the news, etc, but: can someone tell me "who," in Libya, are the "good guys?" What is the programme of the _provisional government_? What do they plan to do for the people of Libya, *all* the people of Libya? Do they plan to establish the rule of law? fundamental individual rights for *all*? property rights? equality at and under the law?
.
.
.
.
.

Or will it (the provisional government) just devolve into another North African/Arab dictatorship/kleptocracy?
.
.
.
.
.

Why, in other words, are we fighting?


----------



## FSTO

I am assuming that the threats from Gadhafi about wholesale murder on the streets of Benghazi prompted the action. Don't need another Rwanda on our hands.
I agree though, what is going to replace the current regime?


----------



## Edward Campbell

Things are already going as "planned" according to this report from the _Associated Press_ via the _Globe and Mail_:

Extract:
"The head of the Arab League has criticized international strikes on Libya, saying they caused civilian deaths.

The Arab League's support for a no-fly zone last week helped overcome reluctance in the West for action in Libya. The UN authorized not only a no-fly zone but also “all necessary measures” to protect civilians.

Amr Moussa says the military operations have gone beyond what the Arab League backed. Mr. Moussa has told reporters Sunday that “what happened differs from the no-fly zone objectives.” He says “what we want is civilians' protection not shelling more civilians.”"

I'm glad to see the _Arab League_ is operating true to form: two faced.


----------



## vonGarvin

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Why, in other words, are we fighting?


We are fighting the government of Libya in order to teach them a lesson: that it's not right to use force to support your....


Oh, wait.  That's not it.


It's because he's a middle eastern tyrant using force against innocent people and.....


Nope, that can't be it either, or all these countries would have joined in on removing Saddam Hussein from power in early 1991.



I don't really know why "Libya" and not (insert country name here).


----------



## JMesh

Canada at war with Libya

Jessica Earle, ctvedmonton.ca

Stephen Harper is giving fighter pilots a green light to fire when necessary against Moammar Gadhafi's regime. The sanction comes as a coalition of countries started using force to prevent the North African dictator from killing more of his people.

On Friday, six CF18 jets flew out of Quebec, en route to enforce a No-Fly zone ordered by the United Nations. Officials say 140 Canadian men and women will join French forces who are already patrolling Libyan skies and attacking Gadhafi's resources.

Andy Knight, a University of Alberta professor who specializes in military analysis, says Canada is entering legitimate enemy territory and will likely suffer casualties.

"Some of them could be shot down and then you're going to have individual pilots taken captive or killed, so this really puts the country at war with Libya," he said.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay admits it's a dangerous undertaking.

"The Libyan Air Force is active, we know that," he said from Halifax on Saturday. "So it isn't without risk, let's put it that way." 

More at link: http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110319/EDM_libya_110319/20110319/?hub=EdmontonHome


----------



## Edward Campbell

I agree with Prof. Jennifer Welsh who has explained in this article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_, why we are making a potentially very unpleasant mountain out of a pissant mole hill:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/force-of-international-military-transforms-libyas-arab-spring-into-civil-war/article1948773/


> Force of international military transforms Libya’s Arab Spring into civil war
> 
> JENNIFER M. WELSH
> 
> Special to Globe and Mail Update
> Published Sunday, Mar. 20, 2011
> 
> Early evening on Saturday, European time, the full force of Operation Odyssey Dawn – the military mission hastily assembled by the French, British, American, Canadians, and other European and Arab partners – became apparent to Moammar Gadhafi's forces and the people of Western Libya.
> 
> This massive show of military might will transform, in an instant, the grass-roots Arab Spring into an internationalized civil war. And despite America's squeamishness about using military force without an 'exit strategy' (supposedly the great lesson of Vietnam), it isn't at all clear what the end game will be.
> 
> Earlier this week, it all looked very different: an unprecedented level of international consensus around the need to protect civilians, particularly in and around Benghazi, and a new lease on life for the United Nations. The Arab League – comprised of Mr. Gadhafi's regional neighbours – had requested the Security Council to impose a no-fly zone in order to save ordinary Libyans from potential slaughter. The Security Council looked ready to respond, and without the heavy hand of the United States. It was the UK, France, and Lebanon that led the diplomatic charge.
> 
> But the UN Resolution 1973 (2011) went further than a no-fly zone. It also contained ambiguities about the ultimate goal of international action, which could come back to haunt its drafters and split apart the international consensus. Indeed, it was precisely these ambiguities which led five key countries on the Security Council (China, Russia, India, Brazil and Germany) to abstain. The Council authorized 'all necessary means' to protect civilians, but also 'civilian populated areas'. With this latter phrase, the international community seemed to be saying to Mr. Gadhafi, 'there are certain cities you cannot attack' – thereby inserting itself into a domestic struggle. U.S. President Barack Obama went even further, giving Mr. Gadhafi an ultimatum to pull back from key cities he had already taken.
> 
> There are clearly some members of the new coalition of the willing that are committed to seeing Mr. Gadhafi go; that is the definition of success. However, for other members of the international community (including in the Arab League), the objective is not to intervene decisively on one side of a civil war. It is to protect civilians and bring about the cessation of violence so that a political process can take root. In other words, Libyans must decide their future for themselves.
> 
> So what would happen if Mr. Gadhafi offered another cease-fire? Will Operation Odyssey Dawn tolerate a political compromise? Or, is this mission at bottom about the removal of Mr. Gadhafi and his supporters from the country? Every government, including the Canadian one, has to have an answer to this question – not only for domestic publics, but for the Libyan people.
> 
> _Jennifer M. Welsh is a professor of international relations at the University of Oxford, Somerville College._




I think I understand why this little war might be in the immediate (Mar/Apr/May) best interests of the sitting government of Canada and I also think I can see France’s self interest, too, but, for the life of me, I cannot fathom why any strategically _responsible_ governments are involved.



Edit: corrected hyperlink


----------



## GAP

Hmmm....uh...what about Yemen, Syria, Bahrain, etc. etc.


----------



## aesop081

GAP said:
			
		

> Hmmm....uh...what about Yemen, Syria, Bahrain, etc. etc.



Who ?

[/sarcasm]


----------



## GAP

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Who ?
> 
> [/sarcasm]



Uh....you know, those other guys that are fighting and dying for this "Arab Spring" thingy....


----------



## MarkOttawa

As well as providing bases, now (Xinhua):

8 Italian Aircraft Ready to Join Operation over Libya 
http://english.cri.cn/6966/2011/03/20/1821s627464.htm

While this would make the coalition perhaps easier to organize and run:

NATO considers joining Libya strikes 
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=220&sid=2285355

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## nuclearzombies

GAP said:
			
		

> Hmmm....uh...what about Yemen, Syria, Bahrain, etc. etc.



Is it really feasible to take action in all these places at once? Seems to me that Quack-daffi is by far the bigger fire burning at the moment. Might as well put him down first and see where we're at after....


----------



## aesop081

nuclearzombies said:
			
		

> Seems to me that Quack-daffi is by far the bigger fire burning at the moment.



I dont know if hes the biggest fire burning but hes certainly the one where we have the least strategic interest. As far as everywhere else goes, you are making the assumption that there will be out of Libya fast enough to have a chance to intervene somewhere else and that the public (and politicians) will still have an appetite for foreign expedition.


----------



## JMesh

Shared with the usual caveats

CF-18s wait to join Libya mission
CBC News
Posted: Mar 20, 2011 12:06 PM ET
Last Updated: Mar 20, 2011 1:55 PM ET
Link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/03/20/libya-canada-planes.html

Canadian warplanes committed to a Western coalition air campaign over Libya could require additional time before flying missions, CBC News has learned.

On Saturday afternoon before U.S. and European airstrikes began on Libyan ruler Moammar Gadhafi's forces and air defences, the Prime Minister's Office said the six Canadian CF-18s had only just arrived in the region and needed 48 hours to be ready for action.

But military sources told CBC News it could be as long as 72 hours between the jets' arrival in Italy and an actual flying or bombing mission.

The CF-18s, along with 150 personnel, arrived at a small airbase in Trapani, Sicily, around noon local time Saturday. But the military is considering moving the aircraft to a larger French base near Marseille, the CBC's James Cudmore reported on Sunday.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay is expected to face questions about the deployment during a funding announcement on Sunday afternoon in Wolfville, N.S. 

More at link


----------



## The Bread Guy

<hypocrisy tangent>
Kettle, this is Taliban pot - you're black, over.
</hypocrisy tangent>


----------



## old medic

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/20/libya-live-blog-allied-airstrikes-continue-against-gadhafi-forces/?hpt=T1


> “Initial operations have been very effective,” Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday morning. “We’ve taken out most of his air defense systems and some of his airfields. But there is still a great deal to be done.”



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/mar/20/libya-air-strikes-live-updates



> Four of Gaddafi's tanks reached the centre of the rebel-held city of Misrata. Two people were killed by snipers on rooftops. One resident in the town said pro-Gaddafi boats in the port were preventing aid from reaching the town.
> 
> 6.44pm: British military aircraft are taking part in the latest strikes in Libya, UK defence sources have confirmed to the Guardian.
> 
> 6.54pm: Muammar Gaddafi's armed forces have announced that they will begin a ceasefire at 7pm (GMT).
> 
> It's the second announcement of a ceasefire by the regime's forces.......
> 
> 7.02pm: The ceasefire statement issued by the Libyan regime was accompanied by a call on the country's tribes to take part in a march from Tripoli to Benghazi for talks on reconciliation
> 
> A regime spokesman, Ibrahim Moussa, read out the statement, saying: "We, the Popular Social Leadership of Libya, recommend to the armed forces to announce an immediate ceasefire to all military units.



CNN blog


> 9:04 p.m. in Libya] The Libyan military has called for an immediate cease-fire, an army spokesman announced Sunday.


----------



## old medic

Libyan military calls for immediate cease-fire
By the CNN Wire Staff
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/20/libya.civil.war/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1



> Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- The Libyan military on Sunday called for an immediate cease-fire, a day after U.S., British and French forces began to enforce a United Nations-mandated no-fly zone, an army spokesman said.
> 
> Earlier, heavy anti-aircraft fire could be seen being fired into the skies of Tripoli, though no allied fighter jets appeared to be approaching or attacking.
> 
> "The armed forces issued command to all military units to safeguard immediate cease-fire everywhere," Libyan spokesman Milad al Fuqhi said in a televised address.
> 
> The coalition of U.S., European and Arab countries likely won't rely on the word of Gadhafi.
> 
> "As with previous cease-fire announcements, we have to wait and see if it's genuine," U.S. Africa Command spokesman Vince Crawley told CNN. "We urge the Libyan government to do everything it can to demonstrate its sincerity."
> 
> The coalition of U.S., European and Arab countries likely won't rely on the word of Gadhafi.
> 
> "As with previous cease-fire announcements, we have to wait and see if it's genuine," U.S. Africa Command spokesman Vince Crawley told CNN. "We urge the Libyan government to do everything it can to demonstrate its sincerity."
> 
> Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi had called the allied nations bombing his country "terrorists."
> 
> A U.S. official said that the country's "fixed air defense systems have suffered major damage" as a result of the strikes.
> 
> There was violence across the country Sunday, with Gadhafi apparently shelling rebels in the west while allied airstrikes destroyed one of Gadhafi's convoys in the east, according to rebels. There were no immediate reports of whether the call for cease-fire had any quick effect.
> 
> As of Sunday night local time, the United States and British military had fired a total of 124 Tomahawk missiles at Libya's air defense sites, Africa Command spokesman Vince Crawley told CNN.
> 
> Gadhafi had said the strikes were a confrontation between the Libyan people and "the new Nazis," and promised "a long-drawn war."
> 
> "You have proven to the world that you are not civilized, that you are terrorists -- animals attacking a safe nation that did nothing against you," Gadhafi had said in an earlier televised speech.
> 
> Gadhafi did not appear on screen during his address, leading CNN's Nic Robertson in Tripoli to speculate that the Libyan leader did not want to give the allies clues about his location.
> 
> Throughout the address, an image of a golden fist crushing a model plane that said "USA" filled the screen -- a monument in Tripoli to the 1986 American bombing of Libya, in which one U.S. plane was downed.
> 
> At the same time Gadhafi spoke, his regime was shelling the city of Misrata using tanks, artillery and cannons, a witness said.......



continues at length at the link above.

I find his calling the UN a bunch of Nazi's just over the top.
Hiring goons from Chad, shooting into houses, calling anyone against him a rat.
I hope his fanatics at  Der Sturmer Libya State TV  get dragged into the ICC for calling for rat extermination.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Be careful what you wish for, Gaddafi supporters....


> EVEN as the allied intervention began, a group of foreign journalists were taken by bus on a rare visit to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's compound - a labyrinth of concrete barracks, fortified walls and barbed wire designed to deter a military coup.
> 
> There, hundreds of supporters offered themselves as human shields, cheering to new dance songs about adoration for their leader. ''House by house, ally by ally,'' the catchiest song went, quoting a Gaddafi speech. ''Disinfect the germs from each house and each room.''
> 
> The crowd included many women and children. Some said they had family in Colonel Gaddafi's forces. They said they had volunteered as shields to protect his compound from bombing ....


----------



## tomahawk6

It would be nice if the UN decided to intervene in Syria and Iran as well. Thats something I could support. On the other hand supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in its effort to takeover Libya is something I DON'T support.


----------



## The Bread Guy

1)  Qatar joins the mission:


> The Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabor al-Thani says the reason behind the Qatari decision is to stop the killing and targeting of civilians in Libya
> Four Qatari planes will soon move into the Libyan zone of operations, a French defence ministry spokesman said yesterday.
> “As announced by the Qatari authorities, it will deploy four planes in the zone to be able to take part in the operations, which is another sign of Arab participation in this international operation to protect civilians,” Laurent Teisseire told reporters.
> A second official said the Qatari planes should arrive soon, although he did not say where they would operate from ....



2)  So, which is it?  

"Moammar Gadhafi may be personally targeted with air strikes if there is no risk to civilians, Britain's defence secretary indicated on Sunday.  Dr. Liam Fox said coalition forces would not take a "gung-ho attitude," but refused to rule out targeting Gadhafi if the opportunity arose ...."

"The United States does not have Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi on its 'target list' as Western nations intensify their military action on Libya, a top U.S. military official said on Sunday ...."


----------



## WingsofFury

JMesh said:
			
		

> Canadian warplanes committed to a Western coalition air campaign over Libya could require additional time before flying missions, CBC News has learned.



At least they have all the recent upgrades to help with the SEAD and CAP missions they'll wind up flying...



> This deployment will also allow the Canadian Air Force to gauge the effectiveness of the 2 Phase Incremental Modernization Project (IMP), which began in 2001 and was completed with delivery of the last fully upgraded CF-18 in March of 2010.



Read the rest of the story HERE.*

*Word of warning about the link - it goes directly to a blog entry which I created yesterday.  Based on my postings, you all know me to be a very big supporter of the Forces and any actions they take so don't expect anything more than a summary of the CF assets being deployed and how the upgrades to the CF-18 are going to be of benefit in this mission.

FYI - 2 separate Polaris refuellers were sent with the Hornets as they departed in 2 groups (3+4 - 1 backup jet).  It is unclear as to whether they will stay as countries are discussing whether each country should use their own refeulling a/c or share the assets already in theatre.

As for whether Gadhafi** is a target or not, I think both responses show that he's not the target as even the resolution outlines that the No Fly Zone is put in place to protect the people and not decapitate the government.  

**insert your spelling of his name here!


----------



## 57Chevy

Technoviking said:
			
		

> So, Mr. Dale may feel that Germany ought to do more, and he may be right.  But his childish attempt to call the Germans "yellow" is ill-placed and mocks the history of those soldiers from some 200 years ago.



Agreed Techno, a low jab by the author of that article.
Apparently the yellow in the flag has been a long standing slanderish conversation piece to the point that some action was taken by the German Federal Court.  

(Wikipedia excerpts)
The flag of Germany is a tricolor consisting of three equal horizontal bands displaying the national colors of Germany: black, red, and yellow.

The black-red-yellow tricolour first appeared in the early 19th century and achieved prominence during the 1848 Revolutions. Only since reunification on 3 October 1990, the black-red-gold tricolour has been used.

The flag of Germany has not always used black, red, and yellow as its colours. After the Austro-Prussian war of 1866, the Prussian-dominated North German Confederation adopted a tricolour of black-white-red as its flag. This flag later became the flag of the German Empire, formed following the unification of Germany in 1871, and was used until 1918. Black, white, and red were reintroduced as the German national colours with the establishment of Nazi Germany in 1933.
The colour schemes of black-red-yellow and black-white-red have played an important role in the history of Germany and have had various meanings. The colours of the modern flag are associated with the republican democracy formed after World War II, and represent German unity and freedom: not only the freedom of Germany, but also the personal freedom of the german people.

Gold or yellow?
Vexillology rarely distinguishes between gold and yellow; in heraldry, they are both Or (the french word for gold). For the German flag, such a distinction is made: the colour used in the flag is gold, not yellow.
When the black-red-gold tricolour was adopted by the Weimar Republic as its flag, it was attacked by conservatives , monarchists, and the far right, who referred to the colours with spiteful nicknames such as Schwarz-Rot-Gelb (black-red-yellow), Schwarz-Rot-Senf (black-red-mustard) or even Schwarz-Rot-Scheiße (black-red-shit). 
On 16 November 1959, the Federal Court of Justice stated that the usage of "black-red-yellow" and the like had "through years of Nazi agitation, attained the significance of a malicious slander against the democratic symbols of the state" and was now an offence. As summarised by heraldist Arnold Rabbow in 1968, "the German colours are black-red-yellow but they are called black-red-gold."
                                        ___________________ 
Regarding German input to the no-fly zone;  
The Germans are considering sending German-manned NATO airborne warning and control planes for the Afghanistan airspace which would free up AWACS for the Libyan airspace.


----------



## 57Chevy

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Why, in other words, are we fighting?



Reasons can be many and those reasons can surely be multiplied. I did mention the strategic importance to Europe of the Mediterranean and that would be the obvious choice answer. Another is the "responsibility to protect" emphasised by the UN of which all further action has been primarily based upon. 

Obviously many a finger is quickly pointed to the energy assets of that country, but that would be the easy out answer. However it may carry some weight. Another is the implementation of a democratic government decided by the people. But freedom must be the overwhelming response.



The rebels are left with their self imposed dilemma. Their initial protest was not carried out in a peaceful manner, so their intent of forming a government for all Libyans is shattered. There would be no difference to what is already in hand. The possibility of any peace process is not entirely impossible but both parties must first agree that an armed civil conflict will only escalate to more bloodshed.


Regarding the no-fly:
I disagree with the undermining of the resolution by the attack on ground vehicles which are not set to some form of anti-aircraft role. Nor do I agree with the attack of storage tanks, roads, or any structure or building not used exclusively in SAM role.
The "oops" I thought that tank looked like a Gecko launcher is not within the resolution mandate. These things will happen and they already have.

Enforcing the no fly zone (limited as it may be) carries much responsibility regarding civilian casualties. Some may be expected but a minimum target of zero should be diligently sought.
The Colonels placement of some of his missile systems within populated areas are no mistake. Without an immediate ceasefire, I can forsee in the near future the necessity of specialized ground troops used strictly in the destruction or immobilization of SAM systems within built up areas.
The greatest caution must be taken to minimize civilian casualties as the consequences of not doing so may be brutal. As the civilian causality rate increases so does the possibility of escalation and/or engagement of exterior sympathetic forces. 

IMO, repeated violations to the mandated resolution regarding civilian casualities could result in an outright UN no-fly mission standown. 

In any case the point of no return is surpassed.


----------



## willellis

Given how this Coalition has stated that the government of Libya attacking the civilian population is the driving force behind OP Odyssey Dawn, it should be truly interesting to see how they react to the Ivory Coast, Bahrain, Yemen, Syria, etc. where similar suppression is occurring of the local populous. Will they apply military action in these regions as well? What will be the reasoning if they do not? Truly long and unsure future for Africa/Middle East I believe.

As far as how things are going in Libya since the intervention of the West, I find it truly difficult to say wether it is best for the country or not. The one obvious positive is the limitations that the government will now have as far as air strikes on the civis. The flip side of this coin is that as tomahawk6 mentioned prior, this application of force could be seen as the coalition paving the way for one group of people to eliminate the other in all out civil war. In addition to this, there are reports on BBC News that there were apparent missile strikes on the Gaddafi compound.  I really don't know what to make of any of this... 

Just my  :2c:


----------



## MarkOttawa

> So, which is it?


  

Everybody is making it up as they go along, not knowing what they are doing or really why in terms of outcome.  Except that Qadhafi is now definitely a very Bad Thing (how embarrassing to all esp. the Euros and Paul Martin).  Plus trying to keep up with the Arab uprising curve (except Bahrain, Yemen, maybe Syria).  Too silly and emotional.  Something...[may] this way come.

Bets on an eventual British or French supreme commander (as it, er, were)?

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## old medic

CNN blog


> [7:56 p.m. Sunday ET, 1:56 a.m. Monday in Libya] A member of the Libyan opposition told CNN that the Gadhafi government collected bodies of people killed in fighting in the past week and displayed them over the weekend, trying to show they were killed by coalition airstrikes. The claim by Ahmed Gebreel, who cited eyewitnesses and medical officials, could not be verified by CNN.


----------



## The Bread Guy

More on who (eventually) may be in charge, from the U.S.'s defense.gov page :


> .... (Defense Secretary Robert M.) Gates said what’s important to President Barack Obama in the ongoing military effort is “a meaningful coalition, meaning other countries making serious military contributions so the United States isn’t carrying the pre-eminent responsibility for an indefinite period of time.”
> 
> Obama limited the U.S. contribution to “no boots on the ground,” the secretary said, but “we agreed to use our unique capabilities … at the front end of this process [and] expected in a matter of days to be able to turn over the primary responsibility to others.”
> 
> “We will continue to support the coalition, be a member of the coalition, we will have a military role in the coalition but we will not have a preeminent role,” the secretary said.
> 
> *U.S. Africa Command has taken the military lead in the initial fighting, Gates cited possibilities for a transition to leadership by the international coalition.
> 
> “One is British and French leadership, another is the use of the NATO machinery, he said. “We just have to work out the command and control that is most accommodating to all coalition members.”
> 
> Gates said the Arab League reaffirmed its support today of the military effort in Libya and that this action was “very important, because the initiative first came from those in the region.”
> 
> The coalition is not operating as a NATO mission, Gates said, because of sensitivity on the part of the Arab League to being seen to be operating under a NATO umbrella. He added it may be possible to “work out NATO’s command and control machinery without it being a NATO mission and without a NATO flag.” ....*


----------



## GR66

We just don't seem capable of learning from the past.  If the Arab League wanted the no-fly zone we should have put them in charge of enforcing it.  Their members have enough aircraft to do the job and we (the west) could have provided guidance, intel, EW support, logistics and even fighter cover for their strike aircraft.  That way it would be fellow Arabs making the calls on how far to go in enforcing the resolution (just taking aircraft in the air, AD facilities, advancing ground units, etc) instead of being able to sit back and criticize the way we're doing what they asked for.  

At the very least an Arab League member should have been placed in command of the operation and the member states forced to provided visible military and political support for the operation.  If they didn't have the balls to actually do any of the heavy lifting and be prepared to face the heat of the consequences of the actions, then we could reasonably sit back and say that the regional players aren't willing to make the call so we, as outsiders, shouldn't enforce OUR will in this civil war.  

Of course they never would have agreed to that due to their own ongoing actions in other parts of the Arab world, but by not forcing them to put their cards on the table we've put ourselves in a situation where we have very few opportunities (in my opinion anyway) to come out as "winners".


----------



## Edward Campbell

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Things are already going as "planned" according to this report from the _Associated Press_ via the _Globe and Mail_:
> 
> Extract:
> "The head of the Arab League has criticized international strikes on Libya, saying they caused civilian deaths.
> 
> The Arab League's support for a no-fly zone last week helped overcome reluctance in the West for action in Libya. The UN authorized not only a no-fly zone but also “all necessary measures” to protect civilians.
> 
> Amr Moussa says the military operations have gone beyond what the Arab League backed. Mr. Moussa has told reporters Sunday that “what happened differs from the no-fly zone objectives.” He says “what we want is civilians' protection not shelling more civilians.”"
> 
> I'm glad to see the _Arab League_ is operating true to form: two faced.




And, speaking of "two faced" this is from the _Globe and Mail_:

"Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Monday likened the UN Security Council resolution supporting military action in Libya to medieval calls for crusades."

In a way this, alone, justifies the Libyan operation: it Russia's against something then it is, probably, a good thing. Russia's interests and our interests rarely if ever coincide, 1941-45 notwithstanding - and they were coincidental then, not the same, they just come close together from happenstance.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Whatever one may think of the intervention, this is a lovely vivisection of the Canadian left by Terry Glavin, a small excerpt:

"Don't Mention The War": Libya And The Canadian Left. 
http://transmontanus.blogspot.com/2011/03/dont-mention-war-libya-and-canadian.html



> ...
> It is more than amusing in the way one of the NDP's rising stars, last seen supporting a campaign to lose the New and change the name of the NDP to the Democratic Party to cash in on Barack Obama's already-vanished cachet, is expressing his happiness with last week's UN Security Council resolution. Michael Byers likes it because it makes the UN look good (I know, I know, but nevermind), the Arab League approves (!), it might even be as important as "the Pinochet case," and it makes Obama look good (go figure that).
> http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2011/03/18/Resolution1973/
> 
> Good for Byers, but it is a little bit transparent in the way he manages to bring in Kosovo, Rwanda and Darfur, but deftly avoids mention Afghanistan, which would perhaps invite comparisons that would be maybe too shy-making. But I'm going to mention the war anyway. Canada's engagement in Afghanistan is also part of a UN-sanctioned multilateral effort, authorized and renewed by several Security Council resolutions, and it involves a military alliance of 43 nations that was and remains welcomed by the overwhelming majority of Afghans. This puts Byers in the role of Basil in that scene from Fawlty Towers, the one with the German tourists in the restaurant. Basil tells the wait staff: "Listen, don't mention the war! I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it all right."
> 
> I am not intending to be mean, but really...



Yes you are, Mr Glavin ;D.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## The Bread Guy

This from CBC.ca


> Canadian CF-18 fighter jets flew their first mission to enforce a UN no-fly zone over Libya Monday, as debate on Canada's role in the military intervention was expected to get underway in the House of Commons.
> 
> The CF-18s, which flew out of a base in Trapani Italy, did not participate in a bombing mission, instead serving as armed escorts for fighters of another nation that conducted the bombing. But Canadian planes are expected to begin bombing missions as soon as Monday night.
> 
> Defence Minister Peter MacKay was expected to lead off the debate in the House of Commons, but its start time was delayed by other House business.
> 
> CBC News has learned that Conservative House Leader John Baird is also seeking unanimous consent from the opposition parties on a motion that could be introduced following question period later Monday afternoon ....


----------



## Edward Campbell

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I agree with Prof. Jennifer Welsh who has explained in this article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_, why we are making a potentially very unpleasant mountain out of a pissant mole hill:
> 
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/force-of-international-military-transforms-libyas-arab-spring-into-civil-war/article1948773/
> 
> 
> 
> Force of international military transforms Libya’s Arab Spring into civil war
> 
> JENNIFER M. WELSH
> 
> Special to Globe and Mail Update
> Published Sunday, Mar. 20, 2011
> 
> Early evening on Saturday, European time, the full force of Operation Odyssey Dawn – the military mission hastily assembled by the French, British, American, Canadians, and other European and Arab partners – became apparent to Moammar Gadhafi's forces and the people of Western Libya.
> 
> This massive show of military might will transform, in an instant, the grass-roots Arab Spring into an internationalized civil war. And despite America's squeamishness about using military force without an 'exit strategy' (supposedly the great lesson of Vietnam), it isn't at all clear what the end game will be.
> 
> Earlier this week, it all looked very different: an unprecedented level of international consensus around the need to protect civilians, particularly in and around Benghazi, and a new lease on life for the United Nations. The Arab League – comprised of Mr. Gadhafi's regional neighbours – had requested the Security Council to impose a no-fly zone in order to save ordinary Libyans from potential slaughter. The Security Council looked ready to respond, and without the heavy hand of the United States. It was the UK, France, and Lebanon that led the diplomatic charge.
> 
> But the UN Resolution 1973 (2011) went further than a no-fly zone. It also contained ambiguities about the ultimate goal of international action, which could come back to haunt its drafters and split apart the international consensus. Indeed, it was precisely these ambiguities which led five key countries on the Security Council (China, Russia, India, Brazil and Germany) to abstain. The Council authorized 'all necessary means' to protect civilians, but also 'civilian populated areas'. With this latter phrase, the international community seemed to be saying to Mr. Gadhafi, 'there are certain cities you cannot attack' – thereby inserting itself into a domestic struggle. U.S. President Barack Obama went even further, giving Mr. Gadhafi an ultimatum to pull back from key cities he had already taken.
> 
> There are clearly some members of the new coalition of the willing that are committed to seeing Mr. Gadhafi go; that is the definition of success. However, for other members of the international community (including in the Arab League), the objective is not to intervene decisively on one side of a civil war. It is to protect civilians and bring about the cessation of violence so that a political process can take root. In other words, Libyans must decide their future for themselves.
> 
> So what would happen if Mr. Gadhafi offered another cease-fire? Will Operation Odyssey Dawn tolerate a political compromise? Or, is this mission at bottom about the removal of Mr. Gadhafi and his supporters from the country? Every government, including the Canadian one, has to have an answer to this question – not only for domestic publics, but for the Libyan people.
> 
> _Jennifer M. Welsh is a professor of international relations at the University of Oxford, Somerville College._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I understand why this little war might be in the immediate (Mar/Apr/May) best interests of the sitting government of Canada and I also think I can see France’s self interest, too, but, for the life of me, I cannot fathom why any strategically _responsible_ governments are involved.
Click to expand...




I am in _partial_ agreement with Neil Reynolds who authored this column, which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/where-was-teddy-roosevelt-when-we-needed-him/article1948109/?from=sec385


> Where was Teddy Roosevelt when we needed him?
> 
> NEIL REYNOLDS
> 
> From Monday's Globe and Mail
> Published Monday, Mar. 21, 2011
> 
> Theodore Roosevelt was explicit in his assertion of an American right to use military force against other countries for ethical reasons. For Roosevelt, it wasn’t necessary that the miscreant country had first slaughtered large numbers of its own people. The Monroe Doctrine had famously proclaimed an American right to use force to prevent (or reverse) European intervention in the Western Hemisphere. Roosevelt went further, enunciating an American right to land soldiers anywhere to avert “chronic wrongdoing.” Although this justification might appear a bit expansive, the question remains: Where was Teddy Roosevelt when we so needed him in the past few weeks? Wherever he was, he wasn’t in the White House.
> 
> For all practical purposes, the United States is the only country on Earth either willing or able to wage war for ethical (or mostly ethical) purposes. Occasionally, it acts (as it did in Serbia in 1999). Often, though, it doesn’t (as it didn’t in Rwanda in 1994). Bill Clinton made the call in both cases.
> 
> In the case of the Libyan people’s uprising, alas, the U.S. couldn’t make up its mind – the moral equivalent of taking a pass. For three weeks, notwithstanding the appeals of the freedom fighters, President Barack Obama dithered – further empowering Moammar Gadhafi. Inexorably, the U.S. President allowed a small war against a disoriented dictator to turn into a bigger war against a passably menacing Arab warrior.
> 
> The global reality is, there are only two ways to punish and stop chronic wrongdoing by rogue states. You delegate the job to the U.S., or you delegate it to the United Nations. Usually, the UN is a waste of time. Usually, China and Russia veto ethical interventions. Last week, much to their credit, they didn’t. In the end, though, the Russian and Chinese decisions didn’t matter. It was, once again, the American decision that mattered.
> 
> In an eloquent paper (_The ‘Bush Doctrine’: Can Preventive War Be Justified?_), U.S. legal scholars Robert Delahunty (University of St. Thomas at Minneapolis) and John Yoo (University of California at Berkeley) note that “hundreds of wars” have been waged, in violation of UN Charter rules on the use of force, during the brief existence of the UN Security Council. It would be “an obvious folly,” these scholars say, to rely on the Security Council to prevent genocide.
> 
> “When the Great Powers are in agreement, the elaborate charades of the Security Council are unnecessary,” Profs. Delahunty and Yoo assert with impeccable logic. “When these powers do not agree, the UN is impotent.” By elimination, this left the U.S. last week as the sole alternative to silent surrender. (France and Britain, early champions of intervention, would never have gone it alone.)
> 
> Almost every U.S. president has asserted a right to use force for preventive reasons. Mr. Obama aside, modern presidents (Ronald Reagan, Mr. Clinton, George W. Bush) have asserted a corollary right: military intervention for protective reasons. Mr. Reagan memorably recognized the right of freedom fighters “to secure rights that have been ours since birth.” Mr. Clinton, for his part, justified his intervention in Serbia on moral grounds alone: to end “ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> The civilized world needs to recognize the strategic necessity of U.S. superpower intervention in such situations. If preventive war is justified, so is protective war: thus, the doctrine of “responsibility to protect.” For democracies, an ethical war is a defensive war. By this standard, Canada should have committed to the Libyan cause earlier, too: Our support now, and our offer of CF-18 fighter jets, came too late to make a difference.
> 
> Mr. Obama’s refusal to intervene promptly in Libya, however, was utterly tragic. This wasn’t Iraq. This wasn’t Afghanistan. This was a simple police action, widely endorsed, against an outlaw state. Done expeditiously, the U.S. could probably have ended Col. Gadhafi’s macabre reign in a matter of days, if not hours. By the time the Security Council convened, with thousands of Libyans already dead or wounded, Col. Gadhafi’s regime was bragging that it would crush the remnants of the rebellion within days.
> 
> We obviously don’t know what happens next – though we should assume that Col. Gadhafi’s ceasefire declaration on Friday was purely strategic. We do know, as Winston Churchill once noted, that nothing whatsoever is gained by putting off a just war.




OK, where do I disagree? Essentially, I disagree with this statement: _”If preventive war is justified, so is protective war: thus, the doctrine of ‘responsibility to protect.’”_ I, at least, see a major difference between _preventive_ war – which I agree is justified, and _protective_ war – which I am not convinced can be justified or need by, by definition, even ‘just.’

Churchill was right: nothing is gained by avoiding a just war. I am not convinced the Libyan adventure is, in any meaningful way, just or even justifiable.

But, on balance: Welsh is still right and Reynolds is not right enough.


----------



## CougarKing

Meanwhile...




> *Listen: Secret Libya Psyops, Caught by Online Sleuths*
> 
> By Noah Shachtman March 20, 2011 | 7:28 pm |
> 
> The U.S. military has dispatched one of its secret propaganda planes to the skies around Libya. *And that “Commando Solo” aircraft is telling Libyan ships to remain in port – or risk NATO retaliation.*
> 
> We know this, not because some Pentagon official said so, but because one Dutch radio geek is monitoring the airwaves for information about Operation Odyssey Dawn — and tweeting the surprisingly-detailed results. On Sunday alone, “Huub” has identified the tail numbers, call signs, and movements of dozens of NATO aircraft: Italian fighter jets, American tankers, British aerial spies, U.S. bombers, and the Commando Solo psyops plane (pictured).
> 
> *“If you attempt to leave port, you will be attacked and destroyed immediately,”* the aircraft broadcasted late Sunday night.
> 
> 
> It’s the kind of information that the American military typically tries to obscure, at least until a mission is over. But Huub is just a single node in a sprawling online network that trawls the airwaves for clues to military operations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EC-130J Commando Solo PSYOPS aircraft
> 
> link


----------



## The Bread Guy

Initial reports from latest briefing from AFRICOM/Theatre Commander ....

Fox News:


> The U.N-approved no-fly zone over Libya is working and will soon be expanded to Tripoli as aircraft from additional coalition countries arrive in the region, the head of U.S. Africa Command said on Monday.
> 
> U.S. Army General Carter Ham told a Pentagon briefing that coalition air forces were continuing missions to sustain the no-fly zone and that Libyan ground forces were moving south from rebel-held Benghazi showing "little will or capability" to operate.
> 
> Ham said U.S. and U.K. forces launched another 12 Tomahawk cruise missiles over the past 24 hours at sites controlled by Libyan leader Col. Muammar Qaddafi. The targets included regime command and control facilities, a surface-to-surface missile site and an air defense station, according to Ham, the operation commander who added that there was no direct coordination among allies and anti-Qaddafi rebels ....



Reuters (1):


> The U.N.-approved no-fly zone over Libya is expanding and will soon cover a 1,000-km area as aircraft from additional coalition countries arrive in the region, the head of U.S. Africa Command said Monday.
> 
> Army General Carter Ham told a Pentagon briefing that coalition air forces were continuing to fly missions to sustain the no-fly zone and that Libyan ground forces were moving south from rebel-held Benghazi showing "little will or capability" to operate.



Reuters (2):


> U.S. and coalition military forces enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya are there to protect civilians and not to provide close-air support for opposition forces fighting Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, the head of U.S. Africa Command said on Monday.
> 
> Army General Carter Ham said the military mission in Libya was "very clear" and he was not concerned that the objectives would grow and change in the coming days. He said he had no orders to directly attack the Libyan leader.



The Associated Press:


> The U.S. commander in Africa says coalition jets fired 12 more cruise missiles at Libyan missile, command and air defense sites as they continued to press a no-fly zone over the North African nation.
> 
> The attacks Monday followed a weekend of punishing air strikes aimed at preventing Moammar Gadhafi's forces from killing civilians seeking his ouster.
> 
> Asked what the coalition knows about the whereabouts of Gadhafi, Gen. Carter Ham said essentially, not much. Speaking by video conference from his headquarters in Germany, Ham told Pentagon reporters that the international coalition is focusing instead on knocking out Libya's ability to command and control its forces ....


----------



## Redeye

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> Meanwhile...
> 
> (snipped from pasted article)
> We know this, not because some Pentagon official said so, but because one Dutch radio geek is monitoring the airwaves for information about Operation Odyssey Dawn — and tweeting the surprisingly-detailed results. On Sunday alone, “Huub” has identified the tail numbers, call signs, and movements of dozens of NATO aircraft: Italian fighter jets, American tankers, British aerial spies, U.S. bombers, and the Commando Solo psyops plane (pictured).



His Twitter feed is @FMCNL if anyone's interested.

Closely spaced aircraft flew over Halifax this afternoon headed SW, not that I'm an expert but they were closer than I think minimum spacing for civil aviation is.  Didn't see what they were though... most interesting.


----------



## MarkOttawa

At the briefing MND MacKay also said a second six-pack of Hornets (presumably from Cold Lake) was on stand-by to deploy for the Libyan theatre if needed (waiting for an "ask" from whoever is in charge of the op) and if the gov't agrees.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

More on Italians (will Canadian media notice much?):

Italy: Doing More than Playing Host for Libyan Operations
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a540370c1-baad-41ba-a4fc-a5d86f645ecc&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest



> Italy is helping fill the gap in the suppression of enemy air defense role over Libya, with four SEAD Tornado ECR involved in the operation.
> 
> Despite restrictive rules of engagement to avoid hurting bystandards, Italian Gen. Biagio Abrate, the chief of the joint defense staff, confirms the Tornado’s are authorized to fire their HARM missions, not just in self-defense roles but also to suppress radars. The Tornado ECRs have the ability to more precisely target HARM missiles than some other aircraft capable of shooting the anti-radar weapon. The Tornado ECRs provide the only European capability to refine HARM targeting; Germany also operates the aircraft, but is refusing to participate.
> 
> The Tornado ECRs are being escorted by four Italy F-16 Block 15s for protection against air threats (although Libya has not had any aircraft flying since the commencement of military operations).
> 
> Italy also has cleared partners to base their assets at a variety of facilities, including Gioia del Colle and Amendola in Puglia, Aviano in north-eastern Italy, Trapani and Sigonella in Sicily, and Decimomannu in Sardinia. Other bases could be used as many additional allied aircraft are reaching Italy. The NATO CAOC in Poggio Renatico is also fully operational, with other C4I installations heavily involved
> 
> Meanwhile, the Italian air force has put its own air defense system on alert, including fixed and mobile radars, as well as Eurofighter Typhoon fighters; the latter are ready to be scrambled within 15 min. from Gioia del Colle and Trapani.
> 
> The air force is also deploying Spada point defense anti-aircraft batteries to protect the main operating bases.



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## The Bread Guy

More on "who's in charge" from today's briefing by AFRICOM's boss, via Wired.com:


> .... Ham said he doesn’t see his mission changing, and he said his focus over the coming days is extending the no-fly zone westward to Tripoli, covering about 1000 kilometers of Libyan territory. But his successor might have a different… interpretation of when Gadhafi forces become legit targets. Over the next several days, Ham will transition command to an as-yet-unspecified multinational command entity. The French and British are already more gung-ho about taking Gadhafi down than the U.S. is.
> 
> And even before the next command takes over, Ham said that “well over half” of the 70 to 80 sorties that coalition aircraft flew over Libya on Monday weren’t U.S. jets. Maybe those non-U.S. pilots draw less strict distinctions between rebel fighters and Libyan civilians.


----------



## The Bread Guy

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> More on Italians (will Canadian media notice much?):
> 
> Italy: Doing More than Playing Host for Libyan Operations
> http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a540370c1-baad-41ba-a4fc-a5d86f645ecc&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa


Probably only outlets like this, or some medium- to small-market outlets with significant Italian populations in the readership.

BTW, nice consolidated map from Radio Deutsche Welle attached.


----------



## Redeye

I think the US plans to hand over command to another party as soon as feasible, and I think they'd love it if an Arab League state was in charge.  They seem interested just in the idea of making sure Arab states participate, which is why they've lobbied for Qatar and the UAE to get involved.



			
				GR66 said:
			
		

> We just don't seem capable of learning from the past.  If the Arab League wanted the no-fly zone we should have put them in charge of enforcing it.  Their members have enough aircraft to do the job and we (the west) could have provided guidance, intel, EW support, logistics and even fighter cover for their strike aircraft.  That way it would be fellow Arabs making the calls on how far to go in enforcing the resolution (just taking aircraft in the air, AD facilities, advancing ground units, etc) instead of being able to sit back and criticize the way we're doing what they asked for.
> 
> At the very least an Arab League member should have been placed in command of the operation and the member states forced to provided visible military and political support for the operation.  If they didn't have the balls to actually do any of the heavy lifting and be prepared to face the heat of the consequences of the actions, then we could reasonably sit back and say that the regional players aren't willing to make the call so we, as outsiders, shouldn't enforce OUR will in this civil war.
> 
> Of course they never would have agreed to that due to their own ongoing actions in other parts of the Arab world, but by not forcing them to put their cards on the table we've put ourselves in a situation where we have very few opportunities (in my opinion anyway) to come out as "winners".


----------



## Container

Are the jets really firing "cruise missles"? I was under the impression that generally speaking a cruise missle was a naval platform......that or a bomber function.

Any experts round here'?


----------



## PuckChaser

Container said:
			
		

> Are the jets really firing "cruise missles"? I was under the impression that generally speaking a cruise missle was a naval platform......that or a bomber function.
> 
> Any experts round here'?



I know the B52 is large enough to launch cruise missiles, but that's the only aerial platform I can think of.


----------



## The Bread Guy

More on the House of Commons action coming up, via Dow Jones wire:


> .... (Defence Minister Peter MacKay) said there will be a "take note" debate and motion in the House of Commons later Monday, which will give all political parties an opportunity to flesh out their positions with regards to the mission.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Belgians in too:
http://english.cri.cn/6966/2011/03/20/1821s627456.htm



> The Belgian fighter jets and a minesweeper will be ready for military actions against Libya on Monday, as Belgian defense chief warned Sunday that the international military operation could cause a large number of casualties.
> 
> Belgium has promised to contribute eight Belgian F-16 fighter-bombers and a minesweeper to the international military operation against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.
> 
> A senior Belgian military official, quoted by the Belga news agency, announced Sunday that the jets, which have arrived at Araxos air base in Greece, would be ready for combat on Monday.
> 
> A total of 200 Beglian military staff will join the mission, the official said.
> 
> Meanwhile, Belgian Defense Minister Pieter De Crem told Belgian radio that "the ultimate goal is to topple the Gaddafi regime [*not a unified coalition party line*] and establish a dignified society for the Libyan people."
> 
> However, he warned that the military operation could take a long period of time and cause heavy casualties...



Active:
http://www.expatica.com/be/news/belgian-news/belgian-f-16s-conduct-first-libya-operation_137228.html



> Belgian F-16 jets on Monday conducted the country's first Libya operation as part of the international coalition enforcing a UN resolution, Defence Minister Pieter De Crem told parliament.
> 
> "During the coalition missions carried out by our F-16 detachment -- this operation is currently under way with a first mission launched a little before 1500 local (1400 GMT) -- NATO rules of engagement will apply," De Crem said.
> 
> "They will be completed by specific rules of engagement to ensure the protection of civilians," he added.
> 
> A source close to the government said four fighters were involved...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

As for a new command structure:

Command Conflict
Turkey Blocks NATO Mission in Libya
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,752222,00.html#ref=nlint



> The US wants to hand over command of Operation Odyssey Dawn to another country within a matter of days, but so far NATO has been unable to reach an agreement on taking control of the implementation of the no-fly zone in Libya. Turkey is leading the objections.
> 
> ...On Monday, however, it didn't look likely that a NATO role would develop as quickly as the US government might like.
> 
> So far, the NATO alliance has been unable to reach an agreement on participation in the military implementation of the no-fly zone. Turkey is resisting the measure and is calling for a new review of other possible measures the alliance could take in Libya. Ankara has also called for an immediate Western cease-fire, with Turkish officials calling on NATO to give greater consideration in its discussions to the possibility of civilian deaths, a NATO diplomat told the news agency AFP under the condition of anonymity. Ankara has rejected any NATO intervention against Libya, including the implementation of a no-fly zone.
> 
> "Military intervention by NATO in Libya or any other country would be totally counterproductive," Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, according to the Anatolia news agency on Monday. "In addition to being counterproductive, such an operation could have dangerous consequences."
> 
> Turkey appears to be concerned about its standing in the Muslim world...
> 
> Over the weekend, the 28 NATO member states unsuccessfully debated a possible role for the military alliance in the implementation of the no-fly zone approved by the United Nations on Thursday. On Monday, European Union ambassadors were meeting in Brussels ahead of a further meeting of their NATO counterparts the same day in an attempt to hammer out an agreement for common action. NATO member states are hoping to reach an agreement on monitoring the UN's no-fly zone, but so far they have only found unanimity on the need for a weapons embargo on Libya.
> 
> NATO decisions must be taken unanimously, but this week the alliance is showing greater division than it has in some time. *Diplomats aren't placing the blame squarely on Turkey, either* [emphasis added]. France is also reportedly blocking an agreement because it does not want to turn command for the operations over to the alliance. Several NATO partners commented critically on the NATO Council meeting on Sunday, saying that France, Britain and the United States were pushing ahead and not doing enough to inform their partners. Currently, no agreement is expected before Tuesday...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Redeye

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I know the B52 is large enough to launch cruise missiles, but that's the only aerial platform I can think of.



Would the JSOW and/or JSSAM count as "cruise missiles"?  They're carried by F-15Es.

More likely than not, it's just journalistic "license".


----------



## MarkOttawa

Problems with this sort of international action:

A Very Liberal Intervention, By ROSS DOUTHAT
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/opinion/21douthat.html



> In its month-long crab walk toward a military confrontation with Libya’s Muammar el-Qaddafi, the Obama administration has delivered a clinic in the liberal way of war.
> 
> Just a week ago, as the tide began to turn against the anti-Qaddafi rebellion, President Obama seemed determined to keep the United States out of Libya’s civil strife. But it turns out the president was willing to commit America to intervention all along. He just wanted to make sure we were doing it in the most multilateral, least cowboyish fashion imaginable...
> 
> But there are major problems with this approach to war as well. Because liberal wars depend on constant consensus-building within the (so-called) international community, they tend to be fought by committee, at a glacial pace, and with a caution that shades into tactical incompetence. And because their connection to the national interest is often tangential at best, they’re often fought with one hand behind our back and an eye on the exits, rather than with the full commitment that victory can require.
> 
> These problems dogged American foreign policy throughout the 1990s, the previous high tide of liberal interventionism. In Somalia, the public soured on our humanitarian mission as soon as it became clear that we would be taking casualties as well as dispensing relief supplies. In the former Yugoslavia, NATO imposed a no-flight zone in 1993, but it took two years of hapless peacekeeping and diplomatic wrangling, during which the war proceeded unabated, before American air strikes finally paved the way for a negotiated peace.
> 
> Our 1999 intervention in Kosovo offers an even starker cautionary tale. The NATO bombing campaign helped topple Slobodan Milosevic and midwifed an independent Kosovo. But by *raising the stakes for both Milosevic and his Kosovo Liberation Army foes, the West’s intervention probably inspired more bloodletting and ethnic cleansing in the short term, exacerbating the very humanitarian crisis it was intended to forestall* [emphasis added--indeed the intervention did--the vast majority of the Kosovar refugees fled/were forced out after the NATO bombing started; Blair and Bush were personally out to get Milosevic just as many are out to get Kadhafi now].
> 
> The same kind of difficulties are already bedeviling our Libyan war. Our coalition’s aims are uncertain...
> 
> The ultimate hope of liberal warfare is to fight as virtuously as possible, and with the minimum of risk. But war and moralism are uneasy bedfellows, and “low risk” conflicts often turn out to be anything but. By committing America to the perils of yet another military intervention, Barack Obama has staked an awful lot on the hope that our Libyan adventure will prove an exception to this rule.



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

Commons' take-note debate on Libya now on CPAC; neither CBC News Network nor CTV News Channel covering live.  Important subject--or important chamber, eh?

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## FoverF

Container said:
			
		

> Are the jets really firing "cruise missles"? I was under the impression that generally speaking a cruise missle was a naval platform......that or a bomber function.
> 
> Any experts round here'?



RAF Tornados are capable of firing Storm Shadow cruise missiles, and they have been used in Libya, according to the MoD

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/MilitaryOperations/UpdatedBritishArmedForcesLaunchStrikeAgainstLibyanAirDefenceSystems.htm

French Mirage 2000s are also capable of firing them.

It is planned to fit Italian Tornados, as well as Italian and RAF Eurofighters with this weapon, but I do not know if it is yet operational on any of these aircraft.


----------



## 57Chevy

Monday morning mission

Photo;
Canadian jet fighters have flown their first mission in the skies over Libya as part of a coalition effort to rein in Moammar Gadhafi’s crackdown on pro-democracy rebels.
ALESSANDRO BIANCHI/REUTERS

article:
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/957514--canadian-fighter-jets-fly-first-mission-in-libyan-no-fly-zone


----------



## The Bread Guy

This from the Canadian Press:


> "The Harper government rallied opposition parties to "war" Monday, casting Canada's military intervention in the Libyan crisis as a moral imperative.  A House of Commons debate took place within hours of the air force carrying out its first combat patrol to enforce the UN-mandated no-fly zone over the embattled north African country.  But the continuing war in Afghanistan and its political divisions cast a long shadow over MPs as they weighed the complexity and uncertainty of the international community's goals in Libya.  Defence Minister Peter MacKay said the atrocities of dictator Moammar Gadhafi could not go unanswered.  "This government along with the international community cannot stand idly by," said MacKay who opened debate on a motion to approve the deployment of military forces …. MacKay couldn't say how long the no-fly mission would last, but said no one wants to have forces in harm's way any longer than necessary.  The motion, which sources said was the subject of feverish back room drafting among the parties, passed unanimously late Monday night ...."


----------



## old medic

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/21/libya.civil.war/index.html?hpt=T1



> Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's momentum has stopped and rebels have been able to hold onto areas that government forces had been poised to capture just a few days ago, a U.S. official said Monday.
> 
> The regime's efforts appeared to have "stalled" as Gadhafi has declared a cease-fire, the official said.
> 
> The coalition is watching carefully to see if Gadhafi's assertion "is a pledge or just words," the official said.
> 
> An opposition spokesman said he already knew the answer, at least as it pertains to Misrata, a key city about two hours east of Tripoli. "There is no cease-fire in Misrata," said Mohamed, who would not divulge his last name out of concern for his safety. "The destruction is unimaginable."
> 
> He said the city, the last in the west under rebel control, has had no electricity, telephone service or drinking water for at least two weeks and was bombarded heavily over the past four days by forces loyal to Gadhafi.
> 
> "He keeps talking about a cease-fire, but he hasn't observed that for one minute here," Mohamed said.
> 
> Based on what he saw at a hospital, the opposition spokesman said Monday's death toll among civilians at the hands of pro-Gadhafi forces was 15. Another 51 civilians died in weekend attacks by pro-Gadhafi forces, Mohamed said.
> 
> Late Monday, state television reported that Misrata was firmly in the hands of government forces, and urged residents to celebrate......


----------



## The Bread Guy

Here's the Commons motion passed yesterday:


> Pursuant to the motion adopted earlier today after question period, there have been discussions among the parties and I believe you would find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:
> 
> * That, in standing in solidarity with those seeking freedom in Libya, the House welcomes United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973; that the House deplores the ongoing use of violence by the Libyan regime against the Libyan people; acknowledges the demonstrable need, regional support and clear legal basis for urgent action to protect the people of Libya; consequently, the government shall work with our allies, partners and the United Nations to promote and support all aspects of UNSC Resolution 1973, which includes the taking of all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in Libya and to enforce the no-fly zone, including the use of the Canadian Forces and military assets in accordance with UNSC Resolution 1973; that the House requests that the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development and the Standing Committee on National Defence remain seized of Canada's activities under UNSC Resolution 1973; that should the government require an extension to the involvement of the Canadian Forces for more than three months from the passage of this motion, the government shall return to the House at its earliest opportunity to debate and seek the consent of the House for such an extension; and that the House offers its wholehearted support to the men and women of the Canadian Forces.*



Here's links to the debate from Hansard and in PDF format (49 pages).


----------



## FoverF

F-15E crashes in Libya

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8397587/Libya-US-fighter-jet-crash-lands-in-field-near-Benghazi.html


----------



## tomahawk6

Both aircrew are safe and in US control.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Good to hear US aircrew OK....

Meanwhile, a Tweet from the HMS Cumberland** that made me giggle:


> Good job BBC don't aim cruise missiles — http://t.co/A3LcuhU — Naval base is in eastern corner of Tripoli harbour, 3.5km from Green Sq



** - not from the ship itself, but from UK's MoD maintaining a Twitter feed associated with the ship.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Swedish Gripens too?

Libya: Sweden Prepares for Possible Gripen Use
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a60ba62d5-ec9b-40d3-8af1-b9a732e0bfd3



> Although the Swedish armed forced have so far not received a national mandate to participate in the enforcement of U.N. Resolution 1973 to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya, the country's air force is drawing up contingency plans for potential use of the JAS-39 Gripen fighter.
> 
> It would be Sweden's first combat deployment of the strike fighter.
> Swedish military planners say six to eight Gripens and their crews could be contributed if the green light for such an operation is given.
> 
> The Gripens are currently on alert as part of the Nordic Battlegroup, but Swedish military officials say a deployment of the fighter would likely take place under the national umbrella, rather than the NBG.



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## a_majoor

Belated American response by the administration is now opening up Constitutional issues on the home front:

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=A74A9456-12D2-4422-9EEB-30EE2F586527



> *Did Obama lose Congress on Libya?*
> By: Jonathan Allen and Marin Cogan
> March 21, 2011 05:20 PM EDT
> 
> President Barack Obama is facing growing anger from lawmakers who believe he overstepped his authority by launching missile strikes into Libya without first seeking the consent of Congress.
> 
> The criticism is from all directions: from moderates, like Sens. Jim Webb (D-Va.) and Dick Lugar (R-Ind.); from those on the far left and right, like Reps. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and Ron Paul (R-Texas), who believe the president acted outside the Constitution; and from the establishment on both sides, including House Democratic Caucus Chairman John Larson of Connecticut and Republican Rep. Candice Miller of Michigan, a self-described “hawk.”
> 
> What it adds up to is this: The president, already taking heat for a perceived lack of engagement on pressing domestic matters, will arrive home from South America needing to justify to Congress and the public his decision to use force in Libya without seeking approval.
> 
> It remains to be seen whether Congress has reached a tipping point in its cession of war-making power to the executive branch, but it’s clear that U.S. intervention in Libya has hit a nerve with a war weary legislative branch.
> 
> “What is the vital U.S. national interest? … How much does he think it will cost us? What is the scope of the mission? How do you define success?” Miller said, ticking off a list of unanswered questions. “The president should come home, call us into session … and explain what he’s doing.”
> 
> Webb, a Marine and former Navy secretary, warned Monday on MSNBC that Congress has “been sort of on autopilot for almost 10 years now, in terms of presidential authority, in conducting these types of military operations absent the meaningful participation of the Congress.”
> 
> Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) tweeted Sunday that the president is treating Congress as a “potted plant.”
> 
> Kucinich, whose words still hold sway among some on the left, raised the question of why it’s not called an impeachable offense.
> 
> “We’re neutered as a Congress. It’s like we don’t exist,” said Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), a longtime member of the Armed Services Committee who turned against the Iraq War. “I wish the president had not gone into Libya without first coming to Congress. We have for too long, as a Congress, been too passive when it comes to sending our young men and women to war.”
> 
> Some Republicans are considering bringing a vote on Libya to the House floor, though it’s not clear exactly what they would vote on.
> 
> “This is not a partisan issue with me; I have serious concerns about how prior Republican presidents have used or potentially misused that authority, and I think this should trigger a debate within Congress and [among] the American people about proper interpretation and application of [the] Constitution. I’m surprised more conservatives aren’t speaking out about this issue,” freshman Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.) told POLITICO. “American lives were not at risk in Libya at the time, and Libya was not a material threat to the United States or its territory, and it’s difficult.”
> 
> During a Monday press briefing, the president’s national security adviser, Tom Donilon, responded to congressional frustration over the level of consultation this way:
> 
> “First of all, consultation with Congress is important, as I said. Secondly, the administration welcomes the support of Congress in whatever form that they want to express that support. Third, as I indicated during the course of the briefing, this is a limited — in terms of scope, duration and task — operation, which does fall in the president’s authorities. Fourth, the circumstances arose with the passage of the United Nations Security Council on Thursday, the night before a congressional recess. So he did, even with that, call Congress — those who remained in town on Friday and those who are out of town — on the phone to consult with them.”
> 
> On Monday, Obama sent an official letter to Capitol Hill informing Congress of the military actions and invoking his authority under the War Powers law.
> 
> Though Obama convened congressional party and committee leaders for a White House Situation Room briefing Friday, many lawmakers say that doesn’t amount to the kind of consultation with Congress intended by the War Powers Resolution. Others say the law, which prescribes how the president must inform Congress of foreign military action, is unconstitutional.
> 
> Even among those who believe the president had the authority to launch the strikes, there is some sentiment that he should have done more to seek congressional approval.
> 
> Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who is considering a bid for the Senate seat held by Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), told POLITICO it’s “very troubling” that Obama sought approval from the United Nations but not Congress.
> 
> Republican leaders have been nearly silent on the matter.
> 
> Speaker John Boehner is the only House GOP leader to issue a public statement on the U.S.-backed military campaign, saying that the president has to “better explain” America’s role in targeting Muammar Qadhafi’s forces and “do a better job of communicating to the American people and to Congress about our mission in Libya and how it will be achieved.”
> 
> The remarks of rank-and-file Republicans reflect the desire to hear more from the president.
> 
> House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia, Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy of California and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky have not commented on U.S. efforts to back Libyan rebels and impose a no-fly zone over the troubled North African country.
> 
> Republican Reps. Buck McKeon of California, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida and Mike Rogers of Michigan, who chair the Armed Services, Foreign Affairs and Intelligence committees, respectively, have taken similar lines to Boehner in their public statements on Libya.
> 
> Cornyn, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, is one of the few senior Republicans in the chamber who spoke out. He’s calling for a congressional vote authorizing Obama to engage in the Libyan campaign.
> 
> “On Libya, is Congress going to assert it’s constitutional role or be a potted plant?” Cornyn tweeted Sunday.
> 
> The influential class of 87 House Republican freshmen — which has yet to face a real foreign policy test — has widely divergent opinions.
> 
> Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan questioned the legality of the strikes from a constitutional perspective, while Rep. Chris Gibson of New York questioned the nation’s ability to add to its foreign commitments. Reps. Renee Ellmers of North Carolina and Vicky Hartzler of Missouri, however, support the action.
> 
> “It’s a little belated. We have a moral obligation for people wanting freedom who are being slaughtered by a dictator,” said Hartzler, who sits on the Armed Services Committee. “I’m glad we have foreign allies helping us in this, but the president needs to be more defined in his mission, and I think that’s something he should work with us on. … I’m glad he moved in now. I think it’s a good thing he got involved.”
> 
> Ellmers, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, agreed that the strikes are appropriate, but called on Obama to explain his plan to Congress.
> 
> “The violence against the people of Libya by Muammar Qadhafi is unacceptable, and it must end. The United States stands with those who seek freedom in that country and around the world. But we must have a coherent strategy anytime we utilize U.S. military force abroad,” Ellmers said. “Now that President Obama has ordered airstrikes and engaged the U.S. military in Libya, he needs to provide more information to Congress and to the American people.”
> 
> During a Saturday conference call among House Democrats, a group of veteran liberals, including Reps. Jerrold Nadler of New York, Donna Edwards of Maryland, Mike Capuano of Massachusetts, Maxine Waters of California, Rob Andrews of New Jersey, Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, Barbara Lee of California, D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton and Kucinich, expressed concerns about the constitutionality of the strikes.
> 
> “The president is acting outside of the authority of the Constitution. There is no question about that whatsoever,” Kucinich said Monday on MSBNC. He also argued that the president is making a costly mistake. “We have money for endless wars, and we can’t take care of things here at home.”
> 
> Larson, chairman of the Democratic Caucus, had said before the missile strikes that the president should consult with Congress prior to taking any military action.
> 
> Some Republicans note that former President George W. Bush sought and won congressional approval of use-of-force resolutions before striking in Afghanistan and Iraq.
> 
> Gibson, who commanded a brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division, said America doesn’t have the resources to open another front.
> 
> “Our country is currently facing a myriad of challenges, including working to complete our objectives in Iraq and Afghanistan, protecting our cherished way of life from extremist terrorist networks and struggling here at home to address a skyrocketing deficit that poses a tremendous threat to our national security,” Gibson said. “Now is not the time to take on new missions. The Libyans must decide their own fate, and we should stop our military operations immediately.”
> 
> — John Bresnahan and Jake Sherman contributed to this report.


----------



## a_majoor

Something to think about next time you reach for the PTT switch....

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/03/secret-libya-psyops/



> *Listen: Secret Libya Psyops, Caught by Online Sleuths*
> 
> * By Noah Shachtman Email Author
> 
> The U.S. military has dispatched one of its secret propaganda planes to the skies around Libya. And that “Commando Solo” aircraft is telling Libyan ships to remain in port – or risk NATO retaliation.
> 
> We know this, not because some Pentagon official said so, but because one Dutch radio geek is monitoring the airwaves for information about Operation Odyssey Dawn — and tweeting the surprisingly-detailed results. On Sunday alone, “Huub” has identified the tail numbers, call signs, and movements of dozens of NATO aircraft: Italian fighter jets, American tankers, British aerial spies, U.S. bombers, and the Commando Solo psyops plane (pictured).
> 
> “If you attempt to leave port, you will be attacked and destroyed immediately,” the aircraft broadcasted late Sunday night.
> 
> It’s the kind of information that the American military typically tries to obscure, at least until a mission is over. But Huub is just a single node in a sprawling online network that trawls the airwaves for clues to military operations.
> 
> Huub, also known online as “BlackBox” and @FMCNL, has been monitoring longer than most — more than a quarter-century. A former member of the Dutch military, he says that he’s captured the sounds of everything from Air Force One to CIA rendition flights to the travels of Yugoslavian war criminal Slobodan Mlosevic.
> 
> “I just combine the global and free information on the Internet with my local received information from the ether,” Huub e-mails Danger Room. “[My] main goal to listen to this communication is to listen to ‘the truth,’ without any military or political propaganda.”
> 
> Military aircraft have to provide basic information about their position over unencrypted, unclassified UHF and VHF radio networks; otherwise, they’d risk slamming into civilian jets in mid-air. That allows savvy listeners like Huub to use radio frequency scanners, amplifiers, and antennas to capture the communications. Some spend thousands of dollars homebrewing their own DIY listening stations. Many others – Huub included – rely on handheld gear, much of which can be ordered through Radio Shack. Huub uses the ICOM R20 receiver and the Uniden UBC-785XLT scanner, both of which retail for a little more than $500.
> 
> But the type of gear is almost secondary, Huub writes. “I do not simply listen to ATC [air traffic control] or NATO frequencies,” he says. Instead, he monitors everything from aircraft transponder data to IRC chatrooms to pinpoint his planes. “I use a combination of live listening with local equipment, audio streaming, video streaming, datamining, intelligence, analyzing and the general knowledge of ATC procedures, communication, encryption, call signs, frequencies and a lot of experience on this!”
> 
> Huub, who ordinarily spends his days as a digital forensics manager in the town of Hilversum, has lately spent up to 16 hours a day, scanning for clues about the attack on Libya. Some of his Twitter followers aren’t so sure Huub should be devoting that much time to plucking military data from the sky.
> 
> “If you are not delaying your tweets by a WIDE margin, you are putting the pilots in harms way!!!!” tweets @Joe_Taxi. “When the sounds of the #operationoddesydawn aircraft are heard in #Libya it should be a complete surprise.”
> 
> Huub is hardly the only one eavesdropping on this operation, however. At least two others recorded the Commando Solo in action on Sunday, for instance.
> 
> And that shows just how easily average folks can now gather intelligence in ways once reserved for the best-funded spy agencies. Online sleuths now use Google Earth to find everything from North Korea’s launch facilities to Pakistan’s drone bases. Plane-spotters scoured tail numbers to uncover the CIA’s torture flights. So it’s no wonder that the sounds of this newest air war are being broadcast online — even before the planes return to their airstrips.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Al Jazeera English is "hosting" an open source info "Target, force and casualty data" document, categorized by country, over at Google Docs here.  It's "read only" for the moment because too many people are, apparently, trying to update it.

edited to add this:  U.S. still working on handing the command baton over to someone else:


> The United States will still be able to pass command of Libyan military operations to allies within the next few days, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Tuesday, brushing aside concerns of a potential delay.
> 
> Divisions in Europe have fueled speculation that Washington will be forced to retain leadership of air patrols to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya, even once an initial U.S.-led bombardment against air defenses is complete.
> 
> "I don't want to get out in front of the diplomacy that's been going on but I still think that a transfer within a few days is likely," Gates told reporters during a visit to Russia.
> 
> He declined to say who might lead the operations but left open the possibility that "NATO machinery" might be drawn upon once the United States steps back to a support role.
> 
> "This isn't a NATO mission. This is a mission in which the NATO machinery may be used for command and control," he said ....


----------



## old medic

CNN Blog


> In a rare public spat, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev criticized his political mentor, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, for Putin's comments over the use of force against Libya.
> 
> Putin on Monday said the U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing a no-fly zone over Libya was "obviously incomplete and flawed." He added that it "resembles a medieval appeal for a crusade in which somebody calls upon somebody to go to a certain place and liberate it."
> 
> A few hours later Medvedev weighed in, scolding Putin's comments, without using the prime minister's name. "It is absolutely inexcusable to use expressions that, in effect, lead to a clash of civilizations - such as 'crusades,' and so on. That is unacceptable," Medvedev said.




http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/21/libya.zawiya.mosque/index.html


> Satellite images of a Libyan city, provided to CNN by an intelligence source, appear to show evidence that pro-Gadhafi forces razed a mosque that recently served as a rebel command center.
> 
> The two images of an area of Zawiya, west of Tripoli, were taken February 20 and March 20, according to the source, who provided them on condition of anonymity.
> 
> In the first picture, a mosque can clearly be seen just south of Zawiya's Martyrs' Square, but in the later picture, the mosque is gone.
> 
> The images, the source said, were released as part of the international effort to build pressure on Gadhafi and to illustrate what coalition members say are crimes against his own people...............


----------



## CountDC

hmmmm something doesn't look right about the mosque pictures - maybe my eyes.  Also don't understand how the destruction of a Rebel Command Center falls into "crimes against his people".  Seems to me the rebels were the ones that committed the crime when they took the Mosque and turned it into a Command Center.    

I know I know - he is the bad guy so everything he does is wrong while the rebels are the good guys so can not do any wrong.  Does anyone really believe the rebels are not killing civilians too?  Anyone care to walk into a rebel strong hold and state they support Gadhafi?  I think this one still has lots of interesting play and more than a few people will not be happy with the end game regardless of which side wins. Me - I am betting it will be a case of trading the devil they know for the devil they don't know.


----------



## WingsofFury

A 2 ship package of CF-18's with Task Force Libeccio were deployed to strike an airfield as part of enforcing the No Fly Zone over Libya. No bombs were dropped as the risk of collateral damage was high. Canadian Forces CC-150T Polaris tanker aircraft are being utilised by the CF-18's and other allied forces as well.

Good to hear that the upgrades both the CF-18's and CC-150's frames underwent are making a difference.


----------



## WingsofFury

CBC had decided to tell the Canadian public about our CF-18's.  The article can be found here: Canada's CF-18 Hornet's

At first glance, these are the factual errors which I've found:

#1 - CF-18's were based on the design of the A/B models and only after the upgrades are they up to C/D model levels.

#2 - While they share some common weaponry, the Super Hornet can carry a wider ...selection of armament. It can also carry a heavier payload.

#3 - Super Hornets aren't lighter than our legacy Hornets at all.

#4 - No CF-18 Hornets are stationed at CFB Trenton. They use the base as a Deployed Operating Base and conduct Quick Reaction Alert training from there.

I'm going to leave the claim about JSF costs ballooning alone, as that is another topic for another sub forum.


----------



## Journeyman

CountDC said:
			
		

> hmmmm something doesn't look right about the mosque pictures...


You mean the complete absence of debris, and when you zoom in on the photo (in the source link) it looks to be pixilated to a different degree than the surrounding square?

Nah....I wouldn't worry about it; I'm sure it's legit


----------



## The Bread Guy

Latest on the Turks (from the U.S. President)....


> The President spoke yesterday evening with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey to continue the two leaders’ consultations on the situation in Libya.  The President expressed appreciation for Turkey’s ongoing humanitarian efforts in Libya, including its assistance in facilitating the release and safe passage to Tunisia of four New York Times journalists who had been detained in Libyan custody.  The President and the Prime Minister reaffirmed their support for the full implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1970 and 1973, in order to protect the Libyan people. The leaders agreed that this will require a broad-based international effort, including Arab states, to implement and enforce the UN resolutions, based on national contributions and enabled by NATO’s unique multinational command and control capabilities to ensure maximum effectiveness.  They underscored their shared commitment to the goal of helping provide the Libyan people an opportunity to transform their country, by installing a democratic system that respects the people’s will.


.... and the French/Brits on who could run the show how:


> France has proposed that a new political steering committee outside Nato be responsible for overseeing military operations over Libya.
> 
> The proposal comes just a day after Prime Minister David Cameron told the House of Commons that Nato would be in charge of enforcing UN Security Council resolution 1973.
> 
> But on Tuesday Nato secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen said that it would only "help enforce" the no-fly zone, not lead it.
> 
> French Foreign Minister Alain Jupe said the new body would bring together foreign ministers of participating states - as well as the Arab League.
> 
> It is expected to meet in the coming days, either in Brussels, London or Paris.
> 
> Mr Jupe said "not all members of the military coalition are members of Nato and this is therefore not a Nato operation."
> 
> The French announcement came after Mr Cameron's spokesman hinted at a compromise over control, saying: "We the Government want to see the machinery of Nato used."
> 
> Sky News defence correspondent Niall Paterson said: "Nato will coordinate what goes on, tactically, on the ground while there will be a political convening body above that." ....


What could go wrong?


----------



## MarkOttawa

More caution:

Derek Burney - Libya: Why are We Involved?
http://www.cdfai.org/the3dsblog/?p=151



> We have jumped into Libya with our eyes wide open but does anyone know where it will lead or why Canada is so directly engaged? The emotions and humanitarian instincts to do “something” are understandable but so, too, are arguments advocating prudence.
> 
> After weeks of deliberation, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution sanctioning a “No-Fly” zone and all necessary means to “protect civilians” – a fine euphemism that, at least initially, gained the endorsement of the Arab League. But for how long?
> 
> While everyone knows the US is in the lead implementing the “No-Fly” zone, the Americans are labouring mightily to drive from the back seat. No wonder. The Administration seemed divided over the wisdom of military engagement in a third Moslem country. The US military is already severely stretched in Iraq and Afghanistan and the US’ fiscal situation leaves little room for yet another costly and vaguely defined military adventure. Especially, as Richard Haass, President of the Council on Foreign Relations, contended persuasively, in a country like Libya where, unlike Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the US has no overriding strategic reason to get involved. Besides, argues Haass, a “No-Fly” zone would “not be decisive given that aircraft and helicopters are not central to the regime’s military advantages. The only way to level the playing field would be to put trainers, advisers and special forces on the ground.”
> 
> Even when a “No-Fly” zone was deployed in Iraq after Saddam Hussein began to attack his own people, much more was needed to evict him from power...
> 
> ...why should the onus for military action fall exclusively on the West, especially when the consequences of action – the end game – belie easy analysis. And why Canada? We are already doing much of the heavy-lifting in Afghanistan whereas several NATO allies have taken a pass. Is it because we were snubbed for a Security Council seat and want to re-establish our credentials for “peace-keeping”? Is it because we regard ourselves as an architect of the Responsibility to Protect concept adopted by the UN? If so, where will it lead – to Iran? Zimbabwe? North Korea? There is a long waiting list.
> 
> If military force was essential, it would have been more logical and more appropriate for the Arab League and/or the Organization of African Unity to have taken the lead. After all, despite its current turmoil, Egypt has the military muscle and is right next door. Saudi Arabia has the money and a very modern air force. Nigeria is also well-equipped [somehow I don't think together or separately they could did this sort of job the way it should be done].
> 
> As history eloquently illustrates, getting in is just the easy part. We are now at war and no-one really knows for how long.
> 
> _Derek H. Burney, Senior Strategic Advisor to Ogilvy Renault LLP and Senior Research Fellow of the Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute (CDFAI), was the Ambassador of Canada to the United States from 1989 to 1993._



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## The Bread Guy

Latest from the fight itself, from the Canadian Press:


> Canadian military fighters embarked on a second day of missions over Libya today but officials say they abandoned a planned attack on a Libyan airfield.
> 
> The mission marked their first offensive operations since arriving in-theatre on the weekend.
> 
> Maj.-Gen. Tom Lawson, a defence spokesman, says once over their target the Canadian pilots and command elements determined the risk of collateral damage was too high ....



.... Reuters:


> Canadian military aircraft joined in a mission against ground targets in Libya on Tuesday, but did not drop their bombs amid concern there might be civilian casualties, military officials said.
> 
> Officials said two CF18 aircraft were assigned to attack a unspecified Libya airfield along with other aircraft from the U.S.-led coalition.
> 
> "Upon arrival on the scene in the target area, the air crew became aware of a risk (of collateral damage) they deemed as too high," Major General Tom Lawson, Canada's Assistant Chief of the Air Staff told reporters.
> 
> The Canadian jets returned safely to base.
> 
> Canada has sent six CF18 fighter jets to the operation and a frigate. It also has refueling aircraft in the region.
> 
> It was the second mission for Canadian planes in the campaign to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya to halt attacks on rebels and civilians and open the way for humanitarian help. It was the first time they had been assigned to attack a target ....



.... and Postmedia News:


> Canadian fighter jets on a combat mission in Libya turned back without releasing their bombs Tuesday after it was determined that the risk of "collateral damage" was too great, Defence Minister Peter MacKay said.
> 
> "A determination was made to not drop ordinances based on their assessment of the situation on the ground," he told reporters in Ottawa. "We are there clearly to minimize any civilian casualties."
> 
> MacKay said the decision to call off the bombing run was consistent with the Canadian Forces' pilots orders and their training.
> 
> Two other Canadian CF-18s participated in air patrols off the coast of Libya on Tuesday in a mission similar to the first operation conducted by the Canadian Forces on Monday, MacKay said ....


----------



## Edward Campbell

From Derek Burney's comments, just above:



> ...And why Canada? We are already doing much of the heavy-lifting in Afghanistan whereas several NATO allies have taken a pass. Is it because we were snubbed for a Security Council seat and want to re-establish our credentials for “peace-keeping”? Is it because we regard ourselves as an architect of the Responsibility to Protect concept adopted by the UN? If so, where will it lead – to Iran? Zimbabwe? North Korea? There is a long waiting list.



Agreed.




> If military force was essential, it would have been more logical and more appropriate for the Arab League and/or the Organization of African Unity to have taken the lead. After all, despite its current turmoil, Egypt has the military muscle and is right next door. Saudi Arabia has the money and a very modern air force. Nigeria is also well-equipped.



And agreed again.


----------



## OldSolduer

To me, the Arab League is like the spouse who says "whatever" to anything ever asked. If it turns out good, then they take the credit.
If it goes south, then they can say "I told you so, its not OUR fault".

Is that too simplistic?


----------



## old medic

Criticism of Gadhafi grows bolder as rebels struggle to organize
Michael Georgy and Maria Golovnina Tripoli
Reuters 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/criticism-of-gadhafi-grows-bolder-as-rebels-struggle-to-organize/article1951202/



> After days of Western air strikes, some people in the Libyan capital felt bold enough on Tuesday to drop their customary praise of leader Muammar Gadhafi for a few moments and say instead they want him gone.
> 
> Residents who spoke to Reuters reporters in Tripoli were still too wary to give their names, and switched back to extolling Col. Gadhafi when officials came within earshot. .................



continues at the link.


----------



## old medic

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110322/crew-eject-us-fighter-110322/
CTV.ca News Staff
22 March 2011 



> ‎The U.S. admiral commanding the coalition enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya confirmed Tuesday that forces loyal to leader Moammar Gadhafi have launched attacks on civilians in the North Africa nation's third largest city.
> 
> Adm. Samuel J. Locklear said that the coalition is "considering all options" to stop the attacks on the city of Misrata, one of the cities that U.S. President Barack Obama has demanded that Gadhafi's forces retreat from. He would not elaborate. ..................


----------



## MarkOttawa

From my comments at the Burney post mentioned above:
http://www.cdfai.org/the3dsblog/?p=151



> The Liberals, NDP and Bloc all support the Libyan combat mission, in major part because it is UNSC-mandated. They all opposed (starting at different times) the Afghan combat mission, also–and repeatedly–UNSC-mandated, and with much more complete SC member support: usually unanimous: not 10-5, with Russia, China, India, Germany and Brazil (most of the other big fellows) abstaining on Libya.
> 
> Go figure.
> 
> I hardly see how the return of the Taliban would be much better than the wrath of Qadhafi in terms of civilians needing protection–and we’re very likely to kill some Libyan ones with our Hornets, something the gov’t would not risk in Afstan:
> http://www.cdfai.org/the3dsblog/?p=148
> 
> Keep figuring.
> 
> Maybe it’s just that the combination of a long real war and over 100 dead CF members is more than most of the country can stomach. How long will we stay involved in Libya if the operation does drag on?



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Nemo86z451e

:yellow:  iper: 8)

All  that we can do is pray that this current situation in -L i B ya can come to an achievable solution without costing too many lives and distrupting the infrastructure of the country, so that the good honest people, whoever they be, can continue to strive towards a nation in which they feel safe from harm or from being treated in any way dehumanizing.  
The implementation of R 2P is something than can be used  for much good, however the Nations involved would be well advised to take measures to not wear themselves too thin.  

listed entities may or may not mobilize, but if we're on them like english springers a good ol flush may lead to some achievable results.

-this of course is merely something to ponder.

-jlmcgs


----------



## Good2Golf

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> From my comments at the Burney post mentioned above:
> http://www.cdfai.org/the3dsblog/?p=151
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa



Referring to, or quoting a published article in accordance with the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act is one thing.  Subsequently posting a link to your own submission to the article's comment list, no matter how witty or insightful you truly believe it to be, is skirting self-promotion, which is contrary to the Milnet.ca Conduct Guidelines (excerpt below):



> *Professional Authors, Journalists, Retailers, Defence Contractors and Public Personalities*
> 
> While authors, journalists, retailers, etc are encouraged to participate in the Forums, posts made for the purpose of self-promotion will be removed unless prior permission from the site owner has been granted. Interested parties should review the advertising options offered by Milnet.ca for more information.



While this is not the first instance of your posting in such a manner, the cumulative effect has been such that you have two options to address the issue: 1) adjust your posting style to comply with the site's conduct guidelines as a normal participant, or 2) commit to a suitable advertiser's agreement with Mr. Bobbitt as noted in the URL provided above.

*Milnet.ca Staff*


----------



## Kalatzi

ABC news  has reported that both Russia and Chine are calling for an immediate ceasefire. 

Qu'elle surpris. 

Angling for the inside on the oil and construction projects? 

Dont know what will happen, but all those  t-bills in China would make a dandy Financial Neutron bomb


----------



## Edward Campbell

Kalatzi said:
			
		

> ABC news  has reported that both Russia and Chine are calling for an immediate ceasefire.
> 
> Qu'elle surpris.
> 
> Angling for the inside on the oil and construction projects?
> 
> Dont know what will happen, but all those  t-bills in China would make a dandy Financial Neutron bomb




The UN resolution is, in my opinion poorly, sloppily drafted - maybe that's why some UNSC members object.


----------



## Edward Campbell

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> The UN resolution is, in my opinion poorly, sloppily drafted - maybe that's why some UNSC members object.



The full text of resolution 1973 (2011) reads as follows: [my emphasis added in place of the normal UN formatting to highlight the bits that matter]

"The Security Council,

Recalling its resolution 1970 (2011) of 26 February 2011,

Deploring the failure of the Libyan authorities to comply with resolution 1970 (2011),

Expressing grave concern at the deteriorating situation, the escalation of violence, and the heavy civilian casualties,

Reiterating the responsibility of the Libyan authorities to protect the Libyan population and reaffirming that parties to armed conflicts bear the primary responsibility to take all feasible steps to ensure the protection of civilians,

Condemning the gross and systematic violation of human rights, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, torture and summary executions,

Further condemning acts of violence and intimidation committed by the Libyan authorities against journalists, media professionals and associated personnel and urging these authorities to comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law as outlined in resolution 1738 (2006),

Considering that the widespread and systematic attacks currently taking place in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya against the civilian population may amount to crimes against humanity,

Recalling paragraph 26 of resolution 1970 (2011) in which the Council expressed its readiness to consider taking additional appropriate measures, as necessary, to facilitate and support the return of humanitarian agencies and make available humanitarian and related assistance in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,

Expressing its determination to ensure the protection of civilians and civilian populated areas and the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance and the safety of humanitarian personnel,

Recalling the condemnation by the League of Arab States, the African Union and the Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference of the serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law that have been and are being committed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,

Taking note of the final communiqué of the Organization of the Islamic Conference of 8 March 2011, and the communiqué of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union of 10 March 2011 which established an ad hoc High-Level Committee on Libya,

Taking note also of the decision of the Council of the League of Arab States of 12 March 2011 to call for the imposition of a no-fly zone on Libyan military aviation, and to establish safe areas in places exposed to shelling as a precautionary measure that allows the protection of the Libyan people and foreign nationals residing in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,

Taking note further of the Secretary-General’s call on 16 March 2011 for an immediate ceasefire,

Recalling its decision to refer the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya since 15 February 2011 to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, and stressing that those responsible for or complicit in attacks targeting the civilian population, including aerial and naval attacks, must be held to account,

Reiterating its concern at the plight of refugees and foreign workers forced to flee the violence in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, welcoming the response of neighbouring States, in particular Tunisia and Egypt, to address the needs of those refugees and foreign workers, and calling on the international community to support those efforts,

Deploring the continuing use of mercenaries by the Libyan authorities,

Considering that the establishment of a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya constitutes an important element for the protection of civilians as well as the safety of the delivery of humanitarian assistance and a decisive step for the cessation of hostilities in Libya,

Expressing concern also for the safety of foreign nationals and their rights in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,

Welcoming the appointment by the Secretary General of his Special Envoy to Libya, Mr. Abdul Ilah Mohamed Al-Khatib and supporting his efforts to find a sustainable and peaceful solution to the crisis in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,

Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya,

Determining that the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya continues to constitute a threat to international peace and security,

Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,

1.   Demands the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians;

2.   Stresses the need to intensify efforts to find a solution to the crisis which responds to the legitimate demands of the Libyan people and notes the decisions of the Secretary-General to send his Special Envoy to Libya and of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union to send its ad hoc High-Level Committee to Libya with the aim of facilitating dialogue to lead to the political reforms necessary to find a peaceful and sustainable solution;

3.   Demands that the Libyan authorities comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, human rights and refugee law and take all measures to protect civilians and meet their basic needs, and to ensure the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance;

Protection of civilians

4.   Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory, and requests the Member States concerned to inform the Secretary-General immediately of the measures they take pursuant to the authorization conferred by this paragraph which shall be immediately reported to the Security Council;

5.   Recognizes the important role of the League of Arab States in matters relating to the maintenance of international peace and security in the region, and bearing in mind Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations, requests the Member States of the League of Arab States to cooperate with other Member States in the implementation of paragraph 4;

No-fly zone

6.   Decides to establish a ban on all flights in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in order to help protect civilians;

7.   Decides further that the ban imposed by paragraph 6 shall not apply to flights whose sole purpose is humanitarian, such as delivering or facilitating the delivery of assistance, including medical supplies, food, humanitarian workers and related assistance, or evacuating foreign nationals from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, nor shall it apply to flights authorised by paragraphs 4 or 8, nor other flights which are deemed necessary by States acting under the authorization conferred in paragraph 8 to be for the benefit of the Libyan people, and that these flights shall be coordinated with any mechanism established under paragraph 8;

8.   Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to enforce compliance with the ban on flights imposed by paragraph 6 above, as necessary, and requests the States concerned in cooperation with the League of Arab States to coordinate closely with the Secretary General on the measures they are taking to implement this ban, including by establishing an appropriate mechanism for implementing the provisions of paragraphs 6 and 7 above,

9.   Calls upon all Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to provide assistance, including any necessary overflight approvals, for the purposes of implementing paragraphs 4, 6, 7 and 8 above;

10.  Requests the Member States concerned to coordinate closely with each other and the Secretary-General on the measures they are taking to implement paragraphs 4, 6, 7 and 8 above, including practical measures for the monitoring and approval of authorised humanitarian or evacuation flights;

11.  Decides that the Member States concerned shall inform the Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States immediately of measures taken in exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 8 above, including to supply a concept of operations;

12.  Requests the Secretary-General to inform the Council immediately of any actions taken by the Member States concerned in exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 8 above and to report to the Council within 7 days and every month thereafter on the implementation of this resolution, including information on any violations of the flight ban imposed by paragraph 6 above;

Enforcement of the arms embargo

13.  Decides that paragraph 11 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall be replaced by the following paragraph : “Calls upon all Member States, in particular States of the region, acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, in order to ensure strict implementation of the arms embargo established by paragraphs 9 and 10 of resolution 1970 (2011), to inspect in their territory, including seaports and airports, and on the high seas, vessels and aircraft bound to or from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the cargo contains items the supply, sale, transfer or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 9 or 10 of resolution 1970 (2011) as modified by this resolution, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel, calls upon all flag States of such vessels and aircraft to cooperate with such inspections and authorises Member States to use all measures commensurate to the specific circumstances to carry out such inspections”;

14.  Requests Member States which are taking action under paragraph 13 above on the high seas to coordinate closely with each other and the Secretary-General and further requests the States concerned to inform the Secretary-General and the Committee established pursuant to paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) (“the Committee”) immediately of measures taken in the exercise of the authority conferred by paragraph 13 above;

15.  Requires any Member State whether acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, when it undertakes an inspection pursuant to paragraph 13 above, to submit promptly an initial written report to the Committee containing, in particular, explanation of the grounds for the inspection, the results of such inspection, and whether or not cooperation was provided, and, if prohibited items for transfer are found, further requires such Member States to submit to the Committee, at a later stage, a subsequent written report containing relevant details on the inspection, seizure, and disposal, and relevant details of the transfer, including a description of the items, their origin and intended destination, if this information is not in the initial report;

16.  Deplores the continuing flows of mercenaries into the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and calls upon all Member States to comply strictly with their obligations under paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011) to prevent the provision of armed mercenary personnel to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;

Ban on flights

17.  Decides that all States shall deny permission to any aircraft registered in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya or owned or operated by Libyan nationals or companies to take off from, land in or overfly their territory unless the particular flight has been approved in advance by the Committee, or in the case of an emergency landing;

18.  Decides that all States shall deny permission to any aircraft to take off from, land in or overfly their territory, if they have information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the aircraft contains items the supply, sale, transfer, or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 9 and 10 of resolution 1970 (2011) as modified by this resolution, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel, except in the case of an emergency landing;

Asset freeze

19.  Decides that the asset freeze imposed by paragraph 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall apply to all funds, other financial assets and economic resources which are on their territories, which are owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by the Libyan authorities, as designated by the Committee, or by individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or by entities owned or controlled by them, as designated by the Committee, and decides further that all States shall ensure that any funds, financial assets or economic resources are prevented from being made available by their nationals or by any individuals or entities within their territories, to or for the benefit of the Libyan authorities, as designated by the Committee, or individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or entities owned or controlled by them, as designated by the Committee, and directs the Committee to designate such Libyan authorities, individuals or entities within 30 days of the date of the adoption of this resolution and as appropriate thereafter;

20.  Affirms its determination to ensure that assets frozen pursuant to paragraph 17 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall, at a later stage, as soon as possible be made available to and for the benefit of the people of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;

21.  Decides that all States shall require their nationals, persons subject to their jurisdiction and firms incorporated in their territory or subject to their jurisdiction to exercise vigilance when doing business with entities incorporated in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya or subject to its jurisdiction, and any individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, and entities owned or controlled by them, if the States have information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that such business could contribute to violence and use of force against civilians;

Designations

22.  Decides that the individuals listed in Annex I shall be subject to the travel restrictions imposed in paragraphs 15 and 16 of resolution 1970 (2011), and decides further that the individuals and entities listed in Annex II shall be subject to the asset freeze imposed in paragraphs 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011);

23.  Decides that the measures specified in paragraphs 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall apply also to individuals and entities determined by the Council or the Committee to have violated the provisions of resolution 1970 (2011), particularly paragraphs 9 and 10 thereof, or to have assisted others in doing so;

Panel of Experts

24.  Requests the Secretary-General to create for an initial period of one year, in consultation with the Committee, a group of up to eight experts (“Panel of Experts”), under the direction of the Committee to carry out the following tasks:

(a)   Assist the Committee in carrying out its mandate as specified in paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution;

(b)   Gather, examine and analyse information from States, relevant United Nations bodies, regional organisations and other interested parties regarding the implementation of the measures decided in resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution, in particular incidents of non-compliance;

(c)   Make recommendations on actions the Council, or the Committee or State, may consider to improve implementation of the relevant measures;

(d)   Provide to the Council an interim report on its work no later than 90 days after the Panel’s appointment, and a final report to the Council no later than 30 days prior to the termination of its mandate with its findings and recommendations;

25.  Urges all States, relevant United Nations bodies and other interested parties, to cooperate fully with the Committee and the Panel of Experts, in particular by supplying any information at their disposal on the implementation of the measures decided in resolution 1970 (2011) and this resolution, in particular incidents of non-compliance;

26.  Decides that the mandate of the Committee as set out in paragraph 24 of resolution 1970 (2011) shall also apply to the measures decided in this resolution;

27.  Decides that all States, including the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, shall take the necessary measures to ensure that no claim shall lie at the instance of the Libyan authorities, or of any person or body in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, or of any person claiming through or for the benefit of any such person or body, in connection with any contract or other transaction where its performance was affected by reason of the measures taken by the Security Council in resolution 1970 (2011), this resolution and related resolutions;

28.  Reaffirms its intention to keep the actions of the Libyan authorities under continuous review and underlines its readiness to review at any time the measures imposed by this resolution and resolution 1970 (2011), including by strengthening, suspending or lifting those measures, as appropriate, based on compliance by the Libyan authorities with this resolution and resolution 1970 (2011);

29.  Decides to remain actively seized of the matter."


----------



## old medic

Nato to take control in Libya after US, UK and France reach agreement
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/22/libya-nato-us-france-uk



> Britain, France and the US have agreed that Nato will take over the military command of the no-fly zone over Libya in a move that represents a setback for Nicolas Sarkozy, who had hoped to diminish the role of the alliance.
> 
> Barack Obama agreed in separate phone calls with Sarkozy and David Cameron that political oversight would be handed to a separate body made up of members of the coalition, including Arab countries such as Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, which are outside Nato.........................


----------



## 57Chevy

Shared in accordance with the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act

Historically the area of Libya was considered three provinces (or states), Tripolitania in the northwest, 
Barka (Cyrenaica) in the east, and Fezzan in the southwest. It also had two Capitals, Tripoli and
Benghazi both of which served alternately as the Capital of Libya. 
There is a possibility of Libya being splt up into two independant states as it was once before.
An interesting read from The American Kafir;
Libya’s Split Between Cyrenaica and Tripolitania
http://americankafir.wordpress.com/2011/02/24/libyas-split-between-cyrenaica-and-tripolitania/

also
An excert from another article:
Seeing Libya’s Future In Darfur’s Past 
By Peripheral Revision  22 March, 2011

http://www.countercurrents.org/pr220311.htm
The potential end-game of the conflict in Libya is to establish a new, "independent" (meaning from anyone other than the U.S.) state in the resource concentrated region of the north-east. This is where the "rebel" stronghold city of Benghazi is located. From the map of Libya’s population density, you can deduce the approximate borders of a possible independent country:


----------



## a_majoor

Is going into Libya a sensible act on the part of Canada and the United States? Is it really in accord with our national interest? This article suggests no:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/our-blood-and-treasure-for-britain-and-france/



> *Our Blood and Treasure, for Britain and France*
> 
> Posted By Abraham H. Miller On March 23, 2011 @ 12:00 am In Uncategorized | No Comments
> 
> There is not a no-fly zone over Zimbabwe, where an oppressive dictator capriciously murders its citizens while condemning them to a life of poverty. There is not a no-fly zone over Bahrain, where the Saudi National Guard is reinforcing a regime shooting its people in the streets. There is not a no-fly zone over Yemen, which is also shooting demonstrators. There is not a no-fly zone over Syria, where the Assad dynasty is once again killing the opposition, and where decades earlier — without a hiccup from the international community — it destroyed the entire city of Hama [1] to suppress an uprising.
> 
> None of the pious rationales for intervention in Libya seem to square remotely with the way in which the international community generally, and the United States specifically, deals with tyrants.
> 
> Just days prior to our intervention in Libya, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton [2] was before the cameras admonishing everyone that no-fly zones don’t work, using Iraq as a case in point.
> 
> So what changed?
> 
> If we are to believe Andrea Mitchell [3], the Arab League convinced Hillary Clinton to persuade the administration to bring down the murderous Libyan dictator. This explanation is so comical that it should be a skit for Saturday Night Live. The Arab League is made up of some of the most ruthless, oppressive, and illegitimate regimes on the planet. The league is best-known for issuing the infamous “Three Nos of Khartoum,” condemning Israel for its very existence, and lobbing fiercely just weeks ago for a UN human rights accolade [4] for the same Libyan dictator it asserts that it now wants to remove from power.
> 
> Persuaded by the Arab League, so the story goes, Hillary Clinton found an ally in UN Ambassador Susan Rice, and these “courageous women” joined forces to get the administration to support the UN no-fly zone.
> 
> This tale of the Arab League and Hillary Clinton seems to be one of those typical contrived leaks for which Washington is famous. Indeed, within twenty-four hours, the Arab League shifted sides, and is now condemning the Western powers for the fierce bombing.
> 
> Libya has a no-fly zone because the British and French want Libyan oil, and they no longer view the ever-bellicose and irrational Moammar Gaddafi as a responsible partner. Nations have interests. They do not have friends. They have allies as a matter of ephemeral convenience.
> 
> When CIA operative Kermit Roosevelt [5] reinstalled the Palavi dynasty in Iran after the CIA-sponsored coup that eliminated Mohammed Mossadegh, among Mohammed Palavi’s first acts was to replace the Anglo-French oil companies with American oil companies.
> 
> If Zimbabwe had oil, it too might get a no-fly zone.
> 
> Britain is so desperate for drilling rights in Libya that it engineered the release and repatriation of the Libyan bomber of Pan American Flight 103 [6], ignoring international outrage. France is one of the major importers of Libyan oil, and France accepted trivial compensation for a Libyan mid-air bombing of one its flights, UTA 772 [7]. The incident, like Pan Am 103, was settled by Gaddafi’s government paying monetary compensation to the victims’ families.
> 
> After tolerating the murder of its citizens in order to get access to Libya’s  easily refined oil, Britain and France saw in Libya’s uprising the handwriting on the wall. Gaddafi might end up on the scrap heap of history, and what Britain and France needed was a new Libyan partner.
> 
> With Britain and France ostensibly standing up for the “democratic” opposition and the media bringing the visual horror of Gaddafi’s words and deeds to the world, the Obama administration could not continue to sit on the sidelines. Yet the media has been beating the drums over the “democratic” opposition, but there has been no real analysis of what the opposition will bring to the political process, if they do win.
> 
> In the meantime, Hillary Clinton’s earlier warning that no-fly zones are ineffectual because they don’t stop troops and tanks has been superseded in this conflict by the French. Their air force has been doing more than just keeping Libyan planes out of the air. They shot up Libyan tanks and armor, carving out seemingly new rules of engagement without objection, until the Arab League began to complain.
> 
> If the Arab League wanted to stop Gaddafi, they didn’t have to wait until his forces were near victorious, nor did they really need the West to carry out the attacks. Egypt and Saudi Arabia alone could have defeated Gaddafi, but ultimately they had no desire to do so. What they had was the desire to rhetorically enter the fray and to posture appropriately for the international community when it appeared Gaddafi would win. After all, the continual fall of Arab tyrants and despots threatens the Arab League itself, an organization comprised of despots and tyrants.
> 
> Obama has dragged us into yet another endless war in the Islamic world, a war where the military mission is clear, as it was in the early days of Iraq, and where the strategy and endgame are totally undefined. Britain’s and France’s strategic interests in this conflict are unambiguous. America’s?  They are no clearer than they are in Zimbabwe and a host of other places where people are wantonly oppressed and killed by tyrants.
> 
> Obama’s ineptitude made him an easy patsy for the strategic interests of Britain and France. American blood and treasure will be needlessly spilled because we have elected a president who is too disengaged to lead and too naive to understand the consequences of his actions.
> 
> Article printed from Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com
> 
> URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/our-blood-and-treasure-for-britain-and-france/
> 
> URLs in this post:
> 
> [1] Hama: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hama_massacre
> 
> [2] Hillary Clinton: http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailybeast/20110314/ts_dailybeast/12908_libyanoflyzonesamericanbackers_1
> 
> [3] Andrea Mitchell: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/03/21/6312078-obama-agenda-the-women-vs-the-men
> 
> [4] UN human rights accolade: http://www.conservativechristianonward.com/apps/blog/show/6292694-vermin-at-un-release-report-to-praise-libya-s-history-on-human-rights
> 
> [5] Kermit Roosevelt: http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.suite101.com/content/kermit-roosevelt-and-the-iranian-coup-of-1953-a134760&sa=U&ei=7oSHTfziFJL4swP28byHAg&ved=0CBIQFjAA&sig2=3y0uKXn9c-z78LyjXgWeNQ&usg=AFQjCNE5D3osnwSjk1Ve62pjmZ1u1eg9rw
> 
> [6] Libyan bomber of Pan American Flight 103: http://articles.cnn.com/2009-08-20/world/lockerbie.bomber.reaction_1_megrahi-victoria-cummock-libyan-leader-moammar-gadhafi?_s=PM:WORLD
> 
> [7] UTA 772: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3163621.stm


----------



## The Bread Guy

A tongue-in-cheek assessment of the NATO control structure, from the New Atlanticist blog:


> A former official with long experience on NATO sends along a concise, if slightly tongue-in-cheek, guide to the intra-alliance debate over NATO's role in Libya:
> 
> The Italians want NATO to take over so they can avoid national responsibility  (ie, tell their Arab friends "it's not us, it's NATO, so we don't have a choice").
> 
> The French want to keep NATO out because they want to prove that THEY are the true friends of the Arabs, and they'll keep that bad NATO away.
> 
> The Germans want to keep NATO out because they don't believe in military action, and NATO having responsibility means Germany would be held to be responsible (for further reading, see "Afghanistan").
> 
> The Turks want to keep NATO out to prove that they are the regional power Arabs should look to to protect their interests inside NATO.
> 
> The US wants NATO to take over as a "handoff" -- even though it means a handoff to ourselves.   In the American political lexicon, NATO has come to mean "Europe" -- and the Obama team just wants to hand off so it's not an "Obama war."
> 
> The UK wants to stick close to the US on this, because if the US bails, the UK doesn't want to be holding the bag.
> 
> Apart from that, we've got a consensus!
> 
> That about covers it.


----------



## PanaEng

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Referring to, or quoting a published article in accordance with the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act is one thing.  Subsequently posting a link to your own submission to the article's comment list, no matter how witty or insightful you truly believe it to be, is skirting self-promotion, which is contrary to the Milnet.ca Conduct Guidelines (excerpt below):
> 
> While this is not the first instance of your posting in such a manner, the cumulative effect has been such that you have two options to address the issue: 1) adjust your posting style to comply with the site's conduct guidelines as a normal participant, or 2) commit to a suitable advertiser's agreement with Mr. Bobbitt as noted in the URL provided above.
> 
> *Milnet.ca Staff*



+100 (whatever that is)
(although I read his articles on occasion)


----------



## The Bread Guy

CF confirms first Canadian bombing sortie, via CTV.ca:


> Canadian CF-18s have bombed a Libyan ammunition depot.
> 
> The air force says four of the jet fighters, supported by two air-to-air refuelling aircraft, conducted two separate bombing runs last night and this morning.
> 
> The first attack took place overnight near Misurata, Libya's third-largest city, located east of Tripoli.
> 
> Maj.-Gen. Tom Lawson, the deputy chief of air staff, told an Ottawa briefing that four laser-guided bombs were dropped on the depot.
> 
> He had no information on where the second attack place or what kind of damage it may have inflicted ....


----------



## Journeyman

> Maj.-Gen. Tom Lawson, the deputy chief of air staff, told an Ottawa briefing....


The Airforce certainly has highly-paid Public Affairs Officers


----------



## The Bread Guy

Journeyman said:
			
		

> The Airforce certainly has highly-paid Public Affairs Officers


As does the Navy, according to the media advisory:





> .... Major-General Tom Lawson, Assistant Chief of the Air Staff and Commodore John Newton, Director General Naval Personnel and Acting Deputy Commander of Maritime Command will provide an update on the Canadian Forces’ contribution and will answer questions from the media ....


----------



## CountDC

Journeyman said:
			
		

> You mean the complete absence of debris, and when you zoom in on the photo (in the source link) it looks to be pixilated to a different degree than the surrounding square?
> 
> Nah....I wouldn't worry about it; I'm sure it's legit



Bingo!! So not just my eyes after all.


----------



## WingsofFury

Bombs on time on target. CF-18's take out an ammunitions dump and another target in day and night missions in Libya.

CF-18’s Begin Air Interdiction Sorties **

**Links to an article on my blog**


----------



## Journeyman

WingsofFury said:
			
		

> **Links to an article on my blog**


You're going going to be another Mark"look what I wrote, look what I wrote"Ottawa are you?   :

If so, see here


----------



## MarkOttawa

Last of the likely NATO participants is in--sort of:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a20f24984-5f3b-4933-bd0a-930572e96ff1



> ...
> Meanwhile, the Netherlands also has decided to contribute, with six F-16s and a KDC-10 tanker, as well as a mine-hunter to help enforce the arms embargo against Libya.
> 
> But the Netherlands is putting limits on its contribution. The F-16s will not strike ground targets or enforce the no-fly zone. They will be used only for intelligence and surveillance roles, or to interdict arms shipments, at least as long as NATO's role has not been expanded to the other tasks.



Same link also notes Rafales now flying missions off CDG.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## observor 69

Journeyman said:
			
		

> The Airforce certainly has highly-paid Public Affairs Officers




Seems it goes on in the British  Army also:   :nod:

"British military spokesman Major General John Lorimer said the missile strike was just a first step, as international forces seek to knock out air defences so they can enforce the no-fly zone with jets patrolling the skies.
"UK and partner forces remain engaged in ongoing operations as we seek to ensure that Colonel Kadhafi and his forces understand that the international community will not stand by and watch them kill civilians," he said."


http://www.focus-fen.net/?id=n245000


----------



## Bo

> Stop the US War Against Libya and Bahrain
> 
> 
> by The International Action Center
> 
> 
> Global Research, March 19, 2011
> The International Action Center
> 
> 
> The International Action Center calls on all anti-war and social justice activists to call Emergency Response STOP THE U.S. WAR AGAINST LIBYA AND BAHRAIN actions in their areas on Friday, March 18 or Saturday, Marcy 19, or to mobilize support for any already existing anti-war demonstrations called to mark the anniversary of the Iraq War, with this statement and signs to STOP THE U.S. WAR AGAINST LIBYA AND BAHRAIN, as well as to intensify the mobilization for the April 9th and 10th Anti-War demonstrations in New York and San Francisco called by the United National Antiwar Committee.
> 
> 
> On March 17, 2011, Washington showed its true intentions by pushing through a U.N. Security Council resolution that amounts to a declaration of war on the government and people of Libya.
> 
> A U.S. attack is the worst possible thing that could happen to the people of Libya. It also puts the unfolding Arab revolutions, which have inspired people across North Africa and Western Asia, in the gravest danger.
> 
> The resolution goes beyond a no-fly zone. It includes language saying U.N. member states could "take all necessary measures" ... "by halting attacks by air, land and sea forces under the control of the Gadhafi regime."(CNN.com, Mar 17)
> 
> The new resolution not only calls for attacks on Libyan aircraft and air defenses, but authorizes the strafing and bombing of ground forces as well. The U.S. and French governments immediately announced that they were ready to go. Britain and Italy are aiding. In essence the former colonial powers have begun an armed attack on the Libyan government and its people, backing one side of a civil war.
> 
> No matter how one feels about Libya today and the role of the Gadhafi government; regardless of how one evaluates the Libyan opposition, a U.S.-led war or intervention in Libya is a disaster for the Libyan people, and for peace and progress around the world.
> 
> 
> 
> BAHRAIN EXPOSES THE LIE ABOUT "PREVENTING ATTACKS ON CIVILIANS"
> 
> 
> The U.S. and its allies are repeating over and over the lie that they are trying to "prevent attacks on civilians" and are acting from humanitarian motives. But nobody should be fooled. Consider these “humanitarians” and how they react to Bahrain.
> 
> The U.S. Fifth Fleet is based in Bahrain, which is an absolute monarchy. Its people have been valiantly trying to change their government for weeks. They had some initial success. The king responded with deadly repression and later with hints at reform.
> 
> *On March 14, however, hours after Secretary of Defense Gates visited Bahrain, the Bahraini government commenced a brutal crackdown, backed up by Saudi Arabian troops. Helicopters, tear gas, rubber bullets, and live ammunition were used, killing and injuring many people. Nearly all of Bahrain's security forces are foreign mercenaries.
> 
> Unlike the Libyan rebels, the Bahraini people have absolutely no arms. But there has been no talk of a no-fly zone over Bahrain, let alone attacks on the murderous Bahraini and Saudi armies.*
> 
> NO BLOOD FOR OIL
> 
> 
> This is because the real motivation for the U.S. and its allies in both Bahrain and Libya, and indeed the whole region, is to control the OIL! It is Washington’s main strategic interest and a primary financial interest for U.S. big business.
> 
> This is true even though the U.S. is not directly dependent on imported oil from Libya. Oil is a worldwide commodity, and any country which imports oil must deal with a world market, no matter from which individual country or countries they import the oil.
> 
> Of even more importance to the U.S. and Europeans is who controls the flow of oil. A military presence or a reliable puppet in Libya would give Washington --and to a lesser extent the European imperialists -- control of the oil spigot to Europe and also establish a military presence in North Africa from which to influence or prevent the development of the revolutions, especially in Egypt and Tunisia.
> 
> 
> ARAB LEAGUE "VOTE" FRAUD
> 
> 
> Not only a demonization campaign against the Libyan leader, but every form of fraud and propaganda is being used to push for this intervention, including a supposed "vote" by the Arab League supporting the latest U.N. resolution.* Left unsaid is the fact that only 11 of the 22 members of the League even attended the meeting, which was held behind closed doors. Two of these 11 attending members, Syria and Algeria, made clear that they were completely opposed to military intervention in Libya.
> 
> Meanwhile the corporate media has ignored a resolution by the African Union, representing 53 countries, which adamantly rejected a no-fly zone or other intervention.*
> 
> 
> WHAT ABOUT GAZA?
> 
> 
> *The U. S. blocked any UN action, even a toothless resolution, during the massive Israeli bombardment of Gaza in 2008 and also during the Israeli bombing and attempted invasion of Lebanon in 2006, as well as the continued bombardment of Gaza as recently as this week!.*
> It is important that peace-loving and progressive people around the world develop a consistent approach opposing ALL U.S. intervention. This is the only way to avoid becoming just an echo of the U.S. State Department and Pentagon.
> 
> U.S., French, British, Italian hands off Libya!
> NO to the U.S. supported attack on the people's movement of Bahrain!
> U.S. Out of Arab and African Lands!



http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23785


----------



## The Bread Guy

Journeyman said:
			
		

> The Airforce certainly has highly-paid Public Affairs Officers





			
				Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> Seems it goes on in the British  Army also:   :nod:


To be fair, though, an organization (esp. gov't) should typically be putting the highest level of SME possible forward to comment on "how it's being done" stuff.  Also, I'm guessing PAO's are in the background doing a lot of work herding the journalists and helping sort out what's to be said, how and to whom.


----------



## Journeyman

Hence the "   "  

Perhaps I should have said "  ;D  "


----------



## 57Chevy

Kalatzi said:
			
		

> ABC news  has reported that both Russia and Chine are calling for an immediate ceasefire.



Here's a good one

North Korea also Tuesday urged an immediate halt to the airstrikes. An unidentified Foreign Ministry spokesman said they were a "wanton violation" of Libya's sovereignty and a "hideous crime against humanity." The spokesman also accused the United States of wanting regime change in Libya and control of its natural resources. The comments were carried by the official Korean Central News Agency.

full article: http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/8307/World/Region/China-and-North-Korea-call-for-immediate-ceasefire.aspx
shared in accordance with provisions of the copyright act


----------



## The Bread Guy

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Hence the "   "
> 
> Perhaps I should have said "  ;D  "


Man, I'm slipping today - and it's not even Friday.


----------



## WingsofFury

Journeyman said:
			
		

> You're going going to be another Mark"look what I wrote, look what I wrote"Ottawa are you?   :



Nah...that's why I'm about to pay for advertising here on the site.  

Besides, I don't get paid to do any of my blog writing - I do it to ensure that there is a source of accurate information presented about the Air Force and eventually ALL the branches of our military in the public realm.

As the work that I get paid to do is in the print realm, it is impossible for me to link to those pieces at all and you'll never see me mention those publications here on the site.

And finally...don't worry, the number of references that I make to my blog will be minimal as I'm not going to be providing a daily breakdown of the contribution of the AF to the campaign.  

Cheers!


----------



## a_majoor

VDH weighs in:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/262849/let-us-count-ways-victor-davis-hanson



> *Let Us Count the Ways . . .*
> March 23, 2011 11:03 A.M.
> By Victor Davis Hanson
> Why are many conservatives against the Libyan war? Is it, as alleged, political opportunism — given their prior support for the 2001 and 2003 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?
> 
> No. Most of us support wholeheartedly our troops now that we are in, but opposed the intervention for reasons that were clear before we attacked, and are even clearer now. Among them:
> 
> 1) Timing: If the administration believed this monster should have left, it should have acted when the rebels had the momentum, and not issued threats and demands for Qaddafi to go without commensurate efforts to follow such saber-rattling up. Fairly or not, the administration established a goal that it now seems to be backing away from, as it talks of toning down the operation before it is even a week old. We boasted about storming Vienna, pulled up at its outskirts, froze, and are now bewildered that someone inside actually is fighting back.
> 
> 2) Approval: To start a third war in the Middle East, the president should have first gone to Congress, especially since he and Vice President Biden have compiled an entire corpus of past speeches, some quite incendiary, equating presidential military intervention without congressional approval with illegality to the point of an impeachable offense (cf. Biden’s warning to Bush over a possible Iran strike). And why boast of U.N. and Arab League approval but not seek the sanction of the U.S. Congress?
> 
> 3) Consistency: Why is meddling okay in Libya but was not okay in Iran when dissidents there were likewise making headway? Is there any rationale that determines our response to unrest in Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Iran, the Gulf, or Libya? It seems we are making it up ad hoc, always in reaction to the perceived pulse of popular demonstrations — always a hit-and-miss, day-late-dollar-short proposition.
> 
> 4) Aims and Objectives: Fact: We are now and then bombing Libyan ground targets in order to enhance the chances of rebel success in removing or killing Qaddafi. Fiction: We are not offering ground support but only establishing a no-fly zone, and have no desire to force by military means Qaddafi to leave. Questions: Is our aim, then, a reformed Qaddafi? A permanently revolutionary landscape? A partitioned, bisected nation? What is the model? Afghanistan? Mogadishu? The 12-year no-fly-zone in Iraq? A Mubarak-like forced exile? Who are the rebels? Westernized reformers? Muslim Brotherhood types? A mix? Who knows? Who cares?
> 
> 5) Hypocrisy: This Libyan war is transpiring in a political climate where, for the last ten years, Obama and his supporters have lectured us that it is not only amoral and unwise but illegal for America to attack an oil-producing Muslim country that does not threaten our national security, a sin magnified if committed without congressional approval. It also follows similar demagoguery on Guantanamo, renditions, tribunals, preventative detentions, etc. — measures blasted as near-criminality under Bush but embraced or expanded under Obama. In this regard, the prior rhetoric of an Eric Holder or a Harold Koh bears no resemblance to their present action — a hypocrisy that follows from the president himself.
> 
> 6) Means and Ends: The monthly federal budget deficit now exceeds the yearly deficit prior to when Bush went into Iraq — at a time when we are engaged in two other Middle East theaters, gas is soaring, inflation is back, and we have borrowed $5 trillion since this administration took office.
> 
> 7) Leadership: This is a Potemkin coalition, far smaller than the one that fought in either Afghanistan or Iraq, notwithstanding loud proclamations to the contrary. We are not even done with the first week of bombing, and yet no one seems in charge: What body/country/alliance determines targets, issues communiques, or coordinates diplomacy? The U.K. goes after Qaddafi, and we plead “They did it, not us”? Again, fairly or not, the impression is that Obama dressed up preponderant American intervention under a multicultural fig leaf, earning the downsides of both. A loud multilateral effort could be wise diplomacy, but not if it translates into a desire to subordinate American options and profile to European and international players that are not commensurately shouldering the burden — and not if all this is cynically used to advance a welcomed new unexceptional American profile.
> 
> When we talk of “European leadership,” we mean the U.K. and France, not Germany, Italy, or most of the EU. When we talk of the “Arab League,” we mean essentially zero military assets. And when we talk of the “U.N.,” we mean zero blue-helmeted troops. So, like it or not, there is a level of understandable cynicism that suspects Obama’s new paradigm of multilateral, international action is simply the same-old, same-old, albeit without the advantages that accrue when America is unapologetic about its leadership role, weathers the criticism, and insists on the options and prerogatives that a superpower must demand in war by virtue of its power and sacrifice.
> 
> Add the above up, and I think Team Obama will find that even Democratic diehards and neocon sympathizers will soon bail, and very soon. Like it or not, to salvage this mess, the Obama administration is going to have to get rid of Qaddafi, do it very quickly, and argue that what follows is somewhat better.


----------



## MarkOttawa

> You're going going to be another Mark"look what I wrote, look what I wrote"Ottawa are you?   :
> 
> If so, see here
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/99510/post-1028677.html#msg1028677



I am not a "professional" on the web.  The CDFAI pays me nothing, nor has any other site where I have posted.  Including this one.  Where the vast majority of my posts, on a wide range of matters, have nothing to do with my own blogging--you could look it up.  I'm wondering whether it's all worth the trouble here; 'twould be no loss to me to quit spending a whole lot of time.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Jed

I'm happy to see your posts, MarkOttawa; and so are many others. Don't take that prior quip to heart.


----------



## old medic

1 - Keep it on topic 

2 - No personal shots. Debate or refute points, but we shouldn't see one line personal shots.

3 - This thread may be cleaned up.


----------



## CougarKing

It looks like Allied air strikes helped lift Loyalist forces' siege of the city:

link



> *Libya: Allied air strikes secure Misrata for rebels*
> 
> *Nearly 12 hours of allied air strikes have broken the Libyan regime's five-day bloody assault on the key rebel-held town of Misrata.
> 
> Residents said yesterday that the aerial bombardment destroyed tanks and artillery and sent many of Muammar Gaddafi's forces fleeing from Misrata, ending a siege and attack by the regime that cost nearly 100 lives from random shelling, snipers and bitter street fighting.*
> 
> Mohammed Ali, an IT engineer at Misrata's main hospital, said that waves of air strikes began shortly after midnight on Wednesday.
> 
> "They bombed a lot of sites of the Gaddafi army. There is a former hospital where his tanks were based. All the tanks and the hospital were destroyed. A column of tanks was destroyed on the edge of the city," he said. "After that there was no shelling. We are very relieved. We are very grateful. We want to thank the world. The Gaddafi forces are scattered around. All that is left is the snipers and our fighters can take care of them."
> 
> Ali said people in Misrata wanted the coalition to keep up the air strikes until all Gaddafi's forces were driven away from the town to ensure that those who were able to escape with armoured vehicles and guns did not return.
> 
> A doctor in the town, who did not want to be named, said snipers were continuing to sow fear by targeting not only rebels but civilians.
> 
> "The sniper problem is a big one. A lot of people are still afraid to leave their homes," he said.
> 
> The apparent breaking of the siege will be a blow to the Libyan ruler's attempts to reassert control over the entire west of the country.


----------



## 57Chevy

shared in accordance with provisions of the copyright act



LIBYA: OUR TOP GUN GIRL          (article excerpts)
A FEMALE Top Gun led the first daylight bombing raids over Libya yesterday.
She is the first British woman pilot to fly the awesome £125million Typhoon fighter jets in combat. 

The war against Gaddafi has already cost £150million. 
British taxpayers are spending £6m a day for planes to patrol the no-fly zone. 
Typhoon jets cost £80,000 an hour. 

The female flying ace, stationed in southern Italy, is one of 10 Typhoon pilots enforcing the no-fly zone over Libyan airspace. 
The super planes travel at 1,550mph and can climb to 40,000ft in two minutes. 
An RAF source said: “No one makes a big deal out of having a female pilot. 
“She is a first-rate pilot and is here purely because of her abilities.”  
The female flying ace, stationed in southern Italy, is one of 10 Typhoon pilots enforcing the no-fly zone over Libyan airspace. 
full article: http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/182756/Libya-Our-top-gun-girl/
                                                                    _________

Libya Conflict May Spur Sales of Battle-Proven Eurofighter Jet
The 1,500-mile-an-hour Typhoon, built by BAE Systems Plc, Finmeccanica SpA and European Aeronautic, Defence & Space Co., flew its first mission with Britain’s Royal Air Force on March 21.

It never hurts to have the ‘as used in combat’ stamp,” said Francis Tusa, London-based editor of the Defence Analysis newsletter. “It can only do you good.”
full article: 
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-03-23/libya-conflict-may-spur-sales-of-battle-proven-eurofighter-jet.html


----------



## MarkOttawa

Further to this post,
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/99510/post-1028677.html#msg1028677

I would note, and Mike Bobbitt can confirm, I have actually contributed money for the upkeep of this site.  Oops.  A real conflict of interest.  How blinking unprofessional.  Do excuse a bit of collar burning.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## WingsofFury

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> I am not a "professional" on the web.  The CDFAI pays me nothing, nor has any other site where I have posted.  Including this one.  Where the vast majority of my posts, on a wide range of matters, have nothing to do with my own blogging--you could look it up.  I'm wondering whether it's all worth the trouble here; 'twould be no loss to me to quit spending a whole lot of time.
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa



As others have said, I have no problem with your posting of articles which reflect the position of learned experts on certain subject matter.

What I do object to, and which you did with great enthusiasm and zeal previously, is post links that take viewers to a blog which contains personal opinion pieces.  There is a stark difference between what is actual fact vs. a piece that is based simply on one's personal opinion.

I strive to produce factual information to counter all the erroneous information which finds itself onto the internet each and every day, just as I outlined earlier in this thread by displaying a CBC piece which contained numerous inaccuracies when describing the CF-18 Hornet.

I've attended the daily briefings via phone and even had the balls to ask a couple of questions which I hope will allow those responding to openly discuss the roles that the Hornets and their newly acquired systems bring to the table.  I'm going to continue to do that so that there is a chance that regular media will put more accurate and detailed information into their pieces.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program about Libya.


----------



## Journeyman

WingsofFury said:
			
		

> What I do object to, and which you did with great enthusiasm and zeal previously, is post links that take viewers to a blog which contains personal opinion pieces.  There is a stark difference between what is actual fact vs. a piece that is based simply on one's personal opinion.


If only he'd catch on   :


----------



## 211RadOp

http://www.kingstonwhigstandard.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3041649

*Canadian jets complete first bombing run*
By BRYN WEESE, PARLIAMENTARY BUREAU
Posted 55 minutes ago
  
OTTAWA-- Canadian fighter jets have destroyed a Libyan ammunition depot near Misurata.

It's the first successful bombing mission for the Canadian Forces in the international effort to disable Moammar Gadhafi's air force and military capabilities to protect the Libyan people from him.

Since Tuesday, when two Canadian F-18s aborted an earlier bombing mission, four CF-18s have flown two missions -- one Tuesday night and one during the day on Wednesday.

During the night sortie, the Canadian fighters dropped four 500-pound laser-guided bombs on the ammunitions depot in Misurata, according to Maj.-Gen. Tom Lawson, assistant chief of the air staff.

Misurata is a rebel-controlled city near Tripoli that has been under heavy assault from pro-Gadhafiforces for several days, according to reports.

Lawson said the point was to destroy the supplies so they couldn't be used against the Libyan people.

"From all indications, it was a solid military target," he said. "Every indication is the attack was very successful and that there was no collateral damage.

"There is no indication at this time that there were any deaths involved from the imagery we have. However, that is not conclusive."

Canada is part of an international coalition, which includes France, the United States and Britain, enforcing a UN-sanctioned no-fly zone over Libya.

More at link


----------



## Edward Campbell

Now here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_, is a clear analysis of the _strategy_ behind the Libyan _intervention_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/were-fighting-war-lite-without-leadership-or-goals/article1954106/


> We’re fighting War Lite, without leadership or goals
> 
> CLIFFORD ORWIN
> 
> From Thursday's Globe and Mail
> Published Thursday, Mar. 24, 2011
> 
> Humanitarian military interventions such as the one under way in Libya typically face just two main obstacles. The first is, they’re humanitarian. The second is, they’re military interventions.
> 
> Humanitarianism means never having to say you’re sorry. The wars it generates present themselves as peace by other means. Not politics by other means – Clausewitz’s famous definition of war – because humanitarianism is, by definition, non-political. It aims for goals on which “the international community” can agree, and there’s no political goal on which that illusory body can agree. It can only agree on non-controversial aims, such as saving innocents from suffering. Brandishing these, it huffily denies that its ends are political ones. Heaven forbid we should be blowing up all those things in Libya for the sake of effecting regime change.
> 
> Regime change is controversial, you see, even when the regime is that of a mad dog like Moammar Gadhafi. So for the sake of consensus – humanitarianism loves consensus, since it’s just this consensus that vouches for it as non-political – intervention couches itself in neutral terms. Yes, Colonel Gadhafi must go (Barack Obama has said so), but it’s not the intervention’s aim to remove him. That aim is merely to stop him from doing such terrible things.
> 
> That goal is a worthy one. But it can’t be achieved except by removing Col. Gadhafi. Leave a despot in power and you leave him with the power to oppress. And removing him may require more than your typical humanitarian intervention – a war fought at 15,000 feet, or with cruise missiles lobbed from distant warships, without too much danger to the intervenors. No despot has ever been deposed from 15,000 feet.
> 
> Because humanitarian intervention is War Lite, it often fails to evoke the resolve that “real” wars do. Yet, because it, too, is war, it, too, requires that resolve. Here, the historical record is clear: To be even partly successful, interventions must feature one determined power, militarily capable and clearly committed, on whom everyone else involved depends to do the heavy lifting. Examples are the U.S. interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo, the Australian one in East Timor and the British one in Sierra Leone. International endorsement merely provided the fig leaf of non-politicality.
> 
> Then there were the genuinely multilateral and, therefore, ineffectual interventions: Somalia, Rwanda, the toxic combination of the Europeans and the United Nations in the Balkans. True multilateralism features everyone hoping that someone else will do something. It means being more concerned with being seen to act on CNN than with actually accomplishing anything.
> 
> No one has strong enough reasons of their own for intervening in Libya. The strategic interests of each participant lies elsewhere (although the Europeans worry, as they did in the Balkans, about a flood of unwanted immigrants). Each country is primarily concerned with exposing itself as little as possible to danger or costs of any magnitude. Mr. Obama, David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy are not in strong enough positions at home to weather significant setbacks abroad. The Americans insist that the Europeans will take the lead, as both parties indulge the wishful thinking that the Arabs will. No one will admit to being in charge, nor is there avowed agreement on the goal. Yet, these are the two things that a military campaign needs above all. Mr. Obama needs to see that a president shouldn’t stake his political futures on vacillating allies to whom he’s offered the example of his own irresoluteness.
> 
> The half-heartedness of the intervenors against the manic determination of Col. Gadhafi; the ragtag rebels against his better-armed and -trained pretorians; our concession of control of the ground to him for unwillingness to put any of our boots there – it all seems to bode something less than a glorious victory. No war is a bargain except for those who can afford it, but cheap, half-hearted ones aren’t bargains for anyone.
> 
> _Clifford Orwin is a professor of political science at the University of Toronto and a distinguished fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution._




Hello, Emperor Obama, sir: you’re walking about with no clothes on, M’lord.


----------



## old medic

I think Orwin is right out to lunch.

Everyone and their dog has said Gadhaffi has to go. With "go" being either the ICC or the grave.
That means regime change.
His last threats against ships and civilian planes should he survive were nails in his own coffin. 
That alone is the will Orwin says is missing.  I suspect France will see to it, weather Sarkozy survives an election or not. 
To call everyone's involvement halfhearted is poor logic.  Any good analyst knew France was hot and bothered
to shoot first.


----------



## Edward Campbell

old medic said:
			
		

> I think Orwin is right out to lunch.
> ...
> ...  Any good analyst knew France was hot and bothered
> to shoot first.




Yes, but why?

Does Sarkozy care a tinker's dam about Libya or is he, like Harper, playing electoral politics with bullets and bombs? is France's aim to prevent further North African migration? To secure oil? To secure more French influence in the EU? All of the above?

"Humanitarian mission?" My eye!


----------



## old medic

Most of the above I think. Perhaps drop migration to the bottom of the list. Italy might be 
more concerned with that.  France has oil interest there, with 85% of production going to Europe.  
China is next, through China National Petroleum. 1.6 million barrels a day were leaving Libya 
before recent events.

That said, it is humanitarian as well. Nobody is going argue that regime was sane, except perhaps 
another loon down in Venezuela.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Two more aircraft - Auroras - join the Canadian mission, from CBC.ca:


> Canada will send two additional aircraft to Italy to support efforts to protect civilians in Libya, Defence Minister Peter MacKay said Thursday.
> 
> He said Canada will deploy two CP-140 Auroras to Italy to provide "strategic maritime surveillance" in support of the recent United Nations resolution on Libya, particularly the enforcement of an arms embargo.
> 
> The CP-140 Aurora is often used to patrol Canada's coastlines and can be used to detect stealth submarines.
> 
> The additional support will help the coalition as it tries to prevent the Moammar Gadhafi regime from committing crimes against civilians, he said ....


----------



## WingsofFury

The CP-140 Aurora's have recently undergone Block III upgrades.



> The Block III upgrade is the third iteration of the Aurora Incremental Modernization Programme (AIMP) which began in 2002.  Blocks I and II brought upgrades to communications and avionics and Block III brings a complete enhancement of the overall weapons system.



Full Article on Upgrades from the CF Air Force Website


----------



## MarkOttawa

A true best buy for initial strike:

The Cost Value of Tomahawk Cruise Missiles
http://www.informationdissemination.net/2011/03/cost-value-of-tomahawk-cruise-missiles.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+InformationDissemination+%28Information+Dissemination%29&utm_content=Google+Reader



> From Sandra Erwin at the National Defense Magazine Blog.
> http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=352
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the Libya operation to enforce a no-fly zone, the Navy so far has launched 161 Tomahawk cruise missiles that, according to a senior U.S. Navy official, cost between $1.4 million and $1.5 million apiece. The Navy is so well stocked that it can fire up to 255 of these weapons a year without making a significant dent in its budget, or its capabilities to replenish supplies, said the official, who was speaking off-the-record at a private meeting. The Navy purchases 196 Tomahawks each year. In economic terms, the official said, the missiles are “sunk costs” that already have been incurred and could not be recovered.
> 
> From a military tactical standpoint, the Tomahawk is the perfect weapon to use in the initial stage of a conflict such as this one, says Eric Wertheim, military analyst and author of "Combat Fleets of the World."
> 
> “That’s where the risk is the highest” and the military wants to avoid putting airplanes in harm’s way, he says.
> 
> When million-dollar weapons were used in the past, complaints about their price tag didn’t make headlines the way they are now. That may be one reason why the Pentagon did not deploy a Navy aircraft carrier off the coast of Libya, says Wertheim. “It sends a strong message that we are not going to be dominating for the duration of this campaign and we do not want to hold the lion’s share of the burden.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to the Navy.mil website, a Tomahawk missile has a Unit Cost of approximately $569,000 in FY99 dollars.
> http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2200&tid=1300&ct=2
> They are indeed "sunk costs" because of the multi-year purchase nature of the contracts that keep stores current - contracts that I have been led to believe kept costs for Tomahawks down. There is a pretty wide difference between $569,000 in FY99 dollars and between $1.4 million and $1.5 million today, in fact in FY11 dollars the difference is somewhere around $600 million a unit if my green book math is right.
> 
> Two destroyers and three submarines have put 161 Tomahawks in Libya. I'd be curious if every other nation in the coalition combined has conducted 161 strike sorties in Libya to date, because I bet the answer is no. In that context, I'd like to highlight the value of Tomahawk missiles, rather than just focus on the cost.
> 
> In my opinion, all of these discussions on Tomahawk missile costs are missing the mark if the subject is operational costs for Libya. Just wait until Congress gets the gas bill for all the tanker sorties. I'll wager any fool who wants to bet that energy costs will be a major budget discussion in defense sooner rather than later, because the gas bill for the DoD in 2011 is going to be enormous.
Click to expand...


Via _AW&ST's_ "Ares" blog:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckBlogPage=Blog

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## a_majoor

Political fallout in Europe. Like here, there does not seem to be a rational reason for this operation:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/why-are-pacifist-europeans-declaring-war-on-libya/?singlepage=true



> *Why Are Pacifist Europeans Declaring War on Libya?*
> An unintended but highly illuminating irony of the military intervention in Libya is that it has exposed the duplicity behind European pacifism.
> March 23, 2011 - by Soeren Kern
> 
> Ever since taking office in 2004, Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero has worked overtime to craft his own public persona as a “convinced pacifist.” His first official act as pacifist-in-chief was, famously, to withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq. That decision was not only wildly popular with Spanish voters, but it also cemented Zapatero’s pacifist credentials on the world stage.
> 
> Just a few months later, facing a barrage of criticism from non-pacifists at home and abroad that his Iraq policy amounted to appeasing Islamic terrorists, Zapatero reluctantly deployed extra troops to the NATO mission in Afghanistan. But just in case that deployment might cast doubt on his commitment to pacifistic ideals, Zapatero dictated strict rules of engagement that forbid Spanish troops in Afghanistan from using lethal force, a “caveat” that ever since has essentially rendered useless their presence in the country.
> 
> Later that same year, in his first speech to the United Nations General Assembly, Zapatero shed some light on his pacifist vision for achieving world peace. Using the flowery post-modern verbiage for which he is now famous, Zapatero declared: “Culture is always peace.” In case that message was not sufficiently clear, Zapatero followed up by telling Time magazine that “sexual equality is a lot more effective against terrorism than military strength.” He then went on to argue that Islamic terrorists are simply misunderstood idealists and that any differences the West may have with them should be worked out in multilateral group therapy sessions supervised by UN psychotherapists.
> 
> Zapatero has also been careful to appoint only pacifists as Spanish ministers of defense. Zapatero’s first defense minister, the controversial José Bono Martínez, proclaimed: “I am a minister of defense and I would rather be killed than to kill.” He then issued orders prohibiting Spanish troops in Afghanistan from harming Taliban fighters.
> 
> Zapatero’s second minister of defense, José Antonio Alonso Suárez, believed it was his job to demilitarize the Spanish military and to turn the newly disarmed forces into an NGO-like humanitarian organization instead. To achieve his vision, he purged from the senior ranks of the Spanish military those officers who refused to abandon the silly belief that the main mission of the military should be to defend Spanish sovereignty.
> 
> During her swearing-in ceremony, Zapatero’s third (and current) defense minister, Carme Chacón, proudly proclaimed: “I am a pacifist, as are the armies of the 21st century.” Again: “I am a pacifist woman, and the Army is also pacifist.” Her biggest achievement as Spain’s pacifism minister has been to unilaterally withdraw Spanish troops from the NATO-led KFOR peacekeeping mission in Kosovo. “Mission accomplished. It’s time to go home,” she declared, cementing Spain’s image as an unreliable military partner.
> 
> Fast-forward to 2011 and the crisis in Libya. Zapatero the ardent pacifist has suddenly been transformed chameleon-like into Zapatero the enthusiastic warrior. Far from bashing the Americans for attacking a tin pot dictator in the Middle East, Zapatero has redefined braggadocio by dispatching four Spanish F-18 fighter jets to Libya. Foes and allies alike have been transfixed by Zapatero’s “definitive metamorphosis.”
> 
> What gives!? Zapatero’s sudden ideological transformation comes at a time when Spain is mired in the worst recession in its modern history. The country has a jobless rate of more than 20 percent, the highest in the industrialized world. With nearly five million Spaniards on the dole, a spiralling national debt, and a Socialist government with no viable strategy to avoid an economic meltdown, many analysts believe Spain is headed for a Greek-style bankruptcy.
> 
> Not surprisingly, newspaper commentators are saying there is nothing like a war in Libya to take Spanish minds off how bad things are at home. And there is nothing like a war to reinvent Zapatero’s reputation as an incompetent economic crisis manager to zealous defender of democracy in Libya.
> 
> To be sure, European duplicity on the use of military force extends far beyond Spain.
> 
> Consider France, for example. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who has consistently refused to send more troops to Afghanistan, has been quick to take the credit for the intervention in Libya. He says France has “decided to assume its role, its role before history” in stopping strongman Muammar Gaddafi’s “killing spree” against people whose only crime was to seek to “liberate themselves from servitude.”
> 
> Sarkozy’s newfound concern for Libyan democracy contrasts sharply from only three years ago, when Sarkozy welcomed Gaddafi with open arms during an extravagant five-day state visit to France. On that December 2007 occasion, Gaddafi breezed into Paris with an entourage of 400 servants, five airplanes, a camel, and 30 female virgin bodyguards, and then proceeded to pitch his tent just across the street from the Elysée Palace.
> 
> Sarkozy’s sudden zeal for the cause of democracy in Libya comes as his popularity is at record lows just thirteen months before the first round of the 2012 presidential election. With polls showing that Sarkozy is the least popular president since the founding of the Fifth Republic in 1958, he is betting that French voters will appreciate his efforts in Libya to place France at the center of the world stage and reinforce what Charles de Gaulle once famously called “a certain idea of France” as a nation of exceptional destiny.
> 
> In any case, Sarkozy’s main rival is not Gaddafi, but rather Marine Le Pen, the charismatic new leader of the far-right National Front party in France. A new opinion poll published by the Le Parisien newspaper on March 8 has Le Pen, who took over from her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, in January, winning the first round of next year’s presidential election.
> 
> Le Pen, who appeals to middle class voters, is riding high on voter dissatisfaction over the failure of the mainstream parties to address the problem of Muslim immigration. Since taking her post three months ago, Le Pen has single-handedly catapulted the twin issues of Muslim immigration and French national identity to the top of the French political agenda, and in recent weeks, Le Pen has been a permanent fixture on French prime-time television to discuss the threat to France of a wave of immigrants from Libya.
> 
> Doing his part, Gaddafi already has pledged that Europe will be “invaded” by an army of African immigrants. In an interview with the French newspaper Journal du Dimanche on March 6, Gaddafi warned: “You will have immigration. Thousands of people from Libya will invade Europe. There will be no one to stop them any more.”
> 
> Earlier, during a visit to Italy in August 2010, Gaddafi demanded €5 billion ($7 billion) a year from the European Union to stop illegal immigration which “threatens to turn Europe black.” At the time, Gaddafi asked: “What will be the reaction of the white Christian Europeans to this mass of hungry, uneducated Africans? We don’t know if Europe will remain an advanced and cohesive continent or if it will be destroyed by this barbarian invasion. We have to imagine that this could happen, but before it does we need to work together.”
> 
> Since the revolt in Tunisia in January, nearly 15,000 boat people (more than the total for all of 2010) have arrived on the tiny Italian island of Lampedusa, a 20-square-kilometer island that traditionally has been a major gateway for illegal immigration into the European Union. The panicked French minister for European affairs, Laurent Wauquiez, recently warned that up to 300,000 illegal immigrants could arrive in the European Union from North Africa during 2011. The influx of immigrants from Libya is a “real risk for Europe that must not be underestimated,” he said.
> 
> Threatened by Le Pen’s rising popularity, and in urgent need of a political boost, Sarkozy is now using the Libya intervention both to play the role of the respected statesman on the international stage and to address French concerns over mass immigration from North Africa. But during a March 21 interview with France 24, Le Pen dismissed Sarkozy as “a French president who is no longer running anything, who is governing on impulse or emotion, depending on the circumstances.”
> 
> Quite apart from the ongoing debate over whether the military intervention in Libya is wise or unwise, legitimate or illegitimate, or if it ultimately will succeed or fail, the European about-face on the use of military force has confirmed the sham that is post-modern European morality, where “cherished” principles are tossed to the wind whenever they are not convenient.
> 
> The antiwar idealism of Zapatero and other European fellow travellers is, in its essence, a neo-pacifist reality-evading political façade that Spain and other European governments have hid behind in recent years to avoid military alliance responsibilities in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. And in an effort to conceal this duplicity, European post-modern pacifism has served as a high-minded, anti-American bully pulpit from which to bash the United States and Israel for refusing to embrace ephemeral concepts like “soft power.”
> 
> Boy George, a poster child for European post-modern popular culture, once described the chameleon-like reality of contemporary European morality: “I’m a man without conviction. I’m a man who doesn’t know.”
> 
> Soeren Kern is Senior Analyst for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group.
> 
> Article printed from Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com
> 
> URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/why-are-pacifist-europeans-declaring-war-on-libya/
> 
> URLs in this post:
> 
> [1] withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3637523.stm
> 
> [2] deployed extra troops: http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/07/02/spain.afghan.troops/index.html
> 
> [3] forbid Spanish troops: http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/07/02/idUSL0272699
> 
> [4] first speech: http://www.fund-culturadepaz.org/spa/ALIANZA/IntervencionPRESIDENTE%20RodriguezZapatero%20en%20UN.pdf
> 
> [5] Time magazine: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,901040927-699350,00.html
> 
> [6] multilateral group therapy: http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=5049
> 
> [7] José Bono Martínez: http://www.libertaddigital.com/index.php?action=desanoti&cpn=1276250594
> 
> [8] José Antonio Alonso Suárez: http://www.gees.org/articulos/ministerio_de_defensa_goodbye-_mr_alonso_5355
> 
> [9] Carme Chacón: http://www.elpais.com/articulo/portada/MADRE/MINISTRA/elpepusoceps/20080907elpepspor_5/Tes
> 
> [10] Again: http://www.libertaddigital.com/mundo/chacon-en-el-journal-du-dimanche-soy-pacifista-y-el-ejercito-tambien-es-pacifista-1276330617/
> 
> [11] unilaterally withdraw Spanish troops: http://pajamasmedia.com../../../../../blog/pacifist-spain-abandons-nato-allies-in-kosovo/
> 
> [12] definitive metamorphosis: http://www.europapress.es/nacional/noticia-iu-zapatero-tiene-subidon-ardor-guerrero-20110321143815.html
> 
> [13] Spain is mired in the worst recession: http://pajamasmedia.com../../../../../blog/europe%E2%80%99s-future-lies-ominously-with-spain/
> 
> [14] 30 female virgin bodyguards: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-501051/Five-planes-camel-tent-30-female-virgin-bodyguards--Libyan-leader-Gaddafi-arrives-Paris-entourage.html
> 
> [15] new opinion poll: http://www.leparisien.fr/election-presidentielle-2012/sondage-marine-le-pen-arrive-devant-sarkozy-dsk-et-hollande-08-03-2011-1348346.php
> 
> [16] Journal du Dimanche: http://www.lejdd.fr/Politique/Depeches/2012-Marine-Le-Pen-part-pour-gagner-278959/
> 
> [17] threatens to turn Europe black: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1307704/Colonel-Gaddafi-demands-4bn-EU-prevent-immigration-Libya.html
> 
> [18] tiny Italian island of Lampedusa: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12816340
> 
> [19] 300,000 illegal immigrants: http://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2011/03/02/wauquiez-qualifie-de-risque-pour-l-europe-l-afflux-de-migrants-en-provenance-de-libye_1487117_3212.html
> 
> [20] March 21 interview with France 24: http://www.france24.com/en/20110317-there-are-still-lot-french-people-who-have-totally-caricatured-vision-national-front
> 
> [21] soft power: http://www.atlantic-community.org/index/articles/view/Why_Europe_Needs_a_Hard_Power_Reality_Check
> 
> [22] Boy George: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_Chameleon


----------



## Mike Bobbitt

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> Further to this post,
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/99510/post-1028677.html#msg1028677
> 
> I would note, and Mike Bobbitt can confirm, I have actually contributed money for the upkeep of this site.  Oops.  A real conflict of interest.  How blinking unprofessional.  Do excuse a bit of collar burning.
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa



Mark, Good2Golf is simply enforcing the site Guidelines, which in this case are designed to help reduce dead links that reference comments from external sources. In essence, we are trying to encourage continuity of the discussion over time, so in the weeks, months and years to come - as external sites are reorganized, evolve, or disappear and links to them cease to work - the conversations here can still be coherent and complete. Hopefully you can agree with the intent, if not the implementation.

I do appreciate if you've helped support the site in the past, but it's important to be clear: the rules are applied uniformly to all, regardless of contributions, subscriber status, rank, civilian standing, etc. Please understand that you were not singled out, and that Good2Golf's friendly reminder was intended as just that. If you still have concerns, please feel free to PM me and I would be happy to discuss. I do appreciate your efforts and contributions.


Cheers
Mike


----------



## observor 69

I put Libya into the search term on Twitter and got the following:


"FMCNL  Canadian Air Force CC-150 as PETRO 14 wkg Malta ACC talking about CHAOS 63/64 on the boom? 
about 2 hours ago via web"

I have found a lot of interesting info on the Libya situation using Twitter.


----------



## observor 69

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> I put Libya into the search term on Twitter and got the following:
> 
> 
> "FMCNL  Canadian Air Force CC-150 as PETRO 14 wkg Malta ACC talking about CHAOS 63/64 on the boom?
> about 2 hours ago via web"
> 
> I have found a lot of interesting info on the Libya situation using Twitter.



And also from same source:

ITALY - Trapani
---------------
MM7.../50-46 Tornado ECR 155Gr arr 20mar
MM70../50-02 Tornado ECR 155Gr arr 20mar
+1 Tornado ECR 155Gr arr 20mar
MM7066/50-03 Tornado IDS 155Gr c/s PANTE arr 20mar
MM70../50-42 Tornado IDS 155Gr c/s PANTE arr 20mar
+1 Tornado IDS 155Gr c/s PANTE arr 20mar
4x Tornado IDS 6St arr 20mar
4x EF-2000 4St arr 20mar
MM7242 +3 F-16C ADF 18St
188734 CF-188 425sqn c/s HUSKY
188739 CF-188 425sqn c/s HUSKY
188752 CF-188 425sqn c/s HUSKY
188756 CF-188 425sqn c/s HUSKY
188759 CF-188 425sqn c/s HUSKY
188760 CF-188 425sqn c/s HUSKY
188769 CF-188 425sqn c/s HUSKY
15004 CC-150 ...sqn c/s HUSKY/PETRO
15005 CC-150 ...sqn c/s HUSKY/PETRO01
LX-N90442 +2 E-3A c/s NATO** ops 18mar/22mar
4x Typhoon FGR4 RAF arr 20mar
77-0352 E-3B USAF c/s SHUCK80


----------



## The Bread Guy

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> I put Libya into the search term on Twitter and got the following:
> 
> 
> "FMCNL  Canadian Air Force CC-150 as PETRO 14 wkg Malta ACC talking about CHAOS 63/64 on the boom?
> about 2 hours ago via web"
> 
> I have found a lot of interesting info on the Libya situation using Twitter.


This is a Tweet from someone in the Netherlands who monitors radio traffic over the area.  Another source of such info is this feed, maintained by an Italian in Rome who monitors radio traffic also - daily summaries on his blog here.


----------



## Rifleman62

A couple of political comentators are comparing Lybian situation to the famous "Who's on First?" by Abbott and Costello (runtime 6 minutes):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sShMA85pv8M

It is not War or War Lite. It is a *Kinetic Military Operation (KMO).*

http://*hotair.com*/archives/2011/03/24/wh-this-isnt-a-war-its-a-kinetic-military-action/

*WH: This isn’t a war, it’s a “kinetic military action”*

Extract: It’s not the first euphemism for war that the White House has introduced, either.  Almost two years ago, the administration announced that they would abandon the phrase *“global war on terror”* and replace it with *“overseas contingency operations.”*  Unfortunately, not all terrorist attacks happened overseas, as the Fort Hood shooting, the attempt to blow up Times Square, and the Underwear Bomber proved.  In case that term didn’t prove elastic enough, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano introduced *“man-caused disasters”* to replace *“terrorist attack.”*

http://*www.commentarymagazine.com*/2011/03/24/the-libyan-kinetic-military-action/

*The Libyan Kinetic Military Action* 

Rick Richman 03.24.2011 - 7:41 AM 

At the State Department press conference yesterday, acting deputy spokesman Mark Toner was asked a straightforward question:

QUESTION: Are we at war in Libya?

MR. TONER: We are implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1973. It is clearly a combat operation or combat mission. As the President made very clear, there will be no U.S. ground force involved in this and that the U.S. role is upfront – frontloaded, if you will, on this. But that’s going to obviously recede into a more – a broader international coalition as we move forward to implement the no-fly zone.

QUESTION: So you would not say we’re at war?
MR. TONER: I think we’ve – you love these sweeping characterizations and I appreciate it.

QUESTION: This isn’t about what I love or do not love. (Laughter.) But the question on the table is: Are we at war in Libya or not?

MR. TONER: I would say it’s a combat mission, clearly. But beyond that, you can parse that out.

So it’s not a war; it’s a frontloaded combat mission that’s obviously going to recede into a coalition.

Later in the afternoon, in a press briefing on Air Force One as it returned to Washington, Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes was asked “if it’s not a war, what’s the right way to characterize this operation?”

MR. RHODES: … I think what we’ve said is that this is a military operation that will be limited in both duration and scope. Our contribution to this military operation that is enforcing a U.N. Security Council resolution is going to be limited — time limited to the front end, and then we’ll shift to a support role. …

Q But it’s not going to war, then?

MR. RHODES: Well, again, I think what we are doing is enforcing a resolution that has a very clear set of goals, which is protecting the Libyan people, averting a humanitarian crisis, and setting up a no-fly zone. Obviously that involves kinetic military action, particularly on the front end. …

So it’s not a war; it’s a kinetic military action that is time-limited and contribution-limited on the front end.

Byron York notes other administration officials using “kinetic” to avoid the word “war.” John Hinderaker calls it emblematic of the administration’s confusion about its role. Combining the Toner/Rhodes formulations, however, it’s clear we are simply in a frontloaded, time-limited, contribution-limited kinetic combat mission that’s obviously going to recede into a coalition, as soon as we parse out who’s in charge of the backloaded part of the … war.


----------



## nuclearzombies

Hmmmmm, I wonder what criteria  must be satisfied in order to call a spade a spade here.  ???

- not enough forces involved?
- death toll not high enough?
- lack of intervention on the ground?

Has "war" become a dirty word, now we have to cover it with clever euphamism? I must say though, "Kintetic Military Operation" does hav a nice ring to it..... :2c:


----------



## a_majoor

More US fallout. Who is in charge of this thing, really?

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/is-libya-mess-the-work-of-nsc-chief-tom-donilon/



> *Is Libya Mess the Work of NSC Chief Tom Donilon?*
> 
> Posted By Richard Pollock On March 25, 2011 @ 12:00 am In Uncategorized | 9 Comments
> 
> President Obama’s war in Libya is angering the left and right, of both parties. His muddled policy pronouncements over Libya are sowing discord within NATO. His international coalition is collapsing, with Germany now withdrawing its forces from the military operation. Congress is infuriated over the failure of notification under the War Powers Act. Rep. Dennis Kucinich says Obama’s actions constitute an “impeachable offense.”
> 
> There is the near universal confusion about what the American military’s mission in Libya is. Who is calling the shots on deploying military assets? What is the end game?
> 
> Finally, there is astonishment that the president of the United States departed for a routine overseas trip on the eve of war.
> 
> At the center of an increasingly incoherent policy is the president’s national security advisor, Thomas E. Donilon, and Washington insiders are privately pointing a finger at him.
> 
> Recall that Donilon’s immediate predecessor, Gen. Jim Jones, privately told Bob Woodward [1] that Donilon was too inexperienced to be the head of the White House’s National Security Council. In his book Obama’s Wars, Woodward writes that Jones felt Donilon’s lack of overseas experience was a major liability: “You have no credibility with the military,” Jones told Donilon [2].
> 
> Woodward cites this further damaging assessment [1] of Donilon by General Jones:
> 
> You frequently pop off with absolute declarations about places you’ve never been, leaders you’ve never met, or colleagues you work with.
> 
> Woodward also discusses a moment in which Donilon almost caused Defense Secretary Robert Gates to storm out of White House meeting:
> 
> Donilon’s sound-offs and strong spur-of-the-moment opinions, especially about one general, had offended him so much at an Oval Office meeting that he (Gates) nearly walked out.
> 
> Current Defense Secretary Robert Gates further told Woodward that Donilon would be a “complete disaster [3]” as the president’s national security advisor. After Donilon was appointed to the post, Gates publicy stepped back [4] from his Woodward comments, but the damage was done.
> 
> Tom Donilon’s other major liability is his long-time reputation as a harsh political operative. He learned the art of sharp elbowed politics as a 23-year-old assistant to Jimmy Carter’s chief of staff, Hamilton Jordan. Jordan dispatched him to the 1980 Democratic National Convention to do President Carter’s dirty work. He successfully shot down Senator Ted Kennedy’s challenge to the president.
> 
> But Donilon may be best-known as the chief lobbyist for government-backed mortgage giant Fannie Mae — just before it imploded. For six years he was a fierce fighter at Fannie Mae, fending off reform efforts by Republicans to rein in the federal agency. He also was deceptive about the agency’s troubles. According to ABC News, he painted a rosy picture [5] of the agency while it was going south:
> 
> Donilon is described as someone who lobbied for and helped paint a rosy picture of Fannie Mae’s financial health to the company’s board. He did so at a time when Fannie Mae faced accusations that it was misstating its earnings from 1998 to 2004.
> 
> A 2006 federal investigation caught [6] Donilon as part of a group of Fannie Mae executives who exchanged “scripts” in advance of meetings of the agency’s independent compensation committee. When Fannie Mae’s independent regulator — the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight — sought to investigate Fannie Mae, Donilon aggressively attacked it. David Frum wrote [7]: “Donilon is the ultimate Democratic Party politico.”
> 
> The well-connected Donilon initially served as Obama’s transition chief at the State Department, and hoped to land a top job there. His controversial role at Fannie Mae convinced Obama that Donilon would never receive Senate confirmation, so he landed at the NSC.
> 
> A number of State Department officials have told PJM that when they see what looks like seat-of-the pants management, it looks like Donilon’s work: “This is pure Tom Donilon,” a USAID official told told PJM. “He makes it up as he goes along.” The official spoke to PJM on the condition of anonymity.
> 
> On the conservative side of the fence, the analysis about Donilon isn’t much better. Andy McCarthy of the National Review Institute told PJM the administration’s Libyan operation “looks like what you would expect it would look like if they didn’t have a plan going in and they didn’t have an objective.”
> 
> As the Libya adventure goes south, Washington seems to be entering the fingerpointing stage. Even now, so early in the deployment, many issues seem to point to strategic military and diplomatic blunders, and much of them fall onto Tom Donilon’s desk.
> 
> For example, few are clear even now whether the U.S. military mission is to protect Libyan civilians or to topple the regime of Col. Muammar Gaddafi. The NATO alliance itself appears to be fracturing. From the NATO command in Brussels there is reported criticism [8] of the “hastily improvised nature of the military coalition.” The German military now has entirely pulled out its military forces [9] from the Libyan coalition. The Brits and Americans are in a public brawl as to whether or not Gaddafi should be assassinated. Turkey has tried to exercise a veto about NATO leadership.
> 
> And there is near universal uncertainty about whether the continuing military action will be directed by the U.S., NATO, or a new unspecified international coalition. “The NSC is kind of the hub that’s the intersection between intelligence, national security and the military,” McCarthy says. “It seems to be a failing of arriving at a coherent strategy from all those different components of government.” This is all Donilon’s portfolio.
> 
> And how could Donilon permit President Obama to take a whirlwind tour of Latin America as a major wartime mission was getting underway? The State Department source called it “purely astonishing.”
> 
> There also is the rupture with Congress and liberal Democrats. Donilon, a consummate political operative, should have foreseen the need to formally notify Congress under the War Powers Act, which requires formal notification of Congress when military hostilities begin. And the White House did not reach out with kid gloves to the party’s left wing, who are enraged by the use of military force in a third Muslim country.
> 
> Certainly there is enough blame to go around, from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Secretary Gates and President Obama. But the nexus of the entire operation is Thomas Donilon, and fingers seem to be pointing at him as the possible fall guy.
> 
> In addition to President Obama, Donlion enjoys the confidence of Vice President Joe Biden: Donilon served as a close confidant to Biden in the late 80s. When Biden was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Donilon was a key player in the destruction [10] of Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork. He was also part of a close-knit group of advisors behind Biden’s presidential bid in 2007. Brother Mike Donilon currently serves as counselor to the vice president, and wife Cathy Russell is Jill Biden’s chief of staff. Few were willing to talk publicly about Donilon. Typical was this statement from a former political colleague:
> 
> Everybody I know who knows Tom Donilon wouldn’t say that he his unqualified — even if they believe he is. This is mostly due to the fact they are all former campaign colleagues, or they want to curry favor with him.
> 
> Article printed from Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com
> 
> URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/is-libya-mess-the-work-of-nsc-chief-tom-donilon/
> 
> URLs in this post:
> 
> [1] privately told Bob Woodward: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/08/tom-donilon-disaster-national-security-advisor_n_755708.html
> 
> [2] Jones told Donilon: http://74.6.238.254/search/srpcache?ei=UTF-8&p=bob+woodward+obama+wars+tom+donilon+washington+post&xa=P4YYIBJvmGN15Xb8I1154Q--%2C1301001001&fr=mcafee&u=http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=bob+woodward+obama+wars+tom+donilon+washington+post&d=4800532370361130&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=f31ce26b,d63474ef&icp=1&.intl=us&sig=QflSgjILmifOR43bUU0hag--
> 
> [3] complete disaster: http://74.6.238.254/search/srpcache?ei=UTF-8&p=bob+woodward+tom+donilon+complete+disaster+gates&xa=nQnGLp9h79NeDWlJQ4ZgqQ--%2C1301002008&fr=mcafee&u=http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=bob+woodward+tom+donilon+complete+disaster+gates&d=5052784385393155&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=cfe518ec,1073a77a&icp=1&.intl=us&sig=FKInB43MTw.bUjKng2TbSw--
> 
> [4] stepped back: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43327.html
> 
> [5] painted a rosy picture: http://beforeitsnews.com/story/209/353/Before_Advising_Obama_on_National_Security,_Donilon_Lobbied_for_Fannie_Mae,_Counseled_Citibank,_Goldman_Sachs.html
> 
> [6] caught: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43348.html
> 
> [7] wrote: http://www.frumforum.com/donilons-the-wrong-man-for-the-job
> 
> [8] criticism: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/21/501364/main20045649.shtml
> 
> [9] entirely pulled out its military forces: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1368693/Libya-war-Germans-pull-forces-NATO-Libyan-coalition-falls-apart.html
> 
> [10] destruction: http://spectator.org/archives/2010/10/11/a-political-hack-and-fannie-ma/print


----------



## dapaterson

The Star is reporting that a Canadian LGen will be put in charge of the NATO efforts: 

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/960483--canadian-general-taking-over-command-of-nato-s-mission-in-libya?bn=1



> A senior White House official says a Canadian will take over command of the NATO mission in Libya.
> 
> The official says Lt.-Gen. Charles Bouchard, stationed in Naples, has been designated by NATO as head of the alliance's military campaign in Libya.




Bio at: http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dsa-dns/sa-ns/ab/sobv-vbos-eng.asp?mAction=View&mBiographyID=33


----------



## Rifleman62

Beat me to the report David!

Same report on US TV and radio down in Texas.

Going now to the Warrior and Family Support Centre at Fort Sam. Lots of folks there are atuned to what goes on in Canada (and Quebec). Be interesting to hear any comments.


----------



## OldSolduer

dapaterson said:
			
		

> The Star is reporting that a Canadian LGen will be put in charge of the NATO efforts:
> 
> http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/960483--canadian-general-taking-over-command-of-nato-s-mission-in-libya?bn=1
> 
> 
> Bio at: http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dsa-dns/sa-ns/ab/sobv-vbos-eng.asp?mAction=View&mBiographyID=33



Just how did that happen? I'm perplexed.....


----------



## old medic

Sweden has frozen assets hidden by Muammar Qaddafi and his associates worth over 10 billion kronor ($1.6 billion), according to a report in the Dagens Nyheter (DN) daily on Wednesday.

http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/frusna-konton-for-regeringens-man
Link has a listing of assets frozen. (in Swedish)



By Borzou Daragahi and David Zucchino, Los Angeles Times
March 24, 2011
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-fighting-20110325,0,1620120.story?track=rss



> Reporting from Tripoli and Benghazi, Libya—
> After losing ground to government forces for weeks, Libyan rebels based in the eastern city of Benghazi showed signs Thursday of regaining the momentum against Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi, whose brutal crackdown on protesters opposed to his four-decade rule has sparked civil warfare.
> 
> Rebel spokesman Col. Ahmed Omar Bani said some government fighters in the front-line city of Ajdabiya had lost contact with their commanders and were negotiating to withdraw and head west toward government-controlled territory.
> 
> The talks hinge on rebel demands that the government forces surrender their heavy weaponry, according to an opposition political spokesman in Benghazi. Bani appealed to other nations for antitank weapons and other heavy artillery to help the lightly armed volunteer army battle Kadafi's troops.
> 
> Meanwhile, Western-led airstrikes pounded the Libyan capital of Tripoli and other targets Thursday morning and evening. Claims of civilian casualties followed, accusations that could weaken support for the U.N.-sanctioned mission aimed at protecting Libyans from the military might of Kadafi.
> 
> Explosions and barrages of artillery fire shook Tripoli and its suburbs. Kadafi loyalists said a large number of civilian casualties occurred, and they showed the Reuters news agency bodies they said were those of civilian and military victims in the Tajoura district.
> 
> But a group of journalists traveling to a hospital in Tajoura to independently verify casualty claims was stopped and detained for 90 minutes.
> 
> A Thursday evening burial for alleged victims of the airstrikes included a dozen bodies and protesters chanting slogans in support of Kadafi. But no grieving relatives attended, nor were there portraits of the deceased or information about who they were or where and how they died.................



http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/25/libya.war/index.html?hpt=T1



> Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- Boosted by support from two significant nations -- one Arab and the other the sole Muslim alliance member -- NATO prepared to assume command over the Libya mission Friday as coalition airstrikes pounded targets for a sixth consecutive night.
> 
> The United Arab Emirates announced it will send 12 aircraft in the coming days to help patrol and enforce the United Nations-mandated no-fly zone. And Turkey, once reluctant of military operations, agreed to the use of an eastern air base in Izmir as a sub-command station.
> 
> Other Muslim nations participating in the Libya mission include Qatar, which will begin flying planes this weekend, and Kuwait and Jordan, which have agreed to provide humanitarian or logistical support.
> 
> But the military role of the UAE and Turkey's participation lend credibility to NATO as the alliance considers whether to broaden its role beyond enforcement of a no-fly zone to protection of civilians on the ground.
> 
> The situation for Libyans caught in battle zones grows more dire by the day, humanitarian agencies reported. The United Nations refugee agency said Friday that increasing numbers of Libyans are displaced from their homes.
> 
> Refugees streaming out of the strife-torn city of Ajdabiya described chilling scenes.
> 
> "I couldn't even begin to describe to you the horror that I have seen," one man told CNN. "Leaving Ajdabiya we saw dead bodies in the street. No one would ever dare go to recover them."
> 
> CNN is not identifying Libyans it has interviewed for their own safety.
> 
> Another man said Moammar Gadhafi's troops were going house to house in Ajdabiya, hunting for opposition members. He said the troops took away five men from his neighbor's house. He didn't know what happened to them...........


----------



## Infanteer

dapaterson said:
			
		

> The Star is reporting that a Canadian LGen will be put in charge of the NATO efforts:



Another Griffon guy!  First COS of the Army, now NATO lead.  I swear there is a Tac Hel mafia moving in on things!!!  :blotto:


----------



## Journeyman

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I swear there is a Tac Hel mafia moving in on things!!!


It's all part of the plan to return Tactical Aviation home to the Army.


And we'll give the Navy a new flag.... or something.....just so there's no complaining


----------



## dapaterson

(cue "Flight of the Valkyries")


----------



## Edward Campbell

dapaterson said:
			
		

> (cue "Flight *Ride* of the Valkyries")




As you wish: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mmpcdNNMos


Edited to correct the title.


----------



## Good2Golf

dapaterson said:
			
		

> (cue "Flight of the Valkyries")



Would it surprise you to know that's my ring tone?


----------



## The Bread Guy

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Just how did that happen? I'm perplexed.....


His bio says he's already in Naples, so that makes him handy.  Politically speaking?  I'll leave that to others to guess....


----------



## Old Sweat

Being in Naples as, I believe, the DComd of the NATO Joint Force Command, or words to that effect, is a start. His wide experience with the US Forces also could not hurt, but probably his nationality helped as we don't have a colonial past in Africa. Against that, we also don't have too many friends in the Arab world.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Just how did that happen? I'm perplexed.....




Maybe because if (when?) things go horribly wrong no Americans, Brits or French senior officers will have to be pilloried ...  :-\


----------



## OldSolduer

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Being in Naples as, I believe, the DComd of the NATO Joint Force Command, or words to that effect, is a start. His wide experience with the US Forces also could not hurt, but probably his nationality helped as we don't have a colonial past in Africa. Against that, we also don't have too many friends in the Arab world.



well OK.....just as long as I get to go somewhere other than Moose Jaw....lol or Thunder Bay!


----------



## dapaterson

A blogger is reporting on the situation, and includes an interesting graphic:







Fortunately, the Polaris flight crew have decided to turn off their transponder on subsequent flights.


----------



## Kalatzi

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Maybe because if (when?) things go horribly wrong no Americans, Brits or French senior officers will have to be pilloried ...  :-\


Kinda like walking outof the house and finding a burning paper bag on the porch. 

OTOH; it seems as if the African Union may be cooking up a made in Africa solution to this mess. Col Spell-check may be on his way out soon. 

We can only hope. 

The promotion refects well on him and the CF. 

Best of luck to all concerned.


----------



## WingsofFury

WingsofFury said:
			
		

> The CP-140 Aurora's have recently undergone Block III upgrades.
> 
> Full Article on Upgrades from the CF Air Force Website



Recently brought to my attention - the Aurora's are *undergoing* Block III upgrades.


----------



## GAP

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links
Article Link

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime.

By Praveen Swami, Nick Squires and Duncan Gardham 5:00PM GMT 25 Mar 2011

In an interview with the Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore, Mr al-Hasidi admitted that he had recruited "around 25" men from the Derna area in eastern Libya to fight against coalition troops in Iraq. Some of them, he said, are "today are on the front lines in Adjabiya".

Mr al-Hasidi insisted his fighters "are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists," but added that the "members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader".

His revelations came even as Idriss Deby Itno, Chad's president, said al-Qaeda had managed to pillage military arsenals in the Libyan rebel zone and acquired arms, "including surface-to-air missiles, which were then smuggled into their sanctuaries".

Mr al-Hasidi admitted he had earlier fought against "the foreign invasion" in Afghanistan, before being "captured in 2002 in Peshwar, in Pakistan". He was later handed over to the US, and then held in Libya before being released in 2008.

US and British government sources said Mr al-Hasidi was a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, or LIFG, which killed dozens of Libyan troops in guerrilla attacks around Derna and Benghazi in 1995 and 1996
More on link


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_ is an unusually insightful column:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/blame-r2p-the-intellectuals-go-to-war/article1957296/


> Blame R2P: The intellectuals go to war
> 
> MARGARET WENTE
> From Saturday's Globe and Mail
> 
> Published Saturday, Mar. 26, 2011
> 
> Why is Canada at war in Libya? You won’t get the answer from our elected leaders. They’re too busy fighting an election to explain it to us. You can’t count on the opposition parties to raise awkward questions, either. They have better things to do at a crucial time like this. Besides, it’s just a little war. It will be over soon, unless it isn’t. If all goes well, perhaps Canadians won’t notice that our political class has committed us to an open-ended military action in North Africa without a clue about what the mission is, who’s in charge, or how deep the quagmire might get.
> 
> The short answer is that Canada is in Libya because our allies are. But, ideologically, this is very much a made-in-Canada war – rooted in a doctrine that has been tirelessly promoted by foreign policy liberals such as Lloyd Axworthy and Bob Rae, and vigorously endorsed by some of Barack Obama’s closest advisers, especially Samantha Power at the National Security Council.
> 
> This doctrine is known as the “responsibility to protect” (R2P for short) and was endorsed by the United Nations in 2005. It mandates that the “international community” is morally obliged to defend people who are in danger of massive human-rights violations. It’s rooted in Western guilt over the failure to prevent genocide in Rwanda. R2P is the moral underpinning of the war in Libya, and it’s the reason why people such as Paul Martin, Roméo Dallaire, Mr. Rae and Mr. Axworthy have been so amazingly eager for us to rush into battle.
> 
> So have Ms. Power and her sister warriors Hillary Clinton, the U.S. Secretary of State, and Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the UN. Together, these three convinced Mr. Obama of the urgent moral case for war in Libya. Ms. Power is the author of the enormously influential bookA Problem from Hell, about Washington’s failure to prevent genocide in the 20th century. Her counterpart in France is the glamorous philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy, who flew to Benghazi, met the rebels, and persuaded French President Nicolas Sarkozy (who badly needs a boost in the polls) to back them.
> 
> In other words, the war in Libya is a creation of the liberal intellectuals – just as the war in Iraq was a creation of the neo-conservatives. Many of the liberal intellectuals who vigorously opposed the Iraq war have just as vigorously been advocating intervention in Libya. Both groups are serenely convinced of their own moral rightness. Yet, the delusions of the R2P crowd aren’t all that different from the delusions of the neo-cons, who thought they could march into Iraq, decapitate the dictator, and help the cheering throngs embrace democracy. Has the past decade taught these people nothing?
> 
> Evidently not. The other day, I heard Mr. Rae explain that the purpose of the war in Libya is to “create space” so the rebels can get their act together (to do what, he didn’t say). This notion of “creating space” is swiped directly from Afghanistan, where we were assured that a more democratic (or at least more Western-friendly) society would emerge once Western forces were able to win over the locals and protect them from the bad guys. How’s that working out?
> 
> R2Pers aren’t just guilty of amnesia. They’re also ignorant. They know less about the tribal politics of Libya than they do about the dark side of the moon. To them, all Arab nations look alike. They got so excited about the Arab Awakening that they assumed the rebels in Libya were not much different from the protesters in Cairo’s Tahrir Square. This hopeful story line has been reinforced by sympathetic Western reporters on the ground, even though they have no idea who the rebels are, either. On closer inspection, it turns out that at least some of them are not too nice. They’re happy to round up suspects and use Moammar Gadhafi’s former prisons in much the same way he did.
> 
> A short, sharp war that ends next week sure would be nice. But it’s a lot harder to get off the bus than it is to get on. Last week, the coalition forces swung into action when Col. Gadhafi’s forces were at the gates of Benghazi. They beat them off and, no doubt, saved many lives. Good. Yet, instead of going home, the coalition has decided to explicitly support the rebels on other fronts. When does a limited protective action morph into a war of liberation? As British MP Rory Stewart said, “The lesson of Afghanistan is if you dip your toes in, you are soon in up to your neck.”
> 
> Right now, it’s not clear who’s in charge in Libya. The U.S., without which there would be no war, has vowed to eject itself from the driver’s seat as soon as possible. After days of bickering, NATO has agreed to take command of the no-fly zone, with a Canadian in charge. Who’s in charge of the rest of the operation is TBA. But one thing is clear – this is the West’s war now.
> 
> We have entered a new age – the age of humanitarian imperialism. Humanitarian imperialists are besotted with fantasies of the West’s inherent goodness. As American writer David Rieff puts it, they have promised that, from now on, all wars will “noble wars of altruism.” To them, the facts on the ground don’t matter much. What really matters is their good intentions.




I agree with Wente’s answer (2nd paragraph) to the big question (1st paragraph). We are, indeed, at war because our allies are and we want, need to be seen to be doing a full and fair share of the heavy lifting, even “punching above our weight" again.

I also agree with Wente’s assessment of R2P and its proponents: it’s a guilt trip for the terminally ignorant.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

dapaterson said:
			
		

> A blogger is reporting on the situation, and includes an interesting graphic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fortunately, the Polaris flight crew have decided to turn off their transponder on subsequent flights.



That could be my wife looking for a parking spot at the mall 8)


----------



## 57Chevy

:rofl: many a wife at that.........actually that race track thingy is a refuelling route.

shared in accordance with provisions of the copyright act
from the Arab Times
http://www.arabtimesonline.com/NewsDetails/tabid/96/smid/414/ArticleID/167187/t/Saleh-offers-safe-hands-handover/Default.aspx
Qatar
Tiny Qatar became the first Arab country to fly combat missions over Libya on Friday after NATO agreed to take command of the no-fly zone part of air operations against Muammar Gaddafi’s regime.
The Qatari fighter jet flew its first sortie alongside a French jet on Friday and the United Arab Emirates pledged 12 warplanes to the effort to thwart Muammar Gaddafi. The international effort has no other countries from the Arab League, a 22-member group that was among the driving forces behind the UN Security Council decision to impose a no-fly zone over Libya.
“Qatar has been a great ally from Day One,” said Mustafa Gheriani, spokesman for opposition Benghazi city council. “It’s an Arab country to be proud of.”
The United States has provided millions of dollars in equipment to many of the league’s countries, including Saudi Arabia and Jordan.
“Having our first Arab nation join and start flying with us emphasizes that the world wants the innocent Libyan people protected from the atrocities perpetrated by pro-regime forces,” US Air Forces Africa Commander Maj. Gen. Margaret Woodward said.
The international coalition confronting Gaddafi agreed to put NATO in charge of enforcing the no-fly zone, with Canadian Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard at the helm, and hammered out a unified command structure.
Despite the leadership confusion, Britain’s senior military spokesman, said the mission was succeeding.

more on Qatar Armed Forces:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_Armed_Forces


----------



## CougarKing

Libyan rebel forces score another victory against Qaddafi Loyalist forces:

link



> *Libyan rebels rout Gaddafi forces in strategic town*
> By Angus MacSwan | Reuters – 25 minutes ago
> 
> AJDABIYAH, Libya (Reuters) - *Libyan rebels backed by allied air strikes retook the strategic town of Ajdabiyah on Saturday after an all-night battle that suggested the tide is turning against Muammar Gaddafi's forces in the east.
> 
> To the west, Gaddafi's forces attacked insurgent-held Misrata, shelling the port with mortars and artillery, a rebel told Reuters.
> 
> One inhabitant said 115 people had been killed in Misrata in a week and snipers were still shooting people from rooftops.*
> 
> In Ajdabiyah, rebel fighters danced on tanks, waved flags and fired in the air near buildings riddled with bullet holes. Half a dozen wrecked tanks lay near the eastern entrance to the town and the ground was strewn with empty shell casings.
> 
> Rebels said fighting had lasted through the night. By the town's western gate there were bodies of more than a dozen Gaddafi fighters, and an abandoned truckload of ammunition suggested Gaddafi forces had beaten a hasty retreat.
> 
> "Thank you Britain, thank you France, thank you America," said one rebel, praising the Western air strikes against Gaddafi targets.
> 
> *Capturing Ajdabiyah, a gateway from western Libya to the rebel stronghold of Benghazi and the oil town of Tobruk, was a big morale boost for the rebels a week after coalition air strikes began to enforce a U.N.-mandated no-fly zone.
> 
> Western governments hope the raids, launched with the aim of protecting civilians, will also shift the balance of power in favor of the Arab world's most violent popular revolt.
> 
> But in Misrata, the only big insurgent stronghold left in Libya's west and cut off from the main rebel force to the east, Gaddafi forces on Saturday attacked the city from the west and the east, shelling the port with mortars and artillery, a rebel told Reuters.*
> "Gaddafi forces are attacking Misrata from the west and east side. (There is) heavy shelling," the rebel, called Saadoun, told Reuters by phone. From the west, he said tanks were advancing from the coastal road toward the city, which has been encircled and under bombardment for weeks.
> 
> "They are also trying to bring in soldiers," he said.
> 
> "From the east, they are shelling with mortars and artillery the port and areas around it. There is the main fuel tank in the port which feeds the central part of the city."
> 
> He said there were thousands of workers, mainly Egyptians, at the port who had fled and stayed there hoping for rescue.
> 
> The reports from Misrata could not be independently verified because Libyan authorities have barred reporters from the area.
> 
> Pro-Gaddafi forces had eased their bombardment of Misrata after Western strikes hit their positions, rebels said earlier.
> 
> *REBELS SAY FORCES REACH BREGA
> 
> A rebel spokesman in Benghazi said insurgents on Saturday had reached the outskirts of the oil terminal town of Brega, 70 km (45 miles) west along the Mediterranean coast from Ajdabiyah. This report could not be independently confirmed.*
> 
> "We are now preparing ourselves to liberate the rest of the cities and towns in the country," Colonel Ahmed Bani said. "Soon we will be in a position to hold another news conference, such as this one, in Tripoli, the capital of free Libya."
> 
> U.S. President Barack Obama, criticized by U.S. politicians across the spectrum for failing to communicate the goals of the air campaign, told Americans that the military mission in Libya was clear, focused and limited.
> 
> He said it had already saved countless civilian lives.
> 
> Obama said Libya's air defenses had been disabled, Gaddafi's forces were no longer advancing and in places like Benghazi, his forces had been pushed back.
> 
> "So make no mistake, because we acted quickly, a humanitarian catastrophe has been avoided and the lives of countless civilians -- innocent men, women and children -- have been saved," Obama said in a weekly radio address.
> 
> Obama, due to speak to Americans about Libya again on Monday evening, had also been faulted by fellow politicians for taking on another military mission in a Muslim country with the United States embroiled in the Iraq and Afghan wars.
> 
> NATO has agreed to take over that role in enforcing the no-fly zone and arms embargo against Libya, but final details have not yet been worked out for the military alliance to take over the air strikes on Gaddafi's military and its equipment.
> 
> *In Tripoli, explosions were heard early on Saturday, signaling possible strikes by warplanes or missiles.*
> 
> Libyan state television was broadcasting occasional, brief news reports of the air strikes. Mostly it showed footage -- some of it grainy images years old -- of cheering crowds waving green flags and carrying portraits of Gaddafi.
> 
> Neither Gaddafi nor his sons have been shown on state television since the Libyan leader made a speech from his Tripoli compound on Wednesday.
> 
> State TV said the "brother leader" had promoted all members of his armed forces and police "for their heroic and courageous fight against the crusader, colonialist assault."
> 
> (Additional reporting by Alexander Dziadosz, Maria Golovnina, Michael Georgy, Ibon Villelabeitia, Lamine Chikhi, Mariam Karouny and Patricia Zengerle; Writing by Tom Pfeiffer and Ibon Villelabeitia; Editing by Mark Heinrich)


----------



## Old Sweat

This article from National Review online is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act. The author asks a number of inconvenient questions.

The Corner

Hard Truths on Libya

March 25, 2011 10:02 A.M. By Victor Davis Hanson  

One can argue about the need for consultation with Congress before using major military force. Most of us think the requirement is essential, with ample constitutional support. But the question takes on new dimensions if the commander-in-chief is a progressive, antiwar, Nobel Peace Prize–winning politician whose political career was predicated on demanding just such congressional oversight of presidential war powers — and his vice president has strutted and boasted that he would impeach a president for doing just this sort of preemptive bombing against a Middle East country that poses no immediate threat to U.S. security.

For a president like Bush (who obtained congressional authorization for Afghanistan and Iraq) or Clinton (who did not originally in the Balkans), the non-authorization would be serious; for an Obama, it reflects a level of hypocrisy that makes a mockery of his entire worldview, past and present. Fairly or not, Obama almost single-handedly is rewriting the history of dissent between 2003 and 2008 — from Guantanamo, renditions, tribunals, Predators, Iraq, and preventative detention to now-optional war-making in the Middle East — and proving that prior loud protests were more partisan attacks than matters of principle. More than any other individual in recent history, the career of Obama (2002–2011) will be a historical touchstone for understanding the nature of protest in the war-on-terror years.

Second, much of this mess hinges on a number of puerile assumptions: that a bunch of televised rebels swarming a Libyan city equals the birth of democracy, as if an unknown group of dissidents could be assumed to be competent and well-intentioned; and that a monster like Qaddafi — with a four-decade pedigree of near-constant violence — could be expected to simply step down. Apparently, we were to believe that he would follow the example of Mubarak’s tail-between-the-legs flight; or that he would depart because Barack Hussein Obama ordered him to, or because there was some chance of serious violence if he did not; or that he would find exile a preferable alternative to a stormy continuance of his rule. I think most adolescents in the real world would know that the above assumptions were all fantasies.

A ruler like Qaddafi is part Milosevic, part Saddam, part Noriega, and part Kim Jong Il. They stay in power for years through killing and more killing (to paraphrase Dirty Harry, “They like it”), and they do not leave, ever, unless the U.S. military either bombs them to smithereens or physically goes into their countries and yanks them out of their palaces. Period. They most certainly do not care much for the concern of the Arab League, the U.N., or a contingent from Europe, or a grand verbal televised threat from a U.S. president — again, even if his name is Barack Hussein Obama and he is not George Bush.

Sorry, but that is where we are and where we’ve always been, so we can either quit, as in Lebanon and Somalia; send in the Marines to take charge of postwar stabilization, as in Afghanistan and Iraq; target Qaddafi and bomb him incessantly until he is broken, as in Clinton’s Balkan air campaign; or schedule a multiyear, Iraq-style no-fly zone, with ample latitude to bomb now and then to carve out sanctuaries within Libya. Those are the options, and one will be chosen one way or another, even if the president thinks he can once again vote present on all of them.


----------



## CougarKing

Rafale-Ms from the carrier _Charles De Gaulle_?



> link
> 
> *French forces destroy seven Libyan aircraft on ground*
> 
> By Elizabeth Pineau, Gerard Bon and Catherine Bremer | Reuters – 9 minutes ago
> PARIS (Reuters) - French warplanes have destroyed five Libyan military planes and two helicopters at Misrata air base in the past 24 hours, France's armed forces said.
> 
> Armed forces spokesman Thierry Burkhard said all seven Libyan aircraft were destroyed while on the ground at the base, near the insurgent-held town of Misrata, as they were preparing to carry out attacks in the area.
> 
> *A patrol of French Rafale fighters, backed by an E2-C Hawkeye AWACS, carried out air strikes overnight and around 20 French planes supported by four tankers and an E3F AWACS struck targets during the day, the armed forces said in a statement.*The strikes, part of the U.N.-mandated campaign by a Western coalition to halt Muammar Gaddafi's offensive on rebels trying to end his 41-year rule, were in the Misrata and Zintan area.
> 
> Backed by the coalition air strikes, rebels retook the strategic town of Ajdabiyah on Saturday after an all-night battle that suggested the tide was turning against Gaddafi's forces in the east.
> 
> Pro-Gaddafi forces had earlier pounded the town with tank, mortar and artillery fire that halted only as coalition aircraft appeared overhead, a rebel told Reuters.
> 
> *The five planes destroyed at Misrata were Galeb fighter jets and the helicopters were MI-35's, the French armed forces said.
> 
> Two French and two Qatari Mirage 2000-5 jets carried out a joint surveillance mission of Libyan airspace from an air base on Crete, the statement also said.
> 
> Earlier in the week, French planes destroyed another Libyan plane just after it landed at Misrata.*
> 
> (Reporting by Elizabeth Pineau, Gerard Bon and Catherine Bremer)


----------



## Edward Campbell

MGen (Ret’d) Lewis MacKenzie joins the debate in this column, reproduced, without further comment, under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Ottawa Citizen_:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Lewis+Mackenzie+What+objective+Libya/4500221/story.html


> What is our objective in Libya?
> 
> BY LEWIS MACKENZIE, THE OTTAWA CITIZEN
> 
> MARCH 25, 2011
> 
> In virtually all the military learning institutions around the world, students from corporals to generals are taught and retaught the 10 principles of war. I won’t bore the reader by listing numbers two to 10, inclusive, because No. 1, Selection and Maintenance of the Aim, is more important than all the rest. It means, in layman’s terms, before going to war decide what your overall objective is and stick to it.
> 
> Regrettably, the UN Security Council’s Resolution 1973 authorizing international military action against the forces of Colonel Gadhafi in Libya failed to precisely pin down the political and, by default, the military’s objective, thereby leaving this critical decision to individual nations enforcing the resolution. At this stage there are still a number of vastly different interpretations of what the resolution was attempting to achieve. Some, particularly in the Arab camp, suggest the objective is to freeze the military situation on the ground so diplomacy led by the Arab League and the African Union can proceed. Others have limited their opinion to a more literal interpretation of the resolution and say the role of the no-fly zone should be to protect civilians and population centres, presumably, while the war rages on away from the cities and towns. A more aggressive interpretation sees the aim as defeating Gadhafi’s military, something well beyond the intent of the resolution. All of the above have been suggested at various times during the past week because the resolution, in order to be passed, is intentionally broad and vague and, to date, no nation has taken the lead and convinced the other participants, including Canada, to agree to a common aim.
> 
> In the absence of coherent political direction, a dangerous escalation has been called for by the rebels. Based on their recent pronouncements it appears they consider the coalition air forces currently enforcing the no-fly zone to be their air force and they have new roles for it. Temporarily advancing south of Benghazi a few weeks ago against little and in many cases no opposition, the rebels now have their sights set on Libya’s capital and Gadhafi’s support base, Tripoli, some 1000 kilometres to the west. This they claim they can do with coalition air support “clearing” Gadhafi’s forces before them during their advance. The concept has been mentioned by at least one coalition member, France.
> 
> The idea of a successful rebel advance to Tripoli is beyond comprehension with or without coalition air support. Allied support for such folly should be rejected and the sooner the better before the rebels are led down the garden path by our silence on the matter.
> 
> The rebels are undisciplined, unco-ordinated and ill-equipped. They are also naive, thanks to their early success against limited opposition, and have no comprehension of the unique and demanding requirements of offensive operations. Defending built-up-areas (civilian population centres) is relatively straightforward. A few well placed, untrained marksmen can hold up an advancing column of infantry and tanks which the rebels themselves demonstrated during Gadhafi’s assaults on Benghazi. Possessed of a common hatred of Gadhafi and unquestionable bravery, the rebels can mount a determined defence. Unfortunately for them, offensive operations are out of their league even with the help of foreign military advisers infiltrating across the Egyptian border to give them a hand.
> 
> To describe a ridiculous but possible scenario to reinforce the slippery slope awaiting any decision to become the rebel’s air force, imagine the rebels advancing toward Tripoli with allied air support and having to fight their way through Ajdabiyah, a town currently held by Gadhafi’s forces 150 km south of Benghazi. As a result of the rebel’s offensive would not the ensuing battle that they initiated threaten the civilian population of Ajdabiyah? That being the case would not paragraph 4 of UN Resolution 1973, which states in part, “take all necessary measures to protect civilians and populated areas under threat of attack,” require the coalition air forces to bomb the rebels? Perhaps not such a ridiculous scenario after all, considering the rebels are now asking for air strikes to help them retake the town of Ajdabiyah.
> 
> Absent well-defined political leadership for the implementation of UN Resolution 1973, we now have a number of coalition military actions that arguably go beyond the letter and the intent of the resolution and seem to be more in support of regime change than protecting civilian population centres. If that is the case, the Security Council should meet and sanction the current military actions in Libya in support of Resolution 1973 and clearly state the removal of Colonel Gadhafi as the mission’s objective.
> 
> In the meantime, a ground invasion force led and dominated by Arab countries should be organized to deal with the inevitable, near-term stalemate.
> 
> _Retired general Lewis MacKenzie served on nine UN peacekeeping missions and commanded two of them._
> 
> © Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen


----------



## observor 69

First time I have seen crew dressed in what I guess is fire retardant gear:

HMS Westminster has been making a vital contribution to Operation Ellamy - the joint operation against the Gaddafi regime in Libya. 

Her sophisticated surveillance technology means the Type 23 frigate can make a significant contribution to monitoring the situation along the Libyan coast, where most of the population centres lie.

The ship is also playing an important role in deterring the Libyan navy from attacking civilian targets. Earlier in the crisis Libyan gunboats had shelled a number of the coastal towns. 

HMS Westminster is working alongside HMS Cumberland and the nuclear submarine HMS Triumph.

http://www.bfbs.com/news/worldwide/hms-westminster-keeps-libyan-navy-bay-45796.html


----------



## old medic

Kadafi regime could fall from within, U.S. officials say
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-fg-libya-gates-20110327,0,2457042.story



> Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton say they have received hints that those close to Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi may be ready to abandon him..........




Pro-Gadhafi forces resume attacks on Libyan rebels
TUNIS— Reuters 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/pro-gadhafi-forces-resume-attacks-on-libyan-rebels/article1958725/


> Eight people were killed when forces loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi resumed attacks on rebel-held Misrata on Sunday, ending a brief lull in fighting following Western air strikes, rebels and a resident said.
> 
> Pro-Gadhafi forces had eased their attacks on Misrata on Saturday after Western coalition planes appeared in the skies and hit some of their positions, rebels said.
> 
> A rebel said fighting between pro-Gadhafi forces and rebels had raged all day Sunday before stopping in the evening...........




Rebels push west as air strikes hit Gaddafi forces
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/Rebels+push+west+strikes+Gaddafi+forces/4511584/story.html

Angus MacSwan, Reuters · Mar. 27, 2011 



> BIN JAWAD, Libya - Libyan rebels pushed further west on Sunday to retake more territory abandoned by Muammar Gaddafi’s retreating forces, which have been weakened by Western air strikes.
> 
> Emboldened by the capture of the strategic town of Ajdabiyah with the help of foreign warplanes on Saturday, the rebels have reversed military losses in their five-week insurgency and are now back in control of all the main oil terminals in the eastern half of the sprawling, North African Arab country.
> 
> Rebels said they now had their sights on the Gaddafi stronghold of Sirte in central Libya.
> 
> A convoy of 20 military vehicles including truck-mounted anti-aircraft guns was seen leaving Sirte on Sunday and heading west towards Tripoli, along with dozens of civilian cars carrying families and stuffed with personal belongings, a Reuters reporter in the vicinity reported.


----------



## The Bread Guy

NATO now running the whole show - this from the SecGen:


> NATO Allies have decided to take on the whole military operation in Libya under the United Nations Security Council Resolution. Our goal is to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under threat of attack from the Gaddafi regime. *NATO will implement all aspects of the UN Resolution. Nothing more, nothing less.*
> 
> This is a very significant step, which proves NATO's capability to take decisive action.
> 
> In the past week, we have put together a complete package of operations in support of the United Nations Resolution by sea and by air. We are already enforcing the arms embargo and the No Fly Zone, and with today's decision we are going beyond. We will be acting in close coordination with our international and regional partners to protect the people of Libya.
> 
> We have directed NATO's top operational Commander to begin executing this operation with immediate effect.


----------



## old medic

As rebels regain the road to Tripoli, residents regroup
GRAEME SMITH 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/as-rebels-regain-the-road-to-tripoli-residents-regroup/article1959120/



> Somewhere among the charred pieces of Libyan tanks, amid the crippled rocket launchers and broken vehicles in the wake of the rebels’ rapid sweep toward Tripoli in recent days, a son recognized his father’s car.
> 
> Fragments of the old Peugeot lay scattered near the road. So little remained of Adam Mufta al-Tarhuni’s brother and father that he did not bother with a formal burial. Like most other residents of coastal towns now emerging from days of brutal occupation by the forces of Moammar Gadhafi, the 40-year-old blames the dictator for his misery.
> 
> “Gadhafi forces shot them with an RPG,” he said. “They were not armed.”
> 
> When informed that a rocket-propelled grenade could not have inflicted such damage on his father’s vehicle, Mr. al-Tarhuni threw up his hands: “Maybe it was a tank.”
> 
> Rebels seized more than 200 kilometres of the strategic road to Tripoli over the weekend, advancing behind air strikes by foreign jets, leaving several hundred thousand people – from Ajdabiya, Brega, Agheila, Ras Lanuf, and smaller towns – straggling home and trying to make sense of what happened.
> 
> Their telephones don’t work, and their friends have scattered after fleeing Col. Gadhafi’s attacks,............




This next one is two days old in most media outlets, but is a good first hand account of what went on 
in that Tripoli hotel.

http://www.channel4.com/news/libya-a-womans-cry-for-help-in-tripoli-hotel



> Ordinarily, you might hope, that when a distressed young woman bursts into a public place claiming to have been repeatedly gang-raped at gunpoint, that she would be gently comforted, calmed down and her horrifying account of what had happened taken seriously.
> 
> But this is Gaddafi's Libya, and today I witnessed the shocking brutality of his regime and how it deals with those who dare dissent.
> 
> Eman al-Obeidi, who I’d judge to be in her mid-30s, burst into the dining room of the Tripoli hotel in which foreign journalists have been held under virtual house-arrest for the past two weeks.
> 
> She made her dramatic entrance as everyone was having breakfast. She started screaming: "Look what Gaddafi's militiamen have done to me" – and everyone in the room just froze.
> 
> We saw a government minder draw a gun from inside his jacket as waiting staff, suddenly showing their true colours, tried to silence her and get her out.......




Turkey offers to broker Libya ceasefire as rebels advance on Sirte
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/27/libya-turkey-mediators-prime-minister



> The Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has signalled that Turkey is ready to act as a mediator to broker an early ceasefire in Libya, as he warned that a drawn-out conflict risked turning the country into a "second Iraq" or "another Afghanistan" with devastating repercussions both for Libya and the Nato states leading the intervention.
> 
> In an exclusive interview with the Guardian, Erdogan said that talks were still under way with Muammar Gaddafi's government and the Transitional National Council. He also revealed that Turkey is about to take over the running of the rebel-held Benghazi harbour and airport to facilitate humanitarian aid, in agreement with Nato........


----------



## Edward Campbell

There is an argument for American/Western intervention in Libya and Fareed Zakaria makes it in this column, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from _Time_:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2058094,00.html


> The Libyan Conundrum
> 
> By FAREED ZAKARIA
> 
> Thursday, Mar. 10, 2011
> 
> If there is one lesson for U.S. foreign policy from the past 10 years, it is surely that military intervention can seem simple but is in fact a complex affair with the potential for unintended consequences. So I'm glad that the Obama Administration is studying all options on Libya. It is more important to arrive at a smart policy than to start shooting first and ask questions later.
> 
> Those who argue that we have no national-security interests in Libya are correct in the narrow sense. But the Libyan case represents a much larger issue. The Arab world is experiencing a genuine awakening. People in the region have lost faith in the old order. Whether they can actually overthrow the government, as they did in Egypt and Tunisia, or merely demand real reform, as in Jordan and the Gulf states, they are searching for a new political identity.
> 
> For the U.S., this presents a powerful opportunity. For decades, Arabs have regarded Washington as the enemy because it has been the principal supporter of the old order — creating a bizarre series of alliances in which the world's leading democracy has been yoked to the most reactionary forces on the planet. It has also produced a real national-security problem: the rise of Islamic terrorism. Al Qaeda's first argument against the U.S. is that it supports the tyrannies of the Arab world as they oppress their people.
> 
> Now the U.S. has the opportunity to break the dysfunctional dynamic that produces anti-American hatred and violence. The Obama Administration has properly aligned itself with the hopes and aspirations of the Arab people, and it has called for governments in the region to engage in serious reform. But right now all these efforts have been sidelined. Libya is burning. Its people rose, and the tyrant gunned them down. Unless something changes, Muammar Gaddafi and his sons will be able to reassert control over the country amid a mass slaughter of its civilians.
> 
> This would be a terrible outcome. President Obama has made it unambiguously clear that he wants Gaddafi to step down. The U.S. is actively seeking his ouster. To have him survive would be a humiliation for Washington at a moment and in a region where its words still have great impact. It would also send a disastrous signal to the other rulers of the region — in Syria, Algeria, Iran — that Mubarak made a mistake and that the way to stay in office is to engage in mass slaughter, scare the U.S. away and wait out the sanctions and isolation. America would lose its opportunity to align with the rising forces of the Arab world.
> 
> So the U.S. must follow through in its efforts to get Gaddafi out of office, pushing all diplomatic levers and seeking maximum multilateral support. It should ask the Libyan opposition for a public set of requests, so that Washington is seen as responding to Libyans, not imposing its will. If the Libyans request military assistance, Washington should move in that direction. I don't believe that a no-fly zone is a magic bullet. It is a high-profile policy that puts the U.S. military directly into the conflict but would actually make little difference. Gaddafi's main advantage is not in the air but on the ground. He has tanks, armored vehicles and massive firepower. The basic military question is hence how to shift the balance of power away from him and toward the rebels.
> 
> Over the past five decades, the U.S. has had very mixed results when it has intervened, by air or land, in other people's wars. But it has done pretty well when it has helped one side of the struggle. Arming rebels in Afghanistan, Central America and Africa has proved to be a relatively low-cost policy with high rates of success. Giving arms, food, logistical help, intelligence and other such tools to the Libyan opposition would boost its strength and give it staying power.
> 
> Once Gaddafi realizes that he is up against an endless supply of arms and ammunition, he will surely recalibrate his decisions. There have been reports that he floated the idea of leaving office as long as he is guaranteed safe passage. At a weak moment, he made a plea that he be treated like Britain's Queen or the King of Thailand, a figurehead with no powers.
> 
> Some worry that if we arm the rebels, things might turn out the way they did in Afghanistan, where the freedom fighters became Islamic jihadists and turned their sights on us. But that's not really what happened. After the Soviet defeat, the U.S. abandoned Afghanistan, leaving it open to Islamic jihadists backed by the Pakistani military. The better analogy is to Chechnya, where as the civil war continued, the rebels became more radical and Islamic fundamentalists jumped into the fight and soon became its leaders. The best way to prevent al-Qaeda from turning Libya into an area of strength would be to have the fighting end — with Gaddafi's defeat. So let's help the Libyan opposition do it.



This is a cogent, reasoned case for US intervention – it is in America’s _interests_ to do this. It is in Canada’s interests to be seen to be helping the US, quickly and without being asked. It is all about self interest.


----------



## dapaterson

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> There is an argument for American/Western intervention in Libya and Fareed Zakaria makes it in this column, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from _Time_:
> 
> http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2058094,00.html
> This is a cogent, reasoned case for US intervention – it is in America’s _interests_ to do this. It is in Canada’s interests to be seen to be helping the US, quickly and without being asked. It is all about self interest.



More importantly, it is in the US interest to support, not to lead, this effort.  A key distinction lost on some.


----------



## 57Chevy

shared in accordance with provisions of the Copyright Act

The Interim Transitional National Council
website http://ntclibya.org/english/ )

The council refers to the state as the Libyan Republic 

Aims and objectives of the national council

The "Declaration of the founding of the Transitional National Council" states the main aims of the council are as follows:
 - Ensure the safety of the national territory and citizens
 - Coordination of national efforts to liberate the rest of the Libya
 - Support the efforts of local councils to work for the restoration of normal civilian life
 - Supervise of the Military Council to ensure the achievement of the new doctrine of the Libyan People's Army in the
   defense of the people and protect the borders of Libya   
 - Facilitate the election of a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution for the country; be put to a popular referendum
 - Form a transitional government to pave the holding of free elections
 - Guide the conduct of foreign policy, and the regulation of relations with other countries and international and regional
   organizations, and the representation of the Libyan people


----------



## Bird_Gunner45

Here's a story for the Tin Foil hat types in the Crowd....


Reason for war? Gaddafi wanted to nationalise oil
25.03.2011

The Libyan leader proposed the nationalisation of U.S. oil companies, as well as those of UK, Germany, Spain, Norway, Canada and Italy in 2009. 

On January 25, 2009, Muammar Al Gaddafi announced that his country was studying the nationalisation of foreign companies due to lower oil prices. 

"The oil-exporting countries should opt for nationalisation because of the rapid fall in oil prices. We must put the issue on the table and discuss it seriously," said Gaddafi. 

"Oil should be owned by the State at this time, so we could better control prices by the increase or decrease in production," said the Libyan leader. 

These statements have worried the main foreign companies operating in Libya: Anglo-Dutch Shell, British Petroleum, U.S. ExxonMobil, Hess Corp., Marathon Oil, Occidental Petroleum and ConocoPhillips, the Spanish Repsol, Germany's Wintershall, Austria's OMV , Norway's Statoil, Eni and Canada's Petro Canada. 

In 2008, the Libyan state oil company, National Oil, prepared a report on the subject in which officials suggested modifying the production-sharing agreements with foreign companies in order to increase state revenues. 

As a result of these contract changes, Libya gained 5.4 billion dollars in oil revenues.

On February 16, 2009, Gaddafi took a step further and called on Libyans to back his proposal to dismantle the government and to distribute the oil wealth directly to the 5 million inhabitants of the country.


Share
Print version
   Font Size
Send to friend
However, his plan to deliver oil revenues directly to the Libyan people met opposition by senior officials who could lose their jobs due to a parallel plan by Gaddafi to rid the state of corruption. 

Some officials, including Prime Minister Al-Baghdadi, Ali Al-Mahmoudi and Farhat Omar Bin Guida, of the Central Bank, told Gaddafi that the measure could harm the country's economy in the long term due to "capital flight."

"Do not be afraid to directly redistribute the oil money and create fairer governance structures that respond to people's interests," Gaddafi said in a Popular Committee.

The Popular Committees are the backbone of Libya. Through them citizens are represented at the district level. 

"The Administration has failed and the state's economy has failed. Enough is enough. The solution is for the Libyan people to directly receive oil revenues and decide what to do with them," Gaddafi said in a speech broadcast on state television. To this end, the Libyan leader urged a radical reform of government bureaucracy. 

Despite this, senior Libyan government officials voted to delay Gaddafi's plans. Only 64 ministers from a total of 468 Popular Committee members voted for the measure. There were 251 who saw the measures as positive, but chose to delay their implementation.

Given the rejection of the Committee, Gaddafi affirmed before a public meeting: "My dream during all these years was to give the power and wealth directly to the people."

So...another big LIE falls by the wayside, the false image of Ghaddafi the dictator who robs from his people.

So far we have had pictures of pro-Ghaddafi demonstrations being portrayed as being against him. The professional, foreign and Photoshop nature of anti-Ghaddafi posters being bandied about were noted, along with signs being held upside down by people not knowing the alphabet placed on the signs.

We have had pictures of one sided battles where heavily armed terrorists are "fighting" with nobody. We have had reports, glaringly false, that Ghaddafi was fleeing the country.

We have had more than enough reports of bombings against his own people that never happened, as well as attacks against "unarmed civilians" that proved to be incorrect. It is patently obvious that there are no "unarmed civilians" involved in these actions against Ghaddafi, but CIA and other intelligence service mercenaries, foreign elements and Al Qaeda.

It has been brought to light that the living standard in Libya is the highest in Africa and that Libya was to be commended for its human rights record.

How many lies do we have to catch them in before somebody in charge buys a clue? It's no sale!

They try to portray Ghaddafi as crazy when he speaks of fighting Al Qaeda and now they have to admit it's true.

Two documents strongly back Gaddafi on this issue, according to the findings of Alexander Cockburn.

"The first is a secret cable to the State Department from the US embassy in Tripoli in 2008, part of the WikiLeaks trove, entitled, "Extremism in Eastern Libya," which revealed that this area is rife with anti-American, pro-jihad sentiment.

The second document, or rather set of documents, are the so-called Sinjar Records, captured al-Qaeda documents that fell into American hands in 2007. They were duly analysed by the Combating Terrorism Center at the US Military Academy at West Point. Al-Qaeda is a bureaucratic outfit and the records contain precise details on personnel, including those who came to Iraq to fight American and coalition forces and, when necessary, commit suicide.

The West Point analysts' statistical study of the al-Qaeda personnel records concludes that one country provided "far more" foreign fighters in per capita terms than any other: namely, Libya."

So who is the crazy one? Obviously that gang of lunatics savagely launching attacks on Libya based on the worst collection of lies in the history of the world. If you want to know where they are headed, just look at their track record, littered with genocide, theft and destruction.

More and more evidence is surfacing that this entire operation has been planned from outside (read U.S. and EU) for quite some time. First surround (Egypt and Tunisia), then invade. Wesley Clarke revealed the laundry list which included Libya.

In the U.S., there is a particulary motley group of interventionist war mongers who don't know what they're doing: Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton and Samantha Power, obviously sexually frustrated and repressed man hating lesbians who want to prove they are he-men.

We are also seeing attacks on residential areas, many civilians being killed. There have been attacks on Ghaddafi's living area, a clear attempt at assassination. Today intelligence also reports they plan a ground invasion. The fascists of the west never change. The term "humanitarian bombing" reminds of George Orwell doublespeak.

One can only heartily agree on Gaddafi's statement: They are "a group of crazy fascists that will end in the garbage dump of history."

History will surely judge them on the same page as Adolph Hitler.

　http://english.pravda.ru//hotspots/crimes/25-03-2011/117336-reason_for_war_oil-0/


----------



## vonGarvin

Wow, Godwin's law.  Anyway, I hate to go all "ad hominem", but....consider the source:

*PRAVDA*

I can only say this:


_*Это не правильно! *_


----------



## 57Chevy

Allied Message directed to Libyan ships in araibic and english
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6Zi6J7GbHA&feature=player_embedded


----------



## The Bread Guy

Yet another name for the operation under way:
*Operation Unified Protector Press Conference held at JFC Naples *


----------



## old medic

425 Squadron hits ammo depot
The Canadian Press
29 March 2011
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20110329/canadian-jets-hit-ammunition-depot-in-libya-110329/



> OTTAWA — Canadian CF-18s have flattened another ammunition depot in Libya.
> 
> And Canada's military has co-ordinated other coalition air raids over Libya involving up to 20 warplanes.
> 
> The military confirms that the fighter jets hit a reinforced bunker, 92 kilometres south of the battered city of Misrata, with 225-kilogram, laser-guided bombs.
> 
> It was the second ammunition dump taken out by the Canadian air contingent in a week.
> 
> Four Hornet jetfighters from 425 Squadron out of Bagotville, Quebec took part in the Sunday raid. ......




Libyan rebels push toward Gaddafi’s home town
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/libyan-rebels-push-toward-sirte-gaddafi-sends-reinforcements/2011/03/28/AFedisoB_story.html?hpid=z2


> RAS LANUF, Libya — Libyan rebels came under heavy fire as they pushed toward Moammar Gaddafi’s home town on the Mediterranean coast Monday, setting up a potentially crucial battle in the six-week-old uprising.........




U.S. deploys low-flying attack planes in Libya
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-deploys-low-flying-attack-planes-in-libya/2011/03/26/AF9grPqB_story.html?hpid=z2



> The U.S. military dramatically stepped up its assault on Libyan government ground forces over the weekend, launching its first missions with AC-130 flying gunships and A-10 attack aircraft designed to strike enemy ground troops and supply convoys.............




Libyan rebels stopped short of Surt
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-fighting-20110329,0,1882268.story


> Despite nine days of allied airstrikes, Moammar Kadafi's forces are putting up a stiff fight against opposition fighters east of Surt, Kadafi's birthplace.....




Fierce fighting roils city 'liberated' by Kadafi troops
In the Libyan city of Misurata, scenes of intense warfare greet foreign journalists arriving from Tripoli. Government officials hastily hustle the visitors out amid gunfire attributed to opposition supporters.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-misurata-20110329,0,1802951.story



> Reporting from Misurata, Libya—
> Government loyalists tried to show Monday that they had wrested control of the last major rebel-held enclave in western Libya, but a visit only underscored that ferocious fighting continued in the city.
> 
> It also showed how deeply Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi's forces were embedded within the heart of Misurata and how difficult it would be to dislodge them without risking civilian lives.
> 
> Libyan officials hustled international journalists onto a pair of buses Monday afternoon in Tripoli for a trip to what government spokesman Musa Ibrahim described as "liberated" Misurata, about 125 miles to the east.
> 
> Reporters were briefly taken to one location just inside the jittery, war-damaged city where plumes of smoke rose in the distance and automatic-weapons fire rattled continuously as dusk approached. A few dozen Kadafi supporters, including children, who had been shuttled in from outside the city in police pickup trucks were presented as Misurata residents.
> 
> Otherwise the streets were an abandoned, battle-scorched wasteland of broken glass and the detritus of warfare......


----------



## tomahawk6

Stratfor map showing the European oil operations in Libya. Map was posted by Rush Limbaugh otherwise it would be limited to Stratfor members.


----------



## Nemo888

A rather interesting BBC background piece on Gadaffi. There is a nice video of him supporting popular uprising against middle Eastern tyrants. It doesn't show his palaces or bevy of concubines though. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2011/03/goodies_and_baddies.html


----------



## The Bread Guy

Brit pilot shortage making it tough to staff next ROTO according to _The Telegraph_:


> Since the conflict began, a squadron of 18 RAF Typhoon pilots has enforced the Libya no-fly zone from an air base in southern Italy. However, a shortage of qualified fighter pilots means the RAF may not have enough to replace all of them when the squadron has to rotate in a few weeks.
> 
> The situation is so serious that the RAF has halted the teaching of trainee Typhoon pilots so instructors can be drafted on to the front line, according to air force sources. The handful of pilots used for air shows will also be withdrawn from displays this summer.
> 
> The shortage has arisen because cuts to the defence budget over the past decade have limited the number of pilots who have been trained to fly the new Typhoon.
> 
> There are also fewer newly qualified pilots coming through after the RAF was forced to cut a quarter of its trainee places due to cuts announced in last year’s Strategic Defence and Security Review ....


----------



## CougarKing

Qaddafi loyalist forces turn back the rebel advance...again:

link



> TRIPOLI (Reuters) - *Muammar Gaddafi's better armed and organised troops reversed the westward charge of Libyan rebels as world powers met in London on Tuesday to plot the country's future without the "brother leader."
> 
> Ahead of the conference, President Barack Obama told Americans in a televised address that U.S. forces would not get bogged down trying to topple Gaddafi, but he stopped short of spelling out how the military campaign in Libya would end.*
> The United States is scaling back to a "supporting role" to let NATO take full command from U.S. forces on Wednesday, but air strikes by U.S., French and British planes remain key to smashing Gaddafi's armor and facilitating rebel advances.
> 
> *It took five days of allied air strikes to pulverize Libyan government tanks around the town of Ajdabiyah before Gaddafi's troops fled and the rebels rushed in and began their 300-km (200-mile), two-day dash across the desert to within 80 km (50 miles) of the Gaddafi loyalist stronghold of Sirte.
> 
> But the rebel pick-up truck cavalcade was first ambushed, then outflanked by Gaddafi's troops. The advance stopped and government forces retook the small town of Nawfaliyah, 120 km (75 miles) east of Sirte.*
> 
> "The Gaddafi guys hit us with Grads (rockets) and they came round our flanks," Ashraf Mohammed, a 28-year-old rebel wearing a bandolier of bullets, told a Reuters reporter at the front.
> 
> REBELS ON THE RUN
> 
> The sporadic thud of heavy weapons could be heard as dozens of civilian cars sped eastwards away from the fight.
> 
> One man stopped his car to berate the rebels.
> 
> "Get yourselves up there and stop posing for pictures," he shouted, but met little response.
> 
> *Later, a hail of machinegun and rocket fire hit rebel positions. As the onslaught began, rebels leapt behind sand dunes to fire back but gave up after a few minutes, jumped into their pick-up trucks and sped off back down the road to the town of Bin Jawad. Shells landed near the road as they retreated.
> 
> Without air strikes it appears the rebels are not able to hold ground or make advances. The battle around Sirte, Gaddafi's birthplace, will show if the rebels have reached their limit.*
> 
> Reports that some Nawfaliyah residents had fought alongside government troops are an ominous sign for world powers hoping for a swift end to Gaddafi's 41-year rule.
> 
> Obama said he had no choice but to act to avoid "violence on a horrific scale" against the Libyan people.
> 
> Gaddafi accused Western powers of massacres of Libyan civilians in alliance with rebels he said were al Qaeda members.
> 
> "Stop your brutal and unjust attack on our country ... Hundreds of Libyans are being killed because of this bombardment. Massacres are being mercilessly committed against the Libyan people," he said in a letter to world leaders carried by Libya's official news agency.
> 
> "We are a people united behind the leadership of the revolution, facing the terrorism of al Qaeda on the one hand and on the other hand terrorism by NATO, which now directly supports al Qaeda," he said.
> 
> *The rebels deny any al Qaeda links and on Tuesday promised free and fair elections if Gaddafi is forced from power.*
> 
> More than 40 governments and international organisations met in London on Tuesday to set up a steering group, including Arab states, to provide political guidance for the response to the war and coordinate long-term support to Libya.
> 
> Both Britain and Italy suggested Gaddafi might be allowed to go into exile to bring a quick end to the six-week civil war, but the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said there was no evidence the Libyan leader was prepared to leave.
> 
> NO REGIME CHANGE MISSION
> 
> Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met the opposition Libyan National Council envoy Mahmoud Jebril before the London talks. A senior U.S. official said the two could discuss releasing $33 billion in frozen Libyan assets to the opposition.
> 
> *Such meetings also help Washington better understand the rebel leadership, its military forces and the problems they face, the official said, though Obama pledged once again that U.S. ground forces would not be deployed to help them out.
> 
> "We will deny the regime arms, cut off its supply of cash, assist the opposition and work with other nations to hasten the day when Gaddafi leaves power," Obama said, but the United States would not use force to topple him, as it had in the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.*
> 
> "To be blunt, we went down that road in Iraq," Obama said.
> 
> The United States though has not ruled out arming the rebels, ambassador Rice said.
> 
> "Over the long term, as the president said, there are other things that are at our disposal that perhaps will assist in speeding Gaddafi's exit," she told CBS television.
> 
> In western Libya, rebels and forces loyal to Gaddafi both claimed control over parts of Misrata and fighting appeared to persist in the fiercely contested city, Libya's third largest.
> 
> *Gaddafi's forces launched another attempt to seize control of Misrata on Tuesday, said a rebel spokesman in the city which has been under siege for more than a month.
> 
> Government troops "tried an hour ago to get into the town through the eastern gate. The youths are trying to push them back. Fighting is still taking place now. Random bombardment is continuing," the spokesman, called Sami, told Reuters by telephone from the city. "Eight civilians were killed and several others wounded last night."*
> 
> Another rebel spokesman, in Benghazi, said 124 civilians had been killed in the past nine days of fighting in Misrata, based on numbers obtained from hospitals in the city.
> 
> (Additional reporting by Angus MacSwan, Alexander Dziadosz, Edmund Blair, Maria Golovnina, Michael Georgy, Ibon Villelabeitia, Lamine Chikhi, Hamid Ould Ahmed, Marie-Louise Gumuchian, Andrew Quinn and David Brunnstrom; Writing by Jon Hemming; Editing by Giles Elgood)


----------



## tomahawk6

Rebels are being routed and the regime is picking up popular support.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Greeeeeeeat.........


> The mantra, from President Obama on down, is that ground forces are totally ruled out for Libya. After all, the United Nations Security Council Resolution authorizing the war explicitly rules out any “occupation” forces. But leave it to the top military officer of NATO, which takes over the war on Wednesday, to add an asterisk to that ban.
> 
> *During a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island asked Adm. James Stavridis about NATO putting forces into “post-Gadhafi” Libya to make sure the country doesn’t fall apart. Stavridis said he “wouldn’t say NATO’s considering it yet.” But because of NATO’s history of putting peacekeepers in the Balkans — as pictured above — “the possibility of a stabilization regime exists.”
> 
> So welcome to a new possible “endgame” for Libya. Western troops patrolling Libya’s cities during a a shaky transition after Moammar Gadhafi’s regime has fallen, however that’s supposed to happen. *Thousands of NATO troops patrolled Bosnia and Kosovo’s tense streets for years. And Iraq and Afghanistan taught the U.S. and NATO very dearly that fierce insurgent conflict can follow the end of a brutal regime. In fact, it’s the moments after the regime falls that can be the most dangerous of all — especially if well-intentioned foreign troops become an object of local resentment.
> 
> In fact, Stavridis told Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma that he saw “flickers of intelligence” indicating “al-Qaeda [and] Hezbollah” have fighters amongst the Libyan rebels. The Supreme Allied Commander of NATO noted that the leadership of the rebels are “responsible men and women struggling against Col. Gadhafi” and couldn’t say if the terrorist element in the opposition is “significant.” But the U.S. knows precious little about who the Libyan rebels are ....


No.  No.  No.  Please, no.


----------



## GAP

Time to bring in a battalion of troops (the US already has a ship with Marines on the way)....get this over with....they already have enough justification and authority from the Arab countries.....knock out Gaddafi's armed forces, turn it over to existing rebel alliance, and get on with life...


----------



## The Bread Guy

GAP said:
			
		

> Time to bring in a battalion of troops (the US already has a ship with Marines on the way)....get this over with....they already have enough justification and authority from the Arab countries.....knock out Gaddafi's armed forces, turn it over to existing rebel alliance, and get on with life...


A return engagement for the Marines to the "shores of Tripoli"?


----------



## tomahawk6

The rebels lack the logistics to sustain their campaign at least thats my read. Also the closer they get to the regime's strongholds they are going to be out numbered. As long as the no fly zone exists I think we will see a divided Libya with Gadaffi in the west and the rebels in the east.


----------



## GAP

> Gadaffi in the east and the rebels in the west.



Reverse those Tony


----------



## CougarKing

> *US Navy P-3C, USAF A-10 and USS Barry Engage Libyan Vessels*
> 
> 
> USS MOUNT WHITNEY, In Port, Mar 29, 2011 —  A U.S. Navy P-3C Maritime Patrol aircraft, a U.S. Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt attack aircraft and guided-missile destroyer USS Barry (DDG-52) engaged Libyan Coast Guard vessel Vittoria and two smaller crafts  after confirmed reports that Vittoria and accompanying craft were firing indiscriminately at merchant vessels in the port of Misratah, Libya, during the evening March 28, 2011.
> 
> *The P-3C fired at Vittoria with AGM-65F Maverick missiles after multiple explosions were observed in the vicinity of the port rendering the 12-meter patrol vessel ineffective and forcing it to be beached.Two small crafts were fired upon by an A-10 using its 30mm GAU-8/ Avenger Gatling cannon, destroying one and forcing the other to be abandoned.
> 
> Barry provided situational awareness for the aircraft by managing the airspace and maintaining the maritime picture.*
> 
> AFRICOM link


----------



## The Bread Guy

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> The rebels lack the logistics to sustain their campaign at least thats my read. Also the closer they get to the regime's strongholds they are going to be out numbered. As long as the no fly zone exists I think we will see a divided Libya with Gadaffi in the east west and the rebels in the west east.


Fixed that for you (thx GAP for the sharp eyes).

Meanwhile, Supreme Allied Commander and Commander, US European Command Stavridis on who's in charge - the short answer, via Twitter:


> #NATO is now in charge of ALL military operations in #Libya: Humanitarian, Arms Embargo, No-Fly Zone, and Protection of Civilians.


... and the longer version, via his blog:


> Not surprisingly, I’ve received a lot of questions about what is happening in Libya in both my capacity as Commander of the US European Command (USEUCOM) and as the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe (SACEUR).
> 
> Given the amount of interest, let me address the role of both USEUCOM and Allied Command Operations (ACO) in Libya – the former in a supporting role, the latter acting upon direction from the North Atlantic Council (NAC). Forgive me if this blog runs a little longer than most – we’ve got a lot to cover!
> 
> Allow me to underscore that in both cases – as a US Combatant Commander and as SACEUR – our purpose with respect to Libya is to support the United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR). The Resolution calls for humanitarian assistance; enforcement of the arms embargo; support of a no fly zone; and the protection of civilians. If you haven’t already, I encourage you to read the actual UNSCRs 1970 and 1973.
> 
> Now, let’s start with USEUCOM. As most of you know, the United States military is organized into geographic and functional Combatant Commands. The Combatant Command with the lead role in ongoing US military operations in Libya – titled Operation ODYSSEY DAWN – is the United States Africa Command (USAFRICOM), under the very able leadership of GEN Carter Ham. USEUCOM is involved in support of USAFRICOM.
> 
> “Alright, Admiral,” you might think to yourself. “What exactly does that mean?” To be more precise, some of the ways USEUCOM is providing support include manpower augmentation (e.g., intelligence, operations, public affairs, etc.), contingency planning, communications connectivity and infrastructure, logistical support at bases within the European theater, and basing/overflight rights. Overall, USEUCOM has helped to enable the effective execution of the operation in a complex and dynamic environment; however, USAFRICOM is the lead combatant command capably directing forces in support of Operation ODYSSEY DAWN.
> 
> Let’s turn next to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Of course, all NATO decisions are based on the consensus of the 28 member nations. Any decision is, therefore, the expression of the nations’ collective will. While numerous committees and groups exist to explore issues and guide discussion, the primary decision making body is the NAC, chaired by the NATO Secretary General and formed of Ambassadors, Defense Ministers, Foreign Ministers, or Heads of State and Government. In permanent session, NATO nations have Ambassadors in the NAC, also known as Permanent Representatives or PERMREPS.
> 
> As you’d expect, gaining consensus amongst 28 sovereign nations is not always a simple matter, but when it does occur, it is a very powerful expression of the collective will that I mentioned earlier. NATO has reacted to the crises in Libya with unprecedented speed. If you’re interested in learning more about how NATO works, there’s a good interactive introduction to the organization here.
> 
> On March 22, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen announced the NAC’s agreement to enforce the UN-mandated arms embargo on Libya within the context of UNSCRs 1970 and 1973. NATO operations for Libya have been named Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR. Under the scope of UNIFIED PROTECTOR, NATO is authorized to enforce the arms embargo and the no-fly-zone (NFZ). This was just five days after the UNSCR passed.
> 
> The arms embargo mission is focused on assisting the international community to reduce the flow of arms and material into and from Libya in order to reduce acts of aggression against the Libyan civilian population. Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR will assist in reducing the flow of arms, related material and mercenaries to and from the coastal waters off Libya only. NATO nation ships and aircraft will conduct operations to monitor, report and, if needed, interdict vessels and intercept aircraft where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that they are carrying cargo in violation of the arms embargo or suspected of carrying illegal arms or mercenaries. This is being conducted in close coordination with international maritime authorities, commercial shipping, and regional organizations to ensure the free flow of legitimate shipping to and from Libya.
> 
> As for the NFZ, it was originally initiated by a coalition of primarily NATO countries coordinating under Operation ODYSSEY DAWN. It quickly became apparent that NATO is uniquely qualified to assume leadership of the NFZ, bringing both capabilities through its members’ military commitments and coherence through NATO’s well established command and control structure. As we have seen in Kosovo, Afghanistan, operations supporting counter-piracy and other missions, NATO has the experience and expertise to lead this effort. On March 24, the NAC took the next step to approve enforcement of the NFZ, which puts NATO in that leadership role, just seven days after the UNSCR.
> 
> And finally, just last night, NATO Allies decided to take on the whole military operation in Libya, ten days after the UNSCR. As defined by the United Nations Security Council Resolution, our goal is to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under threat of attack. NATO will implement all aspects of the UN Resolution ....


Making sense?  ;D


----------



## a_majoor

US Interests?:

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2011/03/30/Libya-Whats-Really-behind-the-US-Action.aspx?p=1



> *Libya: What’s Really Behind the U.S. Action*
> By LIZ PEEK, The Fiscal Times March 30, 2011
> 
> Self interest is at the core of diplomacy. Therefore, the acknowledged lack of apparent U.S. self interest in containing Gaddafi’s troops in Libya has led some to question our military intervention in that country. Last night President Obama defended our engagement in Libya, suggesting that the United States is “different” from those countries that can stand by and witness atrocities; unlike others, Mr. Obama said, we have a moral mandate to protect innocent citizens. Naturally, we are led to wonder whether that same obligation extends to Syria or to Bahrain, or to any other country where a desperate government decides to slaughter its own people.
> 
> Is there something that President Obama is not telling us? Is it possible that we have a greater vested interest in squashing Gaddafi’s belligerence than we are letting on? Could it be that Gaddafi’s reported threats to bomb his country’s oilfields lit the fuse under the leaders of France and Britain who all but shamed us into climbing aboard? Or was it Gaddafi’s prediction that a flood of immigrants would “swamp” Europe that aroused Sarkozy’s energies?
> 
> It is possible that the U.S. is more vulnerable to chaos in Libya than is generally known. Our economic recovery is hanging by a thread — a thread which weaves through the EU and also through Asia. Our modest recovery has been threatened repeatedly — by the government debt crisis in Europe last year and more recently by the tsunami in Japan. Rising oil prices and the prospect of more wide-spread inflation appears to be taking a toll. The recent swoon in consumer confidence presages a fall-off in all-important spending while the housing numbers continue dismal.
> 
> Europe’s leaders might have convinced Obama that Gaddafi’s threats to attack oilfields or create chaos through disruptive immigration could sow the seeds of a double dip in Europe.
> 
> As important as the consumer is in the U.S., it is also essential that our major export markets remain healthy. As in our country, the OECD members are challenged by fiscal difficulties and more recently by inflation. Consumer prices rose 2.4 percent in the OECD in February — the highest rate of increase since October 2008. Concerns about price hikes are likely fueling anxiety among consumers in Europe as well as in the U.S.
> 
> All of these developments mean that the upturn from the banking crisis remains fragile. Fed Chair Ben Bernanke repeatedly has used this uncertainty to argue for the quantitative easing program (QE2) that many view as dangerously encouraging inflation. Bottom line: It is not a stretch to imagine that Europe’s leaders might have convinced President Obama that Gaddafi’s threats to attack oil fields or create chaos through disruptive immigration could sow the seeds of a double dip in Europe.
> 
> They could have made the case that a slump would have pulled the U.S. down as well — the worst of all possible preludes to the 2012 election for Mr. Obama. Were that case made, it is equally believable that Obama would engage all possible measures to thwart such a development.
> 
> In Europe, Italy is especially vulnerable to threats by Gaddafi to bomb his own oilfields and to unleash a massive wave of illegal immigrants. Because of its location, that country is already dealing with the exodus of large numbers of Tunisians and would be the natural entry point for Libyans as well. Italy, like other countries in the E.U., is already struggling and in no position to support a wave of dependent newcomers. At the same time, Italy has sizeable economic interests in its former colony — its state-owned oil company is the largest in the North African nation.
> 
> Libya supplies 13 percent of Italy’s oil and 23 percent of its natural gas. Gaddafi has warned that such interests are at risk.
> 
> Italy is the single largest source of Libyan imports, accounting for nearly 19 percent of the country’s annual $24 billion outlays. Moreover, total imports into Libya have more than doubled in the past five years — a tempting market indeed. Libyan investors own sizeable shares of some of Italy’s leading companies such as banking giant UniCredit, Fiat and defense supplier Finmeccanica. Further, Libya supplies 13 percent of Italy’s oil and 23 percent of its natural gas. Gaddafi has warned that such interests are at risk.
> 
> Because of its economic entanglements with Libya, the leaders of Italy were initially reluctant to support the military intervention so eagerly pursued by England and France. In fact, at a time when others on the continent were criticizing the government in Tripoli, Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said he would not “bother” his close friend Gaddafi. Less than a year before, Berlusconi had hosted Gaddafi at a state dinner and ordered warplanes to draw a Libyan flag in the sky. More recently, the embattled leader revoked his country’s friendship agreement with Gaddafi.
> 
> The Italians are not alone in prizing stable relations with Libya. Though Libya accounts for only about 2 percent of total world oil production, it supplies some 23 percent of Ireland’s oil; for France the figure is 16 percent. Sarkozy staged a grand reception for the Libyan dictator in 2007.
> 
> While many E.U. countries consume Libyan oil, several are also nervous about increasing numbers of illegal immigrants. Germany’s reluctance to sign on for the UN resolution may reflect its wariness on this front. Germany is reported to have nearly 600,000 illegal immigrants; this population has become a touchy political issue across the continent.
> 
> This account will not be alone in questioning the motives of those eager to displace Gaddafi. The Chinese, who abstained from the Security Council vote authorizing the establishment of a no-fly zone, have hinted that the West is after Gaddafi’s oil. That claim resonates; after all, Libya is home to the 9th largest oil reserve cache in the world, amounting to 47 billion barrels.
> 
> The Chinese, it is fair to say, are experts in analyzing self-interest. And, there are numerous other reasons for the leaders of France and England to have pushed so hard for this engagement with Libya. Sarkozy was smarting from his administration’s ties to the former head of Tunisia, and England’s Cameron would like nothing better than to distract his restive populace from his government’s austerity measures. Still, the determination of these two politicians to enter into armed conflict raises doubts that we are getting the whole story.


----------



## 57Chevy

shared in accordance with provisions of the Copyright Act

AFP 30 March 2011
US, Britain insert covert agents into Libya: reports
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hXor75Rd_hg9mXsaTzweY5oMOIeg?docId=CNG.1c55d652e61ad9ac029d2769b1927b97.c81

WASHINGTON — The United States and Britain have inserted covert intelligence agents into Libya to make contact with rebels and to gather data to guide coalition air strikes, a report said Wednesday.

The White House refused to comment on the apparent shadow war in Libya, and also declined to discuss another report that President Barack Obama had signed a secret order allowing Central Intelligence Agency operations in the country.

article continues at link


----------



## CougarKing

> link
> 
> 
> *CIA sends teams of operatives to Libya; US considering 'all types' of help for rebels*
> 
> By Adam Goldman,Donna Cassata, The Associated Press | The Canadian Press – 37 minutes ago
> WASHINGTON - *The CIA has sent small teams of operatives into Libya and helped rescue a crew member of a U.S. fighter jet that crashed, and the White House said Wednesday it was assessing "all types of assistance" for rebels battling Moammar Gadhafi's troops.*
> Battlefield setbacks are hardening the U.S. view that the poorly equipped opposition probably is incapable of prevailing without decisive Western intervention, a senior U.S. intelligence official told The Associated Press.
> 
> Lawmakers, in private briefings with top Obama administration officials, asked tough questions about the cost of the military operation and expressed concern about the makeup of the rebels.
> 
> Members of Congress quoted officials as saying the U.S. military role would be limited, and heard President Barack Obama's director of national intelligence compare the rebel forces to a "pick-up basketball team."
> 
> "No decision has been made about providing arms to the opposition or to any groups in Libya," said White House press secretary Jay Carney. "We're not ruling it out or ruling it in."
> 
> The CIA's precise role in Libya is not clear. Intelligence experts said the CIA would have sent officials to make contact with the opposition and assess the strength and needs of the rebel forces in the event Obama decided to arm them.
> 
> (...)


----------



## old medic

Kadafi aide flees to Britain and quits
Libyan Foreign Minister Musa Kusa may give Western intelligence agencies a better picture of what is going on behind the scenes.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-kusa-20110331,0,579548.story

By Borzou Daragahi, Los Angeles Times
March 31, 2011




> A high-ranking member of Moammar Kadafi's entourage has dealt a serious blow to the Tripoli regime by abandoning his post and fleeing to Britain, where he stepped off a military plane Wednesday and announced his resignation.
> 
> Musa Kusa, Libya's foreign minister and former longtime intelligence chief, had long served as a top member of the Kadafi family's inner circle.
> 
> His apparent defection will give Western intelligence agencies a clearer picture of what is going on behind the scenes. He could provide information on whether there are further fractures within the regime's elite, as well as describing the mood and identifying the doubters and the stalwarts...................


----------



## old medic

http://www.combatcamera.forces.gc.ca/netpub/server.np?find&catalog=news&template=news-nouvelles_detail_eng.np&field=itemid&op=matches&value=853&site=combatcamera

Video Link, Combat Camera , CF-18 hits ammo depot


----------



## old medic

Kadafi government rebuffs Libya rebel cease-fire offer

After rebels refused for weeks to negotiate with Moammar Kadafi's regime, a rebel leader offers a cease-fire if Kadafi agrees to withdraw his forces from besieged cities and permit peaceful protests.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-20110402,0,6826191.story
By Borzou Daragahi and David Zucchino, Los Angeles Times
April 1, 2011

Reporting from Tripoli and Benghazi, Libya—


> Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi's regime brusquely swatted down a truce offered by rebels Friday and continued to pummel opposition positions in both the eastern and western sections of the country.
> 
> After rebels had refused for weeks to negotiate with Kadafi's government, the leader of the opposition's national council, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, offered a cease-fire if Kadafi agreed to withdraw his forces from besieged Libyan cities and permitted peaceful protests.
> 
> But Musa Ibrahim, a spokesman for the regime, dismissed the offer as a trick...............


----------



## observor 69

Play audio file:  CIA flight out of Luqa Malta, Lockheed 382G tail nr N3796B on April 1st 2011 08:00 GMT
about 12 hours ago


http://audioboo.fm/boos/319143-cia-flight-out-of-luqa-malta-lockheed-382g-tail-nr-n3796b-on-april-1st-2011-08-00-gmt


----------



## CougarKing

link



> *NATO airstrike kills Libyan rebels: reports*
> 
> *NATO is investigating reports from Libyan rebels that a coalition airstrike killed 10 rebel fighters near Brega.
> 
> Rebels said Saturday that a NATO warplane struck a rebel position, about 20 kilometres east of Brega, that was firing into the air near the eastern front line of the battle with Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi's forces. The strike happened Friday night, they said. *
> Mohammad Bedrise, a doctor in a nearby hospital, said three burned bodies had been brought in by men who said they had been hit after firing a heavy machine gun in the air in celebration.
> 
> Idris Kadiki, a 38-year-old mechanical engineer, said he had seen an ambulance and three cars burning after an airstrike.
> 
> NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu said the coalition was looking into the reports.
> 
> On Saturday, Libyan government forces killed six civilians in the city of Misrata in an unrelenting campaign of shelling and sniper fire aimed at driving rebels from the main city they hold in western Libya, medical officials said.
> 
> Better discipline
> 
> *The loosely organized rebel force had been acting in a more disciplined fashion in recent days. On Friday, only former military officers and the lightly trained volunteers serving under them were allowed on the front lines.
> 
> Some were recent arrivals, hoping to rally against forces loyal to the Libyan leader who have pushed rebels back about 160 kilometres this week. *
> The better organized fighters, unlike some of their predecessors, can tell the difference between incoming and outgoing fire. They know how to avoid sticking to the roads, a weakness in the untrained forces that Gadhafi's troops have exploited. And they know how to take orders.
> 
> The greater organization was a sign that military forces that split from the regime to join the rebellion were finally taking a greater role in the fight after weeks trying to organize. Fighters cheered Friday as one of their top commanders — Abdel-Fattah Younis, the former interior minister — drove by in a convoy toward the front.
> 
> It was too early to say if the improvements will tip the fight in the rebels' favour. They have been struggling to exploit the opportunity opened by international airstrikes hammering Gadhafi's forces since March 19.
> 
> Lately, according to rebels, Gadhafi supporters have caused confusion by infiltrating opposition forces, Borzou Daragahi of the Los Angeles Times told CBC News.
> 
> *Rebel propose ceasefire condition
> 
> In a sign the airstrikes may be eroding Gadhafi's resilience, his government is trying to hold talks with the U.S., Britain and France in hopes of ending the air campaign, said Abdul-Ati al-Obeidi, a former Libyan prime minister who has served as a Gadhafi envoy during the crisis.
> 
> "We are trying to find a mutual solution," he told Britain's Channel 4 News on Friday. *  British officials met with Mohammed Ismail, a Libyan government aide who happened to be in London visiting relatives, and told him Gadhafi must quit, two people familiar with the issue said Friday.
> 
> The two demanded anonymity to discuss details.
> 
> The opposition said Friday in Benghazi, its de facto capital, that it will agree to a ceasefire if Gadhafi pulls his military forces out of cities and allows peaceful protests against his regime.
> 
> The rebel condition is that "the Gadhafi brigades and forces withdraw from inside and outside Libyan cities to give freedom to the Libyan people to choose," said Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, head of the opposition's interim governing council. "The world will see that they will choose freedom."


----------



## CobraBalls

After reading this ---> http://www.presstv.ir/detail/167704.html

 I wondered what events would need to unfold to actually see U.N. peace keepers in Libya, more specifically, Canadian peace keepers. Assuming the Harper government is voted back in coupled with a Canadian Air Force General currently in command over there and both sides showing no signs of backing down, I wonder if it is indeed possible? We are pulling out of Afghanistan too, which would free up some resources one would assume?... Perhaps even another NATO ISAF deployment?? 

I would love to hear feedback from anyone since I don't really dont have a clear understanding U.N. processies.


----------



## Sizzle709

I think we might actually take a year off after Afghanistan to recompose ourselves and prepare for another conflict. The way that Obama namely has handled the whole situation so far has been brilliant. The airstrikes are working and the coalition are well on their way to getting rid of Ghadafi. It should only be a matter of months now before he steps down or is killed. Just have to play the waiting game.

Sudan on the other hand... Maybe, Just maybe.


----------



## medicineman

The last time we got involved with a civil war with the UN, things didn't bode too well...to answer the question, there would have a to be a UN Security Council Resolution, then the  host country would have to agree to have the soldiers there (one of the multitude of reasons we're not in the Sudan), courntries would have to agree to send troops, and a host of other issues - rules of engagement, a defined and enforceable mandate (the UN is often good at taking the most absolute thing and making it wishy washy and totally ambiguous) and an exit plan.  My question back would be - why should there be UN peacekeeping troops in Libya at this time and what would they be doing?  Do you think that, given how cheap the UN is about how many people they send to do the job, that they would be able to enforce a mandate against a determined foe?  Wouldn't it be better for a green hatted, Arab League force to go there, robust in size and ROE, much like the African Union insists for trying to settle it's own problems?  The days of Targets for Peace is pretty much over - it looks cool, but in reality, the mandates are rarely enforceable due to personnel constraints put on the forces by New York and nothing really gets accomplished.

 :2c:

MM


----------



## OldSolduer

Its a civil war on the continent of Africa. Africans in general don't like "whitey" meddling in their affairs.

Somalia, Rwanda, The Congo. None of those turned out well.

Its an Arab and African issue. I think we should stay out.


----------



## Jed

IMO, because the Western world, which includes Canada, is not very well appreciated by the majority of the warring tribes in Africa; we should just picket and bypass. The only good reason, other than to help our fellow man, which is negated by the lack of acceptance from Africa, is to have 'Eyes on' in case we have another Osama Bin Laden situation develop.


----------



## Rheostatic

I believe the UN brand requires cooperation from both sides and a peace to "keep". Anyways...





			
				http://www.montrealgazette.com/Canadian+boots+ground+Libya+Harper/4538675/story.html said:
			
		

> No Canadian 'boots on the ground' in Libya, Harper vows
> 
> By Mark Kennedy, Postmedia News March 31, 2011
> 
> HALIFAX — Prime Minister Stephen Harper declared Thursday that Canada will not send ground troops into Libya — even though he sees a clear need to depose that country's ruler, Moammar Gadhafi.
> 
> Read more: http://www.canada.com/Canadian+boots+ground+Libya+Harper+vows/4538675/story.html#ixzz1IOlm3B3Z


----------



## a_majoor

Getting sucked into the vortex. Whatever happened to selection and maintainence of the aim?

http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/04/02/eu-to-put-boots-on-the-ground-in-libya/



> *EU to put boots on the ground in Libya?*
> 
> As the US is pulling away from Libya, the EU seems to be getting in.
> 
> The European Council on Friday approved the decision to mount an EU military operation to support humanitarian efforts in Libya, if asked to do so by the United Nations.
> 
> “The EU will, if requested by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), conduct a military operation in…order to support humanitarian assistance in the region,” the council statement read.
> 
> “The aim of the operation would be to contribute to the safe movement and evacuation of displaced persons and to support the humanitarian agencies in their activities with specific capabilities,” it said.
> 
> If I’m reading that right, the EU’s mission is half Dunkirk, half Peace Corps. It also appears to be a sign that Gaddafi will get to hang around a while longer.


----------



## cavalryman

Heiß über Afrikas Boden die Sonne glüht.
    Unsere Panzermotoren singen ihr Lied!
    Deutsche Panzer im Sonnenbrand,
    Stehen zum Kampf gegen England Gadaffi
    Es rasseln die Ketten, es dröhnt der Motor,
    Panzer rollen in Afrika vor! 

 :


----------



## old medic

Libyan rebels seek to bring order to chaotic ranks
Opposition forces trying to hold the front line against Moammar Kadafi's army try to bring discipline and order to their efforts. But panic ensues as they come under rocket attack.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-rebels-20110402,0,2651425.story
02 April 2011



> Libyan rebels began their Friday with new discipline as they hauled up antitank rockets, imposed rigorous checkpoints and assigned fighters to strategic locations along their front line against Moammar Kadafi's forces in eastern Libya.
> 
> But the effort began to unravel by afternoon as scores of unannounced fighters descended on the battlefield and a high-profile visit by one of the acting heads of the rebel army brought a cluster of gunmen around his vehicle, who then fired their Kalashnikov rifles wildly in the air.
> 
> Finally, panic ensued as they came under rocket fire from government forces, and scores of rebels abandoned their positions and once more retreated down the highway in disarray.
> 
> The back-and-forth on the battlefield hints at a long fight ahead between Kadafi's army and the rebels, who began their uprising six weeks ago.
> 
> Libya is now divided in all but name between the rebels in the east and Kadafi in the west........





Libya rebels just learning how to use their guns
Young, inexperienced fighters have left jobs and families to battle Moammar Kadafi's forces. The rebels don't want to end up like their parents, trapped in a police state. But some shoot more photos than bullets.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-rebels-portrait-20110404,0,3750535.story
03 April 2011


> He had the tough, focused bearing of a combat veteran. Tall and powerfully built, he wore form-fitting camouflage fatigues, sunglasses and combat boots. A Kalashnikov assault rifle was slung across his chest.
> 
> Meet Hussam Bernwi, insect exterminator. He drove his pest control truck to the front. He's 36 and never been to war before. His newly purchased weapon was dangling from a strap because he needed both hands to videotape battle scenes for the folks back home.........







Libyan envoy takes Gaddafi message to Greece
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-rt-international-us-libtre7270jp-20110308,0,886341.story



> TRIPOLI (Reuters) - A Libyan government envoy has begun a trip to Europe to discuss an end to fighting, but gave no sign of any major climbdown in a war that has ground to a stalemate between rebels and forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi.
> 
> Libyan Deputy Foreign Minister Abdelati Obeidi flew to Athens on Sunday carrying a personal message from Gaddafi to Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou that Libya wanted the fighting to end, a Greek government official told Reuters.
> 
> "It seems that the Libyan authorities are seeking a solution," Foreign Minister Dimitris Droutsas told reporters, adding Obeidi was next due to due travel to Malta and Turkey........


----------



## old medic

Libyan rebels retake much of key oil town
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110404/libya-rebels-control-brega-gadhafi-envoy-europe-trip-110404/


> BREGA, Libya — Libyan rebels on Monday took back much of a strategic oil town that has repeatedly changed hands in weeks of battles with Moammar Gadhafi's forces along the nation's northern coast.
> 
> There were bursts of artillery and shelling from Gadhafi's forces in the west as rebels pushed into eastern sections of the town. Women and children were seen fleeing Brega as the battle raged.
> 
> "New Brega is under control of our forces and we are mopping up around the university," said Lt. Muftah Omar Hamza, a former member of Libya's air force who had a satellite phone and a GPS around his neck.
> 
> Brega stretches out over several miles of the coast and is concentrated in three main sections: New Brega, a largely residential area on the east end; West Brega, which includes a refinery and housing for oil workers; and a university between them. West Brega was still contested.
> 
> The uprising that began in February against Gadhafi's 42-year rule has reached a stalemate, with a series of towns along one stretch of Mediterranean coastline passing back and forth multiple times between the two sides. Though the regime's forces are more powerful and plentiful, they have been unable to decisively defeat a poorly equipped and badly organized rebel force backed by NATO airstrikes that have kept the Gadhafi loyalists in check.
> 
> Rebel forces made up of defected army units and armed civilians have seized much of Libya's eastern coast, but have been unable to push westward toward the capital, Tripoli. Two rebel advances on Sirte, a Gadhafi stronghold on the road to Tripoli, were cut well short, and government forces pushed the opposition back 160 kilometres or more after each attempt. Rebels were hoping for more this time. ....





Italy Recognizes Libyan Rebel Council
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/africa/Libyan-Rebels-Make-Gains-in-Key-Oil-Town-119199809.html



> Italy has become the third nation to declare the Libyan rebel interim council as the only legitimate government in the North African country, dealing a blow to separate diplomatic efforts by Moammar Gadhafi's government, as well as by two of his sons.
> 
> In Rome Monday, Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said Italy has decided to recognize the Transitional National Council as the only legitimate representative of the Libyan people.  He said Italy plans to send an envoy to the eastern city of Benghazi - where the rebels' government is based - within days.
> 
> Italy follows France and Qatar in recognizing the rebel council.  Frattini welcomed rebel envoy Ali al-Essawi, who said an idea to replace Mr. Gadhafi with one of his sons is unacceptable.
> 
> The New York Times reported that at least two of the Libyan leader's sons have proposed Mr. Gadhafi relinquish power for a transition to constitutional democracy under the direction of his son, Seif al-Islam Gadhafi.
> 
> But government spokesman Mussa Ibrahim said Monday that while Libya is ready for a "political solution" with world powers, Mr. Gadhafi's future is non-negotiable.  He said Libya could have "elections, referendums, anything" - but that Mr. Gadhafi must lead any political transition.
> 
> State television showed the Libyan leader briefly waving to supporters Monday outside his compound in Tripoli.  It was Mr. Gadhafi's first public appearance in more than a week.
> 
> In Ankara, acting Libyan Foreign Minister Abdul-Ati al-Obeidi held talks with senior Turkish officials on brokering a cease-fire with opposition forces.  Turkey said it expects to host representatives from the rebel national council in the next few days........


----------



## sean m

Considering that Fidel Castro could potentially be losing another key alley of his in  Muammar  Gaddafi. Even though: Brazil Argentina, Venezuela, Iran, New Zealand, Iran, China still remain diplomatic relations with his country. Yet this potential lose could impact the Cuban economy since the Cubans will not have a significant ally in that region.  Castro does seem to be attempting to have more dialogue with The United States recently with Jimmy Carter there. Possibly this change in rule of government in Libya could have an impact on the political situation in Cuba. Here is the article concerning Jimmy Carter in Cuba. 

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/35134


----------



## old medic

PM boost Libya jet numbers at Italian base
(AFP) 



> GIOIA DEL COLLE, Italy — Prime Minister David Cameron made a surprise visit Monday to the Italian base hosting British jets enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya, and announced four more planes for the mission.
> 
> Flying into Gioia del Colle in southern Italy, he said Britain would be deploying four new Tornado jets "in the next couple of days" to boost the NATO-led mission to protect civilians from Moamer Kadhafi's forces.
> 
> "Which will mean we will have 10 Typhoons for the mission in terms of the no-fly zone and we'll have a total of 12 Tornado ground attack aircraft involved in operations," he told reporters travelling with him.
> 
> Cameron said his brief visit was intended to give him an opportunity to congratulate the Typhoon and Tornado pilots and their crews on "an incredible job".
> 
> In his first trip to the military base since the operation, Cameron said the British jets had saved "literally thousands of lives in Benghazi and elsewhere in Libya".
> 
> "The whole country should be proud of what they've done. They've responded incredibly quickly, they've flown many sorties, they've been extremely successful in holding back Kadhafi's forces," he told reporters.
> 
> "Just over the weekend they have destroyed ten armoured vehicles and three tanks and they have flown a huge number of missions very rapidly and, as ever, very brilliantly."
> 
> Cameron was due to have a cup of tea with some of the pilots and view the planes during his brief visit, as well as receive a briefing on the operation.
> 
> The British jets have been at Gioia del Colle since the day after military action against pro-regime forces began on March 19, and have flown more than 70 combat sorties, officials said.


----------



## a_majoor

So who are these rebels we are flying air strikes for anyway?

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/cut-gaddafis-throat-then-establish-an-islamic-state/?print=1



> *Libyan Rebel Commander: ‘Cut Gaddafi’s Throat, Then Establish an Islamic State’*
> 
> Posted By John Rosenthal On April 4, 2011 @ 2:02 pm In Africa,Culture,Libya,Media,Politics,Religion,World News | 31 Comments
> 
> “The Jihadists Go to the Front.” This is the title of French journalist Julien Fouchet’s report [1] from eastern Libya that appears in the latest edition of the French Sunday paper Le Journal du Dimanche (JDD). Whereas American officials have been straining to make out “flickers” of intelligence suggesting a jihadist influence in the eastern Libyan rebellion against the rule of Muammar al-Gaddafi, Fouchet encountered a flagrant jihadist presence and met with participants who talked openly about their dedication to jihad and/or their desire to establish an Islamic state.
> 
> On the front near the oil-producing town of Brega, for instance, Fouchet spotted a bearded commander on a sand dune giving orders by satellite phone. The man wore the traditional robe favored by the Salafist current of Islamic fundamentalism and had a Kalashnikov slung over his shoulder. “You can’t speak to him,” rebel fighters told Fouchet. “He is not fighting for Libya. If he is fighting today, it’s for Allah.” Fouchet describes seeing imams driving among the ranks of the rebel fighters in a pick-up truck and reciting prayers over a loudspeaker.
> 
> Further to the east in Darnah, one of the strongholds of the rebellion, Fouchet met a certain Sheikh Choukri Al-Hasy, the director of the town’s principal mosque: the al-Sahaba mosque. As previously reported on PJM [2], according to captured al-Qaeda personnel records, Darnah furnished more foreign fighters to al-Qaeda in Iraq than any other foreign city or town — this despite the fact that the town’s total population is only 80,000. According to Fouchet’s account, the mosque contains a mausoleum where some 70 companions of the prophet Mohammed are reputedly buried. Seventeen rebel fighters are now buried nearby. “Those who followed the prophet Mohammed were the first jihadists,” Al-Hasy explained. “So, it’s normal that we are burying our martyrs next to them….”
> 
> Photos taken by Fouchet for the French photo agency Abaca Press show a wall of the mosque covered with portraits of the town’s “martyrs.” The captions to the Abaca Press images reveal a detail that is not mentioned in Fouchet’s JDD report. The “martyrs” commemorated at Darnah’s Al-Sahaba mosque also include locals who died fighting in Iraq. (Thumbnails of the Abaca Press photos are viewable here [3].)
> 
> In Darnah, Fouchet also spoke to a rebel commander whom he identifies as “Hakim al-Sadi.” The commander in question is presumably in fact Abdul-Hakim al-Hasadi, who, as reported on PJM [4], has admitted to fighting on the side of al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, as well as to recruiting Libyans to fight with al-Qaeda in Iraq. The biographical details attributed by Fouchet to “al-Sadi” correspond to the known details of the biography of al-Hasadi. These include his settling in Afghanistan prior to the 9/11 terror attacks and the subsequent American-led invasion, his detention by American forces in Pakistan in 2002, and his transfer to and imprisonment in his home country Libya.
> 
> Interestingly, Fouchet says that he spoke to “al-Sadi” as the latter was “leaving for the front to coordinate operations.” “In the past,” the rebel commander told Fouchet, “I didn’t like NATO. They fired missiles on Afghanistan. Now that they are helping us in Libya, it’s different. But if there are problems with them, if they begin to occupy our country, we can turn on them in the click of your fingers.”
> 
> As to his goals, “al-Sadi” explained to Fouchet that he had rejoined the jihad in order to “cut Gaddafi’s throat and establish an Islamic state.” Libyan government claims that al-Hasadi had declared an “Islamic emirate” in Darnah have been widely dismissed as propaganda by Western observers.
> 
> Article printed from Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com
> 
> URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/cut-gaddafis-throat-then-establish-an-islamic-state/
> 
> URLs in this post:
> 
> [1] Julien Fouchet’s report: http://www.lejdd.fr/International/Afrique/Actualite/Al-Qaida-s-implique-en-Libye-293649/?from=headlines
> 
> [2] reported on PJM: http://pajamasmedia.com../../../../../blog/saving-the-libyan-islamists/
> 
> [3] here: http://www.eastnews.pl/pictures/result?phrase=fouchet&news
> 
> [4] as reported on PJM: http://pajamasmedia.com../../../../../blog/rebel-commander-in-libya-fought-against-u-s-in-afghanistan/



and the inevitable fallout:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/print/news/world/2011/04/america-may-be-involved-libya-many-years-experts-say



> *America may be involved in Libya for many years, experts say*
> 
> The United States is in Libya for the long haul, whether the Obama administration likes it or not, and weeding out al Qaeda infiltrators from the opposition bent on taking over control of the country from strongman Moammar Gadhafi will be an enormous challenge, experts said.
> 
> Bruce Riedel, a former CIA officer and senior adviser to three U.S. presidents on Middle East and South Asian issues, told The Examiner that "mission creep" is almost a certainty in Libya.
> 
> He said the United States and NATO should twist the arms of opposition leaders to force al Qaeda out of their coalition, if they want to be supplied with weapons and aid from allies. "We have to recognize, whether we like it or not, we own this problem now," said Riedel, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "The notion that you can intervene and walk away from it is very disingenuous," said Riedel. "Half measures are likely to produce failed outcomes. As much as the administration wants to reassure this is no major operation, it is. Once you're in it's very difficult to get out."
> 
> Al Qaeda is raiding Libya's vast weapon coffers, according to news reports from the region, making it more critical that extremist elements are kept from gaining more strength within the loose confederation of opposition groups in that country, experts said. Gadhafi's stockpile includes surface to air missiles, which would be a devastating weapon in the hands of terrorists associated with al Qaeda. The missiles guide themselves to an aircraft after locking onto its heat signature.
> 
> "There is reason to believe that al Qaeda has access to Libyan weapons," said one U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "What weapons they've actually acquired is not really known at this time."
> 
> Pentagon officials said they could not comment at this time on those reports.
> 
> Former National Security Adviser James Jones told CNN Sunday that "there is no real clarity," regarding the Libyan strategy. He added that elements of extremists are in the ranks and they should be identified.
> 
> "If you start from the proposition that the reason for committing our forces, as Americans or as part of NATO, was basically to avoid a massacre of innocent civilians, which probably would have happened, now we're there," Jones said. "Now we have to follow the rest of the trail to identify these people, then decide whether that's meritorious or not in terms of training, organizing, equipping."
> 
> Jim Phillips, senior analyst with the Heritage Foundation said al Qaeda fighters from Libya have played a major role in operations by the terrorist group, and that any aid to the Libyan opposition should be done with caution.
> 
> A number of "top al Qaeda leaders have been Libyan and the Libyan city of Derna provided more foreign recruits to the al Qaeda in Iraq organization than any foreign city except for Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, according to captured documents," he said. "That said, it is unclear how much of the rebel fighting force is made up of al Qaeda sympathizers." Phillips added that probably no more than 10 percent of the Libyan opposition is composed of fighters with a connection to al Qaeda. "But it remains a reason for concern and will be a factor that should make the United States think twice about arming the opposition," he said.
> 
> It will be a difficult challenge for CIA operatives who are now in Libya to identify the terrorist fighters who have infiltrated the opposition forces. Extremist groups, who have long opposed Gadhafi, will use their knowledge of the tribal divisions and the terrain to their advantage, said Riedel, the former CIA officer.
> 
> "They want to expand the safe haven and impose themselves in the opposition," he said. "It will not be an easy task for the CIA to retrieve the information. I think it needs to be taken extremely seriously."
> 
> However, using the opposition leadership to clean out al Qaeda from their fighting force may be possible, as they need NATO and U.S. aid to get weapons and technology to fight Gadhafi forces, he said.
> 
> When the United States entered Bosnia-Herzegoniva in 1995, the rebel fighter were being aided by jihadist extremists and Iranians. "We said if you want our support you're going to have to clean up your act and that's what they did for the most part," Riedel added.
> 
> Sara A. Carter is The Washington Examiner's national security correspondent. She can be reached at scarter@washingtonexaminer.com.


----------



## old medic

Gaddafi planned civilian killings: ICC
Angus MacSwan, Reuters
05 April 2011


http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/Gaddafi+planned+civilian+killings/4561979/story.html




> The International Criminal Court has evidence Muammar Gaddafi’s government planned to put down protests by killing civilians before the uprising in Libya broke out, the ICC’s prosecutor said on Tuesday.
> 
> Protests against the government that began on Feb. 15 swiftly descended into civil war after Col. Gaddafi’s forces opened fire on demonstrators. He then put down uprisings in Libya’s west, leaving the east and the city of Misrata in rebel hands.
> 
> NATO-led air power is now holding the balance in Libya, preventing Col. Gaddafi’s forces from overrunning the seven-week old revolt, but unable for now to hand the rebels outright victory.
> 
> The United Nations Security Council, which on March 17 sanctioned air strikes on Libyan government forces to prevent them killing civilians, in February referred Libya to the ICC, the world’s first permanent war crimes court.
> 
> Court prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo is to report back to the U.N. on May 4, and is then expected to request arrest warrants.
> 
> "We have evidence that after the Tunisia and Egypt conflicts in January, people in the regime were planning how to control demonstrations inside Libya," Mr. Moreno-Ocampo told Reuters.
> 
> "They were hiding that from people outside and they were planning how to manage the crowds ... the evidence we have is that the shooting of civilians was a pre-determined plan.".............


----------



## HavokFour

What is with these places beheading people? I just stumbled across a video of rebels cutting the head off a mercenary in Libya over on LiveLeak.

I'm sorry, but I cannot support people like that. No one deserves to die in that way, especially in the manner of how they went about removing the head.


----------



## CanadaPhil

HavokFour said:
			
		

> What is with these places beheading people? I just stumbled across a video of rebels cutting the head off a mercenary in Libya over on LiveLeak.
> 
> I'm sorry, but I cannot support people like that. No one deserves to die in that way, especially in the manner of how they went about removing the head.



I hear that!

I had been supportive at the beginning and had been visiting various sites set up by Libyan "Opposition", but after a time, I began to sour on this whole adventure. I too had begun to see many of those videos of attrocities committed not by Gaddafi, but by the so called "Freedom Fighters". It is absolutely disgusting. The kind of things that would make shock the average Westerner right to their core.

When I really began to see the underlying tones of some of these supposed sites set up by those "seeking democracy", I began to start to question them for clarification. I began to see more and more of the America and the West are the biggest terrorists of all, jew this, jew that, but let it slide until I could not take it anymore.

Here is a link to a main Opposition site that many have been citing and going to. It was in a post about the NATO strike that hit rebels where I finally blew my stack.

http://www.libyafeb17.com/2011/04/video-aftermath-of-nato-fighter-jet-raid-on-revolutionaries/#comments

I also had begun to point out many of the attrocities committed by Rebels that were showing up on LiveLeak and other sites, and everyone there seems to act like apologists for extremists, like when they do it, they somehow hold the moral high ground. It is sickening. 

These are the people our taxpayers and military are supporting?? Really? REALLY????? 

The West has been completely hookwinked on Libya. We have really had the wool pulled over our eyes on this one. Popular uprising my ass. This is a full on CIVIL WAR were both sides are knee deep in savagery.

We cant get out of this situation soon enough.


----------



## Container

HavokFour said:
			
		

> What is with these places beheading people? I just stumbled across a video of rebels cutting the head off a mercenary in Libya over on LiveLeak.
> 
> I'm sorry, but I cannot support people like that. No one deserves to die in that way, especially in the manner of how they went about removing the head.



Its a digusting practice. But youre right- its like the goto move in that area now. It makes me question the type of leadership these folks will set up and maybe whos lurking in the back ground. I read a thing about beheadings and Islam (I use the term loosely) a while back but Im hazy on the details-.

Heres an article, m not sure of the source but there are several similar conclusions in many places.

http://www.meforum.org/713/beheading-in-the-name-of-islam

A Quran verse-  Sura (chapter) 47 contains the ayah (verse): "When you encounter the unbelievers on the battlefield, strike off their heads until you have crushed them completely; then bind the prisoners tightly."

But Im no expert- there could be legitimate context to this verse but some may just take it as instruction or permission.


----------



## CanadaPhil

This one was posted recently on the LibyaFeb17.com site, here is what their ummmmm.... "General" had to say about NATO a few hours ago.........

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unfortunately we missed the conference, but we bring you @ChangeInLibya‘s tweets that both translate and document AbdulFattah Younis’s main points. Thanks @ChangeInLibya, excellent job!

Why did NATO stop a small fishing trawler from giving aid to Misrata? These people are getting massacred daily

Misrata hasn’t had water for 30 days, and when people started drinking from wells, Gaddafi blocked the sewage pipes.

NATO is treating us like beggars, giving us an air strike every other day while people in Misrata are killed daily

The reaction time of NATO is extremely slow. We give them the co-ordinates of Gaddafi militias daily

NATO takes 8 hours to act on the information we give them, and by then it is too late for the strikes to do any good

If NATO continues to stall, we will take our case to the United Nations and find another solution

We have our own jets, and even when we request permission for a flight, we are denied

They don’t let us use OUR own jets, and their jets take hours to act. How can we allow this? This doesn’t help at all

We do our best to protect the oil fields in the south, and we have a small amount of revolutionaries guarding them

The damage that Gaddafi militias did to the oil fields in the south is big, but we’re working on fixing them

Gaddafi is very jealous, he doesn’t want the Libyan people to enjoy their oil, now that they are free

Our problem and bottleneck now is NATO (laughs) – they are the ones taking hours to use the info we give them

We can fix any damage Gaddafi militias did to the oil fields in the matter of days

**Commotion in the Abdelfatah Younis press conference after a person charged in and tried to say something**

We send more and more soldiers to the battle front in Brega daily

Therefore, it is not possible for us to retreat any more, we are getting stronger and stronger at the front

Abdelfatah Younis to dissident: Under my command in Gaddafi’s time, not a single policeman or soldier fired on a civilian in Libya

This is why when the demonstrations started and people were killed,I felt that I had to defect

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This from a guy who was nowhere to be seen until the last week.  Nothing but a former Gaddafi loyalist, now playing the FREE OPPOSITION card.

How did we get into this??? There was like some serendipity effect where the the Ignatief Election Call and the UN action in Libya overlapped, and Canada was quietly pulled into a new war. Are we simply destined to be pulled further and further into this??? How will we possibly be able to extricate overselves from this mess now???

Welcome to Libya folks!


----------



## OldSolduer

How about we just pull our planes and crews out?


----------



## Journeyman

CanadaPhil said:
			
		

> If NATO continues to stall, we will take our case to the United Nations and find another solution


I love stand-up comedy; it's all in the timing.   ;D


----------



## a_majoor

The UK and France want the oil, so lets sit back and watch them mount a (huge) expeditionary force, kick everyone's ass and secure the territory they deem important. We have no dog in this fight.


----------



## old medic

Photos Offer Graphic Evidence of Abuses Under Qaddafi
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/06/world/africa/06libya.html?_r=1&ref=world
06 April 2011


> ZAWIYAH, Libya — In the second-floor office of a burned-out police station here, the photographs strewn across the floor spun out the stories of the unlucky prisoners who fell into the custody of the brutal government of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi.
> 
> Some depicted corpses bearing the marks of torture. One showed scars down the back of a man dressed only in his underwear, another a naked man face down under a sheet with his hands bound. The faces of the dead bore expressions of horror. Other pictures showed puddles of blood, a table of jars, bottles and powders and, in one, a long saw.
> 
> In a labyrinthine basement, workers were clearing out burned books and files. One room contained a two-liter bottle of gin. Gesturing into another room that was kept dark, a worker mimicked a gun with his hands and murmured “Qaddafi,” suggesting it was an execution chamber.
> 
> Journalists discovered the photographs and records on an official trip to this devastated city, where Qaddafi forces battled rebels for nearly a week to retake control. They were the latest reminder of the long record of arbitrary violence against civilians that now overshadow the government’s efforts to broker an end to the international airstrikes and domestic rebellion threatening Colonel Qaddafi’s four decades in power.
> 
> As Colonel Qaddafi’s son, Seif al-Islam, promised in a television interview to usher in a new era of constitutional democracy in which his father would be a mere figurehead “like the queen of England,” the prosecutor for the International Criminal Court escalated international pressure on the government by declaring that it had deliberately ordered the killing of civilians in a bid to hold back the democratic revolution sweeping the region.
> 
> “We have evidence that after the Tunisia and Egypt conflicts, people in the regime were planning how to control demonstrations in Libya,” the prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, told Reuters. “The shootings of civilians was a predetermined plan.”
> 
> In the rebel-held city of Misrata in western Libya and on the eastern front with the rebels around the oil town of Brega, Qaddafi forces continued to hammer rebels with rockets, artillery and mortars, as rebel leaders expressed exasperation at the limits of NATO’s support.
> 
> In Brussels, Brig. Gen. Mark van Uhm of NATO said Tuesday that Western airstrikes had destroyed about 30 percent of Colonel Qaddafi’s military power.
> 
> But Gen. Abdul Fattah Younes, the head of the rebel army, lashed out at his Western allies during a news conference in Benghazi, accusing NATO of tardiness and indecision. “What is NATO doing?” he asked. “Civilians are dying every day. They use the excuse of collateral damage.” ..............


----------



## old medic

Libyan rebels, hoping for one state, prepare for two
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/hoping-for-one-state-libyan-rebels-consider-two/2011/04/05/AFxiE2lC_story.html?hpid=z2

By Tara Bahrampour, Tuesday, April 5, 9:43 PM



> BENGHAZI, Libya — “One Libya, with Tripoli as its capital” is spray-painted on walls around this rebel city and glides off the tongues of opposition leaders. Moammar Gaddafi will fall in a week, they predict, two at the most, and they’ll build a new country then.
> 
> But as weeks stretch into months and progress on the battlefield stalls, this rebel-held area of Libya is settling into its status as a de facto separate state.
> 
> Since the February uprising that ended Gaddafi’s rule here, schools and many businesses have remained closed. But police are back on the streets, hospitals are functioning and shops are slowly reopening. Behind the scenes, opposition leaders are feverishly courting international partners as they work to set up a political and economic system for a period of division that some quietly admit may stretch on indefinitely.
> 
> A tanker arrived in the rebel-held port of Tobruk on Tuesday to load oil for export, the first time that has happened in nearly three weeks. Although it is unclear whether the rebels will be able to export enough oil to keep the east afloat economically, the tanker’s arrival marked a symbolic step in the rebels’ journey from accidental revolutionaries to governors and statesmen.
> 
> Also on Tuesday, rebel leaders for the first time welcomed to Benghazi an official U.S. envoy, who is here both to meet opposition leaders and provide assistance to the fledgling council that runs affairs in the east............


----------



## GAP

The US may not have a dog in this fight, but the few dribbles I pick up indicate that there will be boots on the ground.....Everybody wants the US to be the boots, but the US, for once, is saying "uh uha"......yet, there is a MEU on its way....


----------



## CanadaPhil

Further to my earlier comment, here is a link to an updated page at the LibyaFeb17 site with a FULL translation (with VIDEO) of the Rebel "Generals" comments regarding NATO yesterday.....

http://www.libyafeb17.com/2011/04/translated-the-complete-press-conference-that-major-general-abdulfatah-younis-gave-today/#comment-4085

At one point, a man tried to disrupt him shouting " YOU KILLED OUR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES.... YOU KILLED OUR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES".

Curious... It turns out the "General", before coming over the "Opposition" was actually in charge of the Security Forces cracking down on the initial protesters in Benghazi in Feb.


----------



## tomahawk6

GAP said:
			
		

> The US may not have a dog in this fight, but the few dribbles I pick up indicate that there will be boots on the ground.....Everybody wants the US to be the boots, but the US, for once, is saying "uh uha"......yet, there is a MEU on its way....



There is a MEU on station.If you recall they participated in the recovery of the USAF pilots. As good as the Marines are it would take alot more than a couple of MEU's to take Tripoli. The administration has decided to pull US combat aircraft from the AO and Obama wont deploy combat troops.Instead they are training and arming the rebels so they can attempt to do it themselves.Good luck with that.


----------



## old medic

The Canadian Press
05 April 2011
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20110405/seven-arrested-after-group-tried-to-enter-libyan-embassy-110405/



> OTTAWA — Police have arrested seven suspects after an incident at the Libyan embassy.
> 
> Police were called in today after a small group pushed its way into the embassy and started causing damage, said RCMP Sgt. Marc Menard.
> 
> "A couple of people went to the embassy," Menard said. "The embassy officials opened the door and they pushed their way through and started damaging property."
> 
> A worker was apparently attacked during the incident, he added.
> 
> "It appears that a common assault to an embassy employee may have occurred."
> 
> He says a door was opened to the group before they pushed their way into the embassy lobby and ventured into non-public areas.
> 
> RCMP and Ottawa police are still investigating the incident and charges are pending, he said. No names were immediately released.
> 
> The RCMP is tasked with the particular responsibility of protecting embassies.
> 
> "We take all threats to our protectees very seriously," Menard said.
> 
> "Those who unlawfully interfere with or threaten the safety of any person or property will be dealt with in accordance with the laws of Canada."


----------



## a_majoor

More political falout in the US:

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/05/senate-defeats-rand-pauls-resolution-reasserting-congresss-war-powers-90-10/



> *Senate defeats Rand Paul’s resolution reasserting Congress’s war powers, 90-10*
> Share
> posted at 7:02 pm on April 5, 2011 by Allahpundit
> printer-friendly
> 
> This wasn’t a resolution to authorize operations in Libya but something far craftier — a resolution reaffirming Obama’s own words from 2007 that “the President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” When Paul first introduced the idea last week, a flustered Harry Reid temporarily closed up shop to keep it from coming to the floor.
> 
> Turns out he needn’t have worried. The roll: 90-10 opposed. Disgraceful.
> 
> The problem with Paul’s amendment, as seen by many members of the Democratic majority, was that it quoted then-Senator Barack Obama’s words from 2007 in what appeared to be an attempt to embarrass the Democratic president…
> 
> Paul’s proposal was “too cute by half,” declared Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein on Tuesday after she joined other senators in voting to table it, 90-10.
> 
> Paul had trouble getting even his fellow Republicans to support his idea. Some said they didn’t approve of where he had chosen to offer his war powers amendment — on legislation to do with small businesses. “I think we need to address Libya, when (that’s) the focus,” said Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Republican, after the vote.
> 
> That’s a convenient excuse but since Democrats weren’t about to let this pass, there’s no reason Republicans should have let a formal objection deter them from supporting it — if only to remind The One of what a hypocrite he is. All 10 no votes were GOP, but it’s an interesting mix: The tea party caucus of DeMint, Paul, and Mike Lee, the Maine RINOs Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, freshmen Ron Johnson, Pat Toomey, and Jerry Moran, and veterans John Ensign and Jeff Sessions. I wonder if Collins and Snowe jumped aboard because they fear public support for the Libya mission crumbling eventually and want to be on the right side of the debate when it does, or if they’re simply worried about tea partiers in the primary and are trying to earn grassroots cred by siding with Rand Paul here. Hmmm.
> 
> McConnell, Kerry, Levin, Lieberman, and McCain are reportedly mulling a real authorization resolution for the Libya mission. If it’s 90-10 against Paul on this, I assume a genuine AUMF will have no trouble passing. Here’s Paul’s floor speech in support of his measure this afternoon. Exit quotation: “The new motto of Congress appears to be, ‘Tread on me. Please, tread on me.’”


----------



## old medic

Jordan sends jets to support no-fly zone over Libya
AMMAN | iloubnan.info - April 06, 2011
http://www.iloubnan.info/politics/actualite/id/59429/titre/Jordan-sends-jets-to-support-no-fly-zone-over-Libya



> Jordanian Foreign Minister, Naser Jawdah, said on Wednesday that Jordan sent fighter aircraft to the European aerial base to support the No-fly zone imposed over Libya.
> 
> The Arab League had pushed earlier for a UN resolution to impose a no-fly zone over Libya following fatal attacks between the rebels in the eastern city of Benghazi and forces loyal to Libyan strongman Muammar Kadhafi.





First Swedish fighter jets arrive in Italy for NATO-led Libya operation
The Associated Press
03 April 2011



> STOCKHOLM - Three Swedish fighter jets have landed in Italy as the Nordic country joins the NATO-led no-fly zone operation over Libya, an air force official said Saturday.
> 
> The JAS 39 Gripen planes touched down at the base in Sicily at around 1400 GMT (4 p.m. EDT), after leaving from their base in Blekinge in southern Sweden earlier Saturday, Air Force spokesman Rickard Wissman said.
> 
> The pilots had initially been instructed to fly to Sardinia, but was informed by NATO after take off that the destination had been moved to the Sigonella base on Sicily in Italy.
> 
> Five more jets will leave for the mission on Sunday, he said.
> 
> Wissman said the first three planes were "practically ready" to help enforce the no-fly zone as soon as they had landed, but are most likely to be put into operation in the middle of next week.
> 
> Swedish lawmakers on Friday approved a contribution of up to eight fighter jets and one transport plane to join the NATO-led mission.
> 
> The jets can't be used to bomb Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's ground forces, but will be able to return fire if they are attacked.


----------



## old medic

As war rages in Libya, diplomatic wheels spin
6 April 2011
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/04/06/libya.war/index.html?hpt=T2



> Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- As rebel forces in Libya endure setbacks on the battlefield, a former U.S. lawmaker came to Tripoli armed with a plan to end the bloody war.
> 
> Ex-U.S. Rep. Curt Weldon, who met with Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi before within the last decade, paid a visit to the Libyan capital with a cease-fire plan and a clear message to the embattled ruler that he must step down.
> 
> The diplomatic overture occurred amid one bit of good news for the rebels Wednesday -- a tanker carrying crude oil is leaving the Libyan port of Tobruk in what is the first known opposition export of oil during the conflict.
> 
> At the same time, rebel fighters are trying to recover from a heavy artillery barrage by Gadhafi forces in the town of al-Brega, while residents in the western city of Misrata are spending their days in fear.
> 
> Weldon's trip comes amid other moves. A U.S. representative paid a visit to opposition leaders in Benghazi in the east. And Gadhafi sent a letter to the U.S. State Department, according to a senior administration official. There were no details on the contents.
> 
> In an interview with CNN affiliate WPIX-TV in New York, Weldon said he plans to meet with Gadhafi and Libyan Deputy Foreign Minister Khalid Khaim............




Nato concern at Libya use of human-shields in Misrata
6 April 2011
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12989878



> Nato says forces loyal to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi are using human shields in the war-torn town of Misrata.
> 
> The coalition says Col Gaddafi's troops are using civilian vehicles and hiding their heavy armour in civilian areas.
> 
> Nato spokeswoman Oana Lungescu told the BBC: "Misrata remains our number one priority... but [Gaddafi's troops] are using human shields to protect themselves." ......
> 
> ......'Gaddafi' letter to US
> 
> A Nato-led coalition mandated by the UN to protect civilians is enforcing a no-fly zone and attacking ground targets. It accuses Gaddafi forces of sheltering weapons in civilian areas.
> 
> In Washington the White House confirmed on Wednesday that it had received a letter reportedly from Col Gaddafi, but a spokesman declined to comment on the context of the letter.
> 
> Earlier, Libyan state TV said Col Gaddafi had sent a letter to US President Barack Obama following the US "withdrawal from the Crusader, colonialist and hostile alliance against Libya".


----------



## old medic

Canada adds personnel to NATO mission
By Jessica Murphy, Parliamentary Bureau
http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/canada/2011/04/06/17901951.html


> OTTAWA - Canada has boosted the number of personnel involved in the NATO-led mission in Libya by nearly 200, the military said Wednesday.
> 
> There are now 570 Canadian army and navy personnel taking part in international efforts to crack down on Libyan despot Moammar Gaddafi.
> 
> That's compared to the 380 personnel originally posted when Canada joined the mission in March.
> 
> Brig.-Gen Richard Blanchette made the comments during a media briefing on the mission.
> 
> He also said Canadian CF-18 fighter jets had been on 14 flights since last week, targeting a number of ammunitions depots and military bunkers in Libya.
> 
> Canada also has navy frigate HMCS Charlottetown patrolling the waters north of Libya and CP-140 Aurora aircrafts flying the coastline.
> 
> The NATO mission is headed by Canadian Lt.-Gen Charles Bouchard.


----------



## a_majoor

Political fallout continues; a lawyer drafts Articles of Impeachment against the President. While I doubt it can get very far (the Senate has to vote for Impeachment if I remember correctly) it is indicative of how far off the rails this venture is pushing US politics. Long article(s), read it all on the link: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0411/GOP_lawyer_circulates_Obama_impeachment_articles.html


----------



## Container

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html

I reviewed the thread and it doesn't appear, or I may have missed it, to be discussed at length the potential that we are actually assisting Libya in becoming an extremist state. I know the glorious leader suggested the links the rebels had to AQ at the beginning and it came across as a weird pitch but now some of the rebel fighters are admitting the links.

What is the end game here? Are we assisting our enemies in getting a foothold somewhere else? It would appear that some of the same people shooting at us in other countries are the people we are supporting in Libya. 

IMHO if it wasnt for how much of a terrible guy Gaddafi is I would as soon stay out of it- of course it never comes down to what I want. If this somehow suits Canada's interests than go for it. But the stuff said by the "rebel" leaders suggests that whatever country comes out of this it won't be a friend. 

This would appear, on surface context alone to me- uninformed though I be, to be an even less defined, and potentially lengthy and costly foray that will only have served to further dilute stability. Potentially we will have trained armed and assisted a group that will serve as recruiting grounds for the other guys......

It may sound cruel but these countries will only make themselves better when they are invested in it. Us getting involved removes their stake- this strikes me, at best, as a "good feelings" war- where _we had to do SOMETHING_. I m not a big fan of those- I dont like spending our resources without victory conditions. But hey- im just a dumb cop now.


----------



## GAP

This, combined with Thucydides post regarding Egypt in the thread Failing Islamic States, kinda leads me to believe things aren't going to work out like we think they will....


----------



## Edward Campbell

Container said:
			
		

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html
> 
> I reviewed the thread and it doesn't appear, or I may have missed it, to be discussed at length the potential that we are actually assisting Libya in becoming an extremist state. I know the glorious leader suggested the links the rebels had to AQ at the beginning and it came across as a weird pitch but now some of the rebel fighters are admitting the links.
> 
> What is the end game here? Are we assisting our enemies in getting a foothold somewhere else? It would appear that some of the same people shooting at us in other countries are the people we are supporting in Libya.
> 
> IMHO if it wasnt for how much of a terrible guy Gaddafi is I would as soon stay out of it- of course it never comes down to what I want. If this somehow suits Canada's interests than go for it. But the stuff said by the "rebel" leaders suggests that whatever country comes out of this it won't be a friend.
> 
> This would appear, on surface context alone to me- uninformed though I be, to be an even less defined, and potentially lengthy and costly foray that will only have served to further dilute stability. Potentially we will have trained armed and assisted a group that will serve as recruiting grounds for the other guys......
> 
> It may sound cruel but these countries will only make themselves better when they are invested in it. Us getting involved removes their stake- this strikes me, at best, as a "good feelings" war- where _we had to do SOMETHING_. I m not a big fan of those- I dont like spending our resources without victory conditions. But hey- im just a dumb cop now.




This has been bothering me for a while and, a week or so back, I said:



			
				E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Just about the last thing Libya (or Tunisia or even Egypt and Bahrain, which "matter" much more) needs, right now, is foreign, especially US, intervention.
> 
> It is not clear who may end up running Libya, nor is it clear, to me anyway, why it matters a whole lot. We, the big, US led Western "we" and the even bigger Sino-Indo-American led "we" do care about Egypt and Bahrain and a few other places that are seething with discontent - Pakistan, too, maybe? - but not about Libya.
> 
> These populist _movements_ may well bring on fundamentalist _Islamist_ government - that was the result of the last really "free and fair" elections (1991) in relatively sophisticated Algeria. Libya has, for over 60 years, been behind its North African neighbours in most socio-economic measures; it depends upon Egypt and others for a steady supply of educated professional and technical people to "operate" the country. It is quite possible that a new military _junta_ of some sort will take over and it _may_ decide to reform and modernize the country - or it may decide that further decades of political repression and socio-economic stagnation are in Libya's best interests.
> 
> In any event, it is of little concern to us ... whoever "us" is.


----------



## Container

Thanks E.R. Sorry I missed it.

I think in a manner alot of extremists have had their "free parking" cards revoked in more than a few countries. In places like Afghan, being an extremist freedom fighter carries a potential hot lead sentence. While they are still there, their ability to operate as open and freely as they used to is more limited. Greater scrutiny I suppose at the least. Not like in their prime where in Afghan they were invited by the government and almost enjoyed "status".

If I apply my own experience with drug dealers, and think from their point of view Libya would be attractive- some level of infratructure, something to sell, and an upcoming power vacuum that could legitimize their presence or allow them to operate with some freedom. Wink wink nudge nudge "they aren't here" type of thing. 

That isn't to suggest that AQ is a cohesive unit with a shadowy council of leaders. But at the individual level its the natural reaction to pressure. It could very well be that for them that Libya is the path of least resistance and a good place to reorganize from. I imagine its more complicated than that but I have observed similar on a small scale.


----------



## Edward Campbell

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Maybe because if (when?) things go horribly wrong no Americans, Brits or French senior officers will have to be pilloried ...  :-\





Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_, is one view from Washington:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/libya-stalemate-emerging-us-general-says/article1975481/


> Libya stalemate emerging, U.S. general says
> 
> PHIL STEWART
> WASHINGTON— Reuters
> 
> Published Thursday, Apr. 07, 2011
> 
> A stalemate appears to be emerging in Libya between rebels and forces loyal to Colonel Moammar Gaddafi but the United States should not make any decision to arm the rebels without knowing more about them, a top U.S. general said on Thursday.
> 
> The comments at a Senate hearing by General Carter Ham, who led the coalition air campaign before Washington handed over command to NATO, is likely to stoke debate in the United States about the next steps in Libya.
> 
> U.S. President Barack Obama has ruled out sending American ground forces to the North African oil-exporting nation and top administration officials have stressed the limits of American involvement in what could become a protracted civil war.
> 
> Mr. Obama has called for Col. Gadhafi to leave but has insisted the United States will not use military force to oust him.
> 
> Senator John McCain, a Republican who is pushing for greater U.S. involvement, grilled Gen. Ham about the risks of Col. Gadhafi staying in power.
> 
> Asked by Mr. McCain whether he believed the situation could be described as a stalemate or an emerging stalemate, Gen. Ham said: “I would agree with that at present on the ground.”
> 
> Gen. Ham, head of the U.S. military’s Africa Command, later acknowledged that the likelihood of a stalemate was higher now than before the United States passed control of the air campaign to NATO on March 31.
> 
> “So right now we are facing the prospect of a stalemate, which then means Gadhafi remains in power,” Mr. McCain said. “Which then means that we will then have a very, very serious situation with Mr. Gadhafi in the future if he remains in power, particularly given his past record.”
> 
> The debate underscored tensions within Washington about how to best influence events in Libya, where poorly trained rebels are outgunned by Col. Gadhafi’s loyalist forces despite a coalition air campaign.
> 
> Asked by Senator Lindsey Graham how the war would end, Gen. Ham said: “I think it does not end militarily.”
> 
> He said there was a low likelihood that rebels would be able to fight their way to Tripoli and oust Col. Gadhafi by force.
> 
> “That’s a very honest answer. I would assess (the chance) as almost impossible,” replied Mr. Graham, a Republican.
> 
> But Washington has also been reluctant to firmly side with the rebels, citing concerns that extremists might be among their ranks. A U.S. commander recently said that intelligence detected “flickers” of a possible al-Qaeda presence among the rebels, and an Algerian official said al-Qaeda had acquired some arms in Libya.
> 
> Gen. Ham renewed that cautious line on Thursday.
> 
> “We would need, I think, necessarily to be careful about providing lethal means to a group unless we are assured that those U.S.-provided weapons would not fall into the hands of extremist organizations,” Gen. Ham said.
> 
> He cited the stated intent of al-Qaeda’s North Africa arm, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), to aid the opposition.
> 
> “It has been very difficult to ascertain whether that intent to support the opposition with AQIM personnel has actually materialized in anything on the ground,” Gen. Ham said. “We’re watching that for indications of that very clearly.”
> 
> Gen. Ham defended the work of NATO in the face of criticism by the head of Libya’s rebels, who condemned the alliance this week for its slow chain of command in ordering air strikes to protect civilians.
> 
> A NATO air strike on Thursday killed at least five rebels near the Libyan port of Brega. It was the second time in less than a week that rebels had blamed NATO for bombing their comrades by mistake.




So the French, mainly, led the US and NATO on a fool’s errand which may, at best, end up in a stalemate or, at worst, as an _al Qaeda_ victory, with, even worse, Gadhafi still around. Anyone now want to know why there is a Canadian in charge? Who will get blamed: the US? France?


----------



## Journeyman

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> So the French, mainly, led the US and NATO on a fool’s errand .....


Clearly it's been a no-win, tragic farce from the get-go. 

France, for anyone who's followed current events, has been at war with Libya since 1978 (the 1978-'88 decade, with Chad as allies, was particularly ugly). Sure, they're buying Libyan oil, but the conflict is far from over in the halls of power within Paris.

But now Sarkozy needs a domestic victory; NATO (for credibility sake) cannot lose; yet intervention, in whatever form, cannot -- or cannot be _seen_ to -- aid AQIM or other terrorist organizations.

As said earlier.....Egypt and Bahrain, yes....Libya, who cares. Shame it's too late.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Personally I think we should not be involved.  Let the two sides duke it out, best man wins.  We don't need and should not get sucked further into the vortex of shit this situation seems to be heading towards.  And I am not happy with the thoughts of helping a load of Islamofacists getting in power somewhere.


----------



## Dissident

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Personally I think we should not be involved.  Let the two sides duke it out, best man wins.  We don't need and should not get sucked further into the vortex of crap this situation seems to be heading towards.  And I am not happy with the thoughts of helping a load of Islamofacists getting in power somewhere.



Indeed. I would have thought we would have learnt that lesson with the Taliban by now.


----------



## midget-boyd91

Didn't see these posted on here... 
RAW Footage of CF-18s hitting Libyan SCUD depots
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nm7gfSKHSwo&feature=related

and Ammo Depots
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDGxXVtN66k


----------



## CanadaPhil

@Uncle...

Yeah, there are a couple on Liveleak also.

Does anyone find it curious that our F18's were actively involved in bombing targets in and around Misrata for about 5 solid days,  but that our activity (at least bombing raids I mean) seem to have virtually ceased as of last Friday, April 1st.

This was the same day of the NATO strike that accidently killed some civilans near Brega due to secondary explosions. I believe an RAF tornado was involved in that. 

I for one hope that we have simply returned to running combat air patrol, surveillance and re-supply only.  

If France and the UK want to usurp Russia and Turkey in Libya, let them take care of this mess.


----------



## 57Chevy

provided in accordance with provisions of the Copyright Act


NATO: No Military Solution in Libya
http://news.antiwar.com/2011/04/08/nato-no-military-solution-in-libya/
Analysts See Partition as Inevitable
by Jason Ditz, April 08, 2011 

The NATO war in Libya is continuing apace with no end in sight. Despite this, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen reiterated today that there “is no military solution” in the nation.

Rasmussen insisted that a “political solution” was needed instead, which is noteworthy primarily because NATO appears to be making absolutely no effort toward such a solution, but is rather content to keep dropping bombs.

The comments are virtually identical to those made last week, and analysts are saying that they once again point to a civil war which has rapidly devolved into a stalemate. It seems, many believe, that partition is virtually inevitable, and what remains to be seen is where the border will be drawn.

And while a stalemate might well mean a return to relative calm on both sides of the country, lingering hostility is likely to be a justification for the continuation of the NATO no-fly zone and, by extension, the war, for months or even years to come.


----------



## DCRabbit

CanadaPhil said:
			
		

> @Uncle...
> 
> Yeah, there are a couple on Liveleak also.
> 
> Does anyone find it curious that our F18's were actively involved in bombing targets in and around Misrata for about 5 solid days,  but that our activity (at least bombing raids I mean) seem to have virtually ceased as of last Friday, April 1st.
> 
> This was the same day of the NATO strike that accidently killed some civilans near Brega due to secondary explosions. I believe an RAF tornado was involved in that.
> 
> I for one hope that we have simply returned to running combat air patrol, surveillance and re-supply only.
> 
> If France and the UK want to usurp Russia and Turkey in Libya, let them take care of this mess.




 My bro in law just went over there to head up NATO's PR effort. I do not envy him his job.


----------



## old medic

Iceland air support sent to Libya, Canada rearranges cover

Ice News
4 April 2011
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2011/04/04/iceland-air-support-sent-to-libya-canada-rearranges-cover/


> Three fighter jets landed at Iceland’s Keflavik airport and NATO military base yesterday evening and three more are expected later today. The air cover for Iceland had to be swiftly re-arranged because the Canadian Forces Air Command decided to send the team originally earmarked for Iceland on a mission to Libya.
> 
> Canada has just taken over responsibility for Icelandic airspace under the NATO arrangement which sees allied nations take turns to patrol the air above Iceland. Air forces often also take the opportunity to use Iceland for exercises, as the NATO member country has the relevant equipment and ground crews despite not having a military of its own.
> 
> Before the three F-18 fighters arrived yesterday, Canada had already sent personnel, tools and equipment to Iceland. Later today one more F-18 will arrive, along with a P-3 aircraft used for aerial re-fuelling.
> 
> Some 150 personnel accompany the planes and will be staying at the Keflavik base over the coming weeks. As well as patrolling, the Canadians also plan to conduct exercises and landing practice at Keflavik, Akureyri and Egilsstadir.
> 
> The Icelandic Coastguard recently took over from the Icelandic Defence Agency, which held ultimate responsibility for Icelandic airspace, RUV reports.
> 
> The coastguard reports that the current Canadian mission had to be swiftly reorganised when it came to light the originally scheduled aircraft and crew would be sent on the NATO no-fly zone enforcement mission to Libya.


----------



## old medic

CanadaPhil said:
			
		

> Does anyone find it curious that our F18's were actively involved in bombing targets in and around Misrata for about 5 solid days,  but that our activity (at least bombing raids I mean) seem to have virtually ceased as of last Friday, April 1st.



You should google up the words "media releases, dnd and election" or even search them here.


http://www.acus.org/natosource/canada-adds-personnel-nato-mission

07 April 2011



> Canada has boosted the number of personnel involved in the NATO-led mission in Libya by nearly 200, the military said Wednesday. ...
> 
> Brig.-Gen Richard Blanchette made the comments during a media briefing on the mission.
> 
> He also said Canadian CF-18 fighter jets had been on 14 flights since last week, targeting a number of ammunitions depots and military bunkers in Libya.



Yellow reference to briefing on 6 April 2011


----------



## old medic

NATO destroys 17 Libyan tanks: official
Reuters 
9 April 2011
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/NATO+destroys+Libyan+tanks+official/4589502/story.html



> BRUSSELS — NATO forces destroyed 17 tanks belonging to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi’s forces on Friday and early Saturday, a NATO official said on Saturday.
> 
> NATO aircraft hit 15 tanks near the western city of Misrata, where Gaddafi’s forces are attacking rebels, and two south of Brega in the east of the country, he said. "Friday’s operations could prove to have had the highest tempo (since NATO took command of military operations in Libya)," the official said.
> 
> The official also said NATO aircraft intercepted a MIG 23 aircraft near Benghazi on Saturday, flown by a rebel pilot, and advised him to land. "We don’t know the identity of the pilot but given that he took off from Benghazi, we would presume it was an opposition pilot," he said


----------



## old medic

NATO bombs Gaddafi forces attacking key rebel town
Michael Georgy, Reuters 
10 April 2011
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/NATO+bombs+Gaddafi+forces+attacking+rebel+town/4591195/story.html



> AJDABIYAH, Libya - NATO aircraft hit six vehicles carrying Libyan government soldiers during an assault on the eastern town of Ajdabiyah on Sunday, killing at least 15.
> 
> The strikes appeared to have helped break an assault by forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi on Ajdabiyah, a strategic town 150 km (90 miles) km south of the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.
> 
> In Brussels, NATO said it had destroyed 25 government tanks in air strikes during the day — 11 near Ajdabiyah and 14 on the outskirts of Misrata, the only rebel bastion in western Libya that has been under siege for six weeks.
> 
> “The situation in Ajdabiyah, and Misrata in particular, is desperate for those Libyans who are being brutally shelled by the (Gaddafi) regime,” said Canadian Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard, who commands NATO’s Libya operations.
> 
> A Reuters reporter saw 15 charred bodies scattered around burned and overturned vehicles in two separate sites about 300 metres apart on the western outskirts of Ajdabiyah, which Gaddafi’s forces had been attacking all day.
> 
> Rebels said there had been two NATO air strikes.
> 
> The rebel-held town had come under sustained artillery and rocket attack since morning and there were clashes between rebels and Gaddafi loyalists who penetrated the town centre.
> 
> But by early afternoon the rebels looked back in control and seemed to have cleared the town. They commanded key intersections and fired six rockets towards the west...........


----------



## FoverF

> Later today one more F-18 will arrive, along with a P-3 aircraft used for aerial re-fuelling.



Unlikely.


----------



## WingsofFury

as of 2359 hr UTC, 7 April 2011  

CF Sorties to date :

CF-188 Hornet 76 
CC-150 Polaris 33 
CP-140 Aurora 11


----------



## 57Chevy

Gadhafi 'accepts peace roadmap': Zuma
Reuters April 10, 2011

TRIPOLI - Muammar Gadhafi has accepted a roadmap for ending the conflict in Libya, South African President Jacob Zuma said on Sunday after leading a delegation of African leaders at talks in Tripoli.

“I have some commitment which is compelling me to leave now but we have completed our mission with the brother leader (Gadhafi),” Mr. Zuma said after several hours of talks with the Libyan leader at his Bab al-Aziziyah compound.

“The brother leader delegation has accepted the roadmap as presented by us. We have to give ceasefire a chance,” he said, adding that the African delegation would now travel to the eastern city of Benghazi for talks with anti-Gadhafi rebels.

article link:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Gadhafi+accepts+peace+roadmap+Zuma/4591717/story.html#ixzz1JABVUyTf

reproduced in accordance with the provisions of The Copyright Act


----------



## aesop081

FoverF said:
			
		

> Unlikely.



The CP-140 Aurora that accompanied the jets was there to provide SAR support to the flight over. this is done for most long transits by our fighters over the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.


----------



## Zoomie

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> The CP-140 Aurora that accompanied the jets was there to provide SAR support to the flight over.



The SGOD does Duckbutt?  That would suck to be the downed aviator.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

Why?  The carry a SCAD kit.  You would be a lot more comfortable in a 10 man raft, than you would a seat kit raft.

Think of all the jelly candies you could eat while you waited for the nearest merchant ship to get to you.


----------



## Zoomie

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Why?  The carry a SCAD kit.



In all fairness, they might even carry two SKADs - it's just that dropping one of those to a person in any sort of sea state might be viewed as futile.  I watched them drop one at 19 Wing once - they shut down the entire hot ramp for the drop.


----------



## aesop081

Zoomie said:
			
		

> The SGOD does Duckbutt?



We've even done it more than once.........



			
				Zoomie said:
			
		

> In all fairness, they might even carry two SKADs -



yes, we can carry two, for a total of 4 10-man life rafts.



> it's just that dropping one of those to a person in any sort of sea state might be viewed as futile.



Why is that ? 



> I watched them drop one at 19 Wing once - they shut down the entire hot ramp for the drop.



A few years ago, they dropped the arctic version of SKAD in Comox during SAREX. Seemed to work pretty well from the video i saw. I dont know about the sea SKAD.


----------



## Zoomie

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> A few years ago, they dropped the arctic version of SKAD in Comox during SAREX.



I saw the Arctic SKAD at SAREX - it was an impressive drop.   Can you drop those things IMC on RADAR only?  That is an ability that a future FWSAR should have.  We have dropped pumps out at sea IMC in the Buff via a weak RADAR picture - luckily the 500' of rope helped with netting the sinking vessel.


----------



## aesop081

Zoomie said:
			
		

> Can you drop those things IMC on RADAR only?



I have never tried and we dont have a procedure for that. I dont think it would be possible with the current radar but the new one in block 3 might open the doors to new procedures to deal with IMC situations.


----------



## PanaEng

Is it more timidity on part of NATO fliers or just lack of aircraft to cover all the missions (now that the US is just on a supporting role)?
From the CBC:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/04/12/libya-nato-gadhafi-france-rebels.html


----------



## a_majoor

What exactly are we supposed to accomplish tere again?

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2011/04/as-the-libyan-stalemate-gets-stale.html



> *As The Libyan Stalemate Gets Stale*
> 
> The NY Times reports that France and Britain want NATO to bomb more and faster in Libya.  They also shock us with the news that Obama's lack of a plan has caused strains in Washington:
> 
> Possible Libya Stalemate Puts Stress on U.S. Policy
> 
> By DAVID E. SANGER
> 
> WASHINGTON — Three weeks ago, President Obama  ordered American troops into the first “humanitarian war” on his watch, vowing to stop the forces loyal to Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi from massacring their own people. Mr. Obama’s hope was that a quick application of power from the air would tip the balance, and the Libyan rebels would do the rest.
> 
> Now with the Qaddafi forces weathering episodic attacks, and sometimes even gaining, the question in Washington has boiled down to this: Can Mr. Obama live with a stalemate?
> 
> Asked on Monday whether the United States could accept a cease-fire proposed by the African Union that would effectively leave Colonel Qaddafi in control of part of the country, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton hedged. First, she said, the Libyan government would have to allow food, water and electricity into cities it has cut off and allow in humanitarian assistance. Then, she added, “These terms are nonnegotiable.”
> 
> But she immediately reiterated that ultimately nothing could be resolved without “the departure of Qaddafi from power, and from Libya.” The statement seemed to underscore the limbo the administration finds itself in, with the rebels unable to achieve regime change on their own, and Washington and its NATO allies hesitant to leap deeper into a civil war.
> 
> Mr. Obama’s decision to join the military intervention in Libya may well be judged a failure if the initial result is a muddle or a partition of the country, an outcome that his own secretary of defense, Robert M. Gates,  declared less than a month ago would be a “a real formula for insecurity.”  If the country’s civil war drags on, Mr. Obama will almost certainly have to answer a rising chorus of critics that he entered the battle too late, began to exit too early, and overestimated a very inexperienced, disorganized rebel movement.
> 
> The Times joins in the cheap-shotting:
> 
> In interviews, senior administration officials urge patience. The first NATO strikes, they note, were only 23 days ago. Colonel Qaddafi, they say, has been badly wounded by the rebellion and is still reeling from the defection of a few key allies and the loss of billions in revenue that he used buy loyalty. Tommy Vietor, the spokesman for the National Security Council, argues that the key to ultimate success is “continued messaging to Qaddafi’s inner circle that the writing is on the wall.”
> 
> But, Mr. Vietor added: “Unilateral, open-ended military action to pursue regime change isn’t good strategy, and wouldn’t advance American credibility anywhere. Stopping a massacre, building an international coalition, and tightening the squeeze on Qaddafi as a part of an international coalition is in our interest, and that’s what we’re going to do.”
> 
> Over time, that strategy might yet work. But clearly the administration is gambling on catching a break — perhaps  an army uprising, the gradual starvation of a regime addicted to cash, maybe a stray bullet or lucky missile strike that ends a dictator’s 40-year rule.
> 
> But as Mr. Obama frequently noted when he was in the Senate criticizing the American approach to Iraq and Afghanistan, hope is not a strategy.
> 
> Hope is not a strategy?  Now they tell us.


----------



## Kalatzi

In't this just Dandy???
The African union wants a ceasefire so that the settlment they claim to have brokered has a chance to go into effect.  Presumably they couldn't have done that without the acceptance of at some of the rebel leaders. The rumor that I heard hwas the Col spell-check would stay on until elections later this year. 

Another group of rebels wants MORE air-strikes to come up with their own soltion. I think the spokesmans first name is Al. 

Interesting to see how this plays out


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Kalatzi said:
			
		

> In't this just Dandy???
> The African union wants a ceasefire so that the settlment they claim to have brokered has a chance to go into effect.  Presumably they couldn't have done that without the acceptance of at some of the rebel leaders. The rumor that I heard hwas the Col spell-check would stay on until elections later this year.
> 
> Another group of rebels wants MORE air-strikes to come up with their own soltion. I think the spokesmans first name is Al.
> 
> Interesting to see how this plays out



I'm sure there's a valid point somewhere in your post, but I'm missing it. Do you think you could proof read and spellcheck your posts before hitting send. It'll make it much easier to decipher what you're saying.

Thx


----------



## Journeyman

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Tommy Vietor, the spokesman for the National Security Council, argues that the key to ultimate success is “continued messaging to Qaddafi’s inner circle that the writing is on the wall.”


I'd love to be at the back of the room when the staff college student proposed that one.
      op:


----------



## PanaEng

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I'd love to be at the back of the room when the staff college student proposed that one.
> op:


 :rofl:


----------



## OldSolduer

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I'd love to be at the back of the room when the staff college student proposed that one.
> op:


What this means to me:

Continued messaging = lots of bombs and rockets  til you run away


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Quote from: Thucydides on Yesterday at 22:58:00


> Tommy Vietor, the spokesman for the National Security Council, argues that the key to ultimate success is “continued messaging to Qaddafi’s inner circle that the writing is on the wall.”



You have to stay inside their OODA loop. ;D

O - Observe
O - Overreact
D - Destroy
A  - Apologise


----------



## WingsofFury

How the results of the Incremental Modernization Project (IMP) are helping CF-18 Hornet pilots get the job done over in Libya.

New Technologies Key to CF-18 Combat Operability


----------



## Kalatzi

recceguy said:
			
		

> I'm sure there's a valid point somewhere in your post, but I'm missing it. Do you think you could proof read and spellcheck your posts before hitting send. It'll make it much easier to decipher what you're saying.
> 
> Thx


Thx, I'll do my best. 

My main point is that normally armed force is used to get the other party to agree to your terms. 

In this case, a party that claims to have legitimate status, The African Union, is saying that they have negotiated a settlement, that The government and at least some of the rebels have agreed to. They have asked for a ceasefire. 

Nothing on the diplomatic  front seems to be happening. 

Hypothetically speaking, If I were the Col who would I have to deal with if I wanted out?

INormally the side with the upper hand makes the conditions known. 

If I sound confused, I am.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Kalatzi said:
			
		

> Thx, I'll do my best.
> 
> My main point is that normally armed force is used to get the other party to agree to your terms.
> 
> In this case, a party that claims to have legitimate status, The African Union, is saying that they have negotiated a settlement, that The government and at least some of the rebels have agreed to. They have asked for a ceasefire.
> 
> Nothing on the diplomatic  front seems to be happening.
> 
> Hypothetically speaking, If I were the Col who would I have to deal with if I wanted out?
> 
> INormally the side with the upper hand makes the conditions known.
> 
> If I sound confused, I am.




The reason "nothing ... seems to be happening" is that French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who faces an election, is still behind in the polls. This war, _Srakozy's war_, has an aim: to re-elect Nicolas Sarkozy. When the war serves that purpose it can end, ditto French involvement in Côte d'Ivoire.


----------



## old medic

Kalatzi said:
			
		

> In this case, a party that claims to have legitimate status, The African Union, is saying that they have negotiated a settlement, that The government and at least some of the rebels have agreed to. They have asked for a ceasefire.
> 
> Nothing on the diplomatic  front seems to be happening.
> 
> Hypothetically speaking, If I were the Col who would I have to deal with if I wanted out?
> 
> INormally the side with the upper hand makes the conditions known.
> 
> If I sound confused, I am.



Any ceasefire, while dubious based on the last few announced "ceasefires" 
will have a major stumbling block.. i.e. A loon and his umbrella that doesn't realize the curtain has fallen. 

The Councils demand
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/AU-Leaders-to-Mediate-Libyan-Crisis-119559349.html


> ....An African Union delegation, with leaders from South Africa, Mauritania, Mali, Uganda and Congo, says it wants an immediate end to all hostilities. It also is seeking to provide a regular supply of humanitarian aid and the beginning of a dialogue between the Libyan government and its opponents. The African envoys say Libya also should plan for a transition period ushering in reforms.
> 
> Such talk has had little effect on rebel leaders, who maintain they will not settle for anything less than Colonel Gadhafi's departure.
> 
> The African Union and Turkey, which is also pushing a diplomatic solution to end the conflict, are widely viewed with suspicion in eastern Libya as being too close to Colonel Gadhafi and the oil wealth his government represents......




NATO and the US demand:
http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/article/2011/04/20110411161731elrem0.5065882.html


> 11 April 2011
> Clinton Says Cease-Fire in Libya Is Essential
> By Merle David Kellerhals Jr.
> Staff Writer
> 
> Washington – Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says that a cease-fire in Libya between government military forces and opposition forces is essential.
> 
> “We want to see the Libyan regime forces pull back from the areas that they have forcibly entered,” Clinton said April 11 at a joint press conference. “We want to see a resumption of water, electricity and other services to cities that have been brutalized” by the forces of Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi.
> 
> “We want to see humanitarian assistance reach the people of Libya. These terms are non-negotiable,” Clinton said.
> 
> An African Union peace mission led by South African President Jacob Zuma was in the Libyan capital of Tripoli April 10 to meet with the Qadhafi government, and was scheduled to meet with opposition leaders in Benghazi April 11. Clinton said the United States was awaiting a full briefing from the AU delegation on what was achieved and what the opposing sides would agree to support in the two-month-old civil strife.
> 
> Clinton told reporters that in addition to the other conditions — a cease-fire, a return of basic services for citizens, and humanitarian assistance — the United States believes that “there needs to be a transition that reflects the will of the Libyan people and the departure of Qadhafi from power and from Libya.”



The AU: 
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/04/2011410232126366150.html


> ...........The committee said in a statement that it had decided to go along with a road map adopted in March, which calls for an end to hostilities, "diligent conveying of humanitarian aid" and "dialogue between the Libyan parties".
> 
> Speaking in Tripoli, Ramtane Lamamra, the AU Commissioner for Peace and Security, said the issue of Gaddafi's departure had come up in the talks but declined to give details.
> 
> "There was some discussion on this but I cannot report on this. It has to remain confidential," he said.
> 
> "It's up to the Libyan people to chose their leaders democratically."....


----------



## a_majoor

Walking softly works a lot better when you actually have a big stick in the first place. How the UK and France are going to pony up the vast expeditionary force to secure their oil interests will also be an interesting exercise for the reader...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nato-runs-short-on-some-munitions-in-libya/2011/04/15/AF3O7ElD_print.html



> *NATO runs short on some munitions in Libya*
> 
> By Karen DeYoung and Greg Jaffe, Friday, April 15, 8:46 PM
> Less than a month into the Libyan conflict, NATO is running short of precision bombs, highlighting the limitations of Britain, France and other European countries in sustaining even a relatively small military action over an extended period of time, according to senior NATO and U.S. officials.
> 
> The shortage of European munitions, along with the limited number of aircraft available, has raised doubts among some officials about whether the United States can continue to avoid returning to the air campaign if Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi hangs on to power for several more months.
> 
> U.S. strike aircraft that participated in the early stage of the operation, before the United States relinquished command to NATO and assumed what President Obama called a “supporting” role, have remained in the theater “on 12-hour standby” with crews “constantly briefed on the current situation,” a NATO official said.
> 
> So far, the NATO commander has not requested their deployment. Several U.S. military officials said they anticipated being called back into the fight, although a senior administration official said he expected other countries to announce “in the next few days” that they would contribute aircraft equipped with the laser-guided munitions.
> 
> Opposition spokesmen in the western Libyan city of Misurata, under steady bombardment by government shelling, said Friday that Gaddafi’s forces had used cluster bombs, and Human Rights Watch said its representatives on the ground had witnessed the explosion of cluster munitions in civilian areas there. The Libyan government denied the weapons had been used.
> 
> A spokesman for the Misurata City Council appealed for NATO to send ground troops to secure the port that is the besieged city’s only remaining humanitarian lifeline.
> 
> The opposition has also repeatedly called for an increase in NATO airstrikes. The six countries conducting the air attacks, led by Britain and France, were unsuccessful at a meeting this week in Berlin in persuading more alliance members to join them.
> 
> NATO officials said that their operational tempo has not decreased since the United States relinquished command of the Libya operation and withdrew its strike aircraft at the beginning of April. More planes, they said, would not necessarily result immediately in more strike missions.
> 
> But, they said, the current bombing rate by the participating nations is not sustainable. “The reason we need more capability isn’t because we aren’t hitting what we see — it’s so that we can sustain the ability to do so. One problem is flight time, the other is munitions,” said another official, one of several who were not authorized to discuss the issue on the record.
> 
> European arsenals of laser-guided bombs, the NATO weapon of choice in the Libyan campaign, have been quickly depleted, officials said. Although the United States has significant stockpiles, its munitions do not fit on the British- and French-made planes that have flown the bulk of the missions.
> 
> Britain and France have each contributed about 20 strike aircraft to the campaign. Belgium, Norway, Denmark and Canada have each contributed six — all of them U.S.-manufactured and compatible with U.S. weaponry.
> 
> Since the end of March, more than 800 strike missions have been flown, with U.S. aircraft conducting only three, targeting static Libyan air defense installations. The United States still conducts about 25 percent of the overall sorties over Libya, largely intelligence, jamming and refueling missions.
> 
> Other NATO countries, along with the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Jordan, have contributed planes to enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya to prevent Gaddafi’s use of airpower, but so far have declined to participate in the strike missions.
> 
> After the Berlin meeting, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rassmussen said that 10 more aircraft were needed and that he was confident they would be supplied. A U.S. official said that Italy — which earlier in the week said it was not interested — may contribute planes to the ground attack mission, and that the Arab participants might also do so.
> 
> But with Gaddafi’s forces and the rebel army locked in a stalemate, Obama has resisted calls from opposition leaders, and some hardline lawmakers in this country, to move U.S. warplanes back into a leading role.
> 
> Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and other have called on Obama to redeploy U.S. AC-130 gunships, which are considered more effective over populated areas.
> 
> Although the gunships flew several missions early in the operation, Gen. Carter Ham, who commanded the mission before it was turned over to NATO, said last week that they were frequently grounded because of weather and other concerns.
> 
> The slow-moving aircraft, which flew as low as 4,000 feet over Libya, are also considerably more vulnerable than jet fighters to surface-to-air missiles. While much of Libya’s stationary air defenses have been destroyed, Ham said Gaddafi was believed to have about 20,000 shoulder-held SAMS at the beginning of the conflict, and “most” of them are still unaccounted for.
> 
> Concerns that supplies of jet-launched precision bombs are growing short in Europe have reignited long-standing controversies over both burden-sharing and compatibility within NATO. While allied jets have largely followed the U.S. lead and converted to precision munitions over the last decade, they have struggled to keep pace, according to senior U.S. military officials.
> 
> Libya “has not been a very big war. If [the Europeans] would run out of these munitions this early in such a small operation, you have to wonder what kind of war they were planning on fighting,” said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a defense think tank. “Maybe they were just planning on using their air force for air shows.”
> 
> Despite U.S. badgering, European allies have been slow in some cases to modify their planes and other weapons systems so they can accommodate U.S. bombs. Retooling these fighter jets so that they are compatible with U.S. systems requires money, and all European militaries have faced significant cuts in recent years.
> 
> Typically, the British and French militaries buy munitions in batches and stockpile them. When arsenals start to run low, factories must be retooled and production lines restarted to replace the diminished stock, all of which can take time and additional money, said Elizabeth Quintana, an aerospace analyst at the Royal United Service Institute in London.
> 
> deyoungk@washpost.com
> 
> jaffeg@washpost.com
> 
> Correspondent Simon Denyer in Tripoli contributed to this report.


----------



## CougarKing

> link
> 
> 
> *Britain's William Hague says UK will send military advisers to Benghazi to help Libya rebels*
> 
> By David Stringer,Frances D'Emilio, The Associated Press | The Canadian Press – 1 hour 22 minutes ago
> 
> LONDON - Britain said Tuesday it will send a team of up *20 senior military officers *  to Libya to help organize the country's haphazard opposition forces.
> 
> Foreign Secretary William Hague said the military advisers would join a group of British diplomats already co-operating with rebel leaders in Benghazi.
> 
> The decision by Britain's National Security Council to deploy the military team comes as international allies search for ways to help the opposition to break their military stalemate with Moammar Gadhafi's forces.
> 
> Britain has said it would not become involved in directly supplying weapons to Libya's rebels; it has already sent non-lethal support, *such as 1,000 sets of body armour and 100 satellite phones.*
> Hague insisted the advisers would not be involved in supplying weapons to the rebels, or in assisting their attacks on Gadhafi's forces.
> 
> (...)


----------



## tomahawk6

They are already running short of munitions. Hrad to mount an independent campaign on a shoe string budget.Maybe the US tax payers will loan them some JDAM's. :


----------



## wannabe SF member

Weren't "military advisers" the fist step in Vietnam. I am starting to get the feeling that many of us are looking at our next deployment; Blue helmet or not.


----------



## 57Chevy

shared in accordance with provisions of the Copyright Act


Brussels Monday 18 April 2011 17.25 BST

Libya conflict: EU awaits UN approval for deployment of ground troops
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/18/libya-conflict-eu-deployment-ground-troops

European member states poised to send 1,000 soldiers to besieged rebel city of Misrata to assist relief effort

The EU has drawn up a "concept of operations" for the deployment of military forces in Libya, but needs UN approval for what would be the riskiest and most controversial mission undertaken by Brussels.

The armed forces, numbering no more than 1,000, would be deployed to secure the delivery of aid supplies, would not be engaged in a combat role but would be authorised to fight if they or their humanitarian wards were threatened. "It would be to secure sea and land corridors inside the country," said an EU official.

The decision to prepare the mission, dubbed Eufor Libya, was taken by the 27 governments at the beginning of April. In recent days, diplomats from the member states have signed a 61-page document on the concept of operations, which rehearses various scenarios for the mission in and around Libya, such as securing port areas, aid delivery corridors, loading and unloading ships, providing naval escorts, and discussing the military assets that would be required.

The planning has taken place inside the office of Catherine Ashton, the EU's foreign and security policy chief. Officials are working on an "A-plan", the operational instructions that would specify the size of the force, its equipment and makeup, and the rules of engagement.

Diplomats and officials said this would not be finalised unless a request for an EU military mission came from the UN body the Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs (Ocha).

Valerie Amos, the head of Ocha, has privately told EU leaders she is reluctant to make the request and wants to explore all civilian options for the aid operation before seeking military help.

Amos said on Monday the Libyan government has promised the UN access to the besieged rebel city of Misrata, although they had not guaranteed a ceasefire during such a mission. She was in talks with the Libyan prime minister in Tripoli on Sunday and said she would send a team to the city of 300,000 as quickly as possible, adding that she was "deeply concerned" about the safety of civilians.

The EU has established an operations headquarters in Rome under the command of an Italian rear-admiral as part of its plan for a military deployment to Libya. Ashton has written to Ban Ki Moon, the UN secretary-general, offering the military assets, but the overture has been declined.

"The operation is agreed. It's ready to go when we get the nod from the UN," said the EU official. But behind the scenes in Brussels, there is much ambivalence as well as attempts at point-scoring between the bigger member states.

Diplomats say Ashton is pushing for a UN consent under strong pressure from the French, which is generally keen to promote projects supporting European defence and security policy.

With the situation in Libya, particularly Misrata, getting more critical, diplomats in Brussels say the pressure is mounting on the UN to authorise the EU force. "We're at the point of saying we may need to support aid being delivered," said one EU diplomat in Brussels. "So you need people with military capability. The EU has two battle groups ready."

Under a policy going back several years but seldom used, Brussels has a roster of battle groups, with two on permanent standby, comprising a force of about 1,500. The main battle group that would be deployed is German-dominated, which could trigger a row.

France and Britain have been the main hawks on Libya while Germany has been the most vocal opponent of the bombing campaign. Berlin stunned its allies by abandoning the UK, France, and the US in the security council vote last month that mandated the bombing.

Berlin has since promised it would commit forces for a humanitarian mission, but Paris and London would be reluctant to let Germany take the lead, fearing it would be overcautious and restrict the mission's scope.

The Nato alliance is keen to let the EU take over any armed escorts for an aid mission, seeing little role for itself. "I would appreciate it if the EU could take the initiative on the delivery of humanitarian aid," the Nato secretary-general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, said last week. "Nato has no intention to play a leading role."


----------



## OldSolduer

Does any one remember the story of the Tar Baby?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tar_baby

That is where Libya is going. No good can come of this.

Europe and by default, Canada, will become "Stuck"

My :2c:


----------



## Old Sweat

If anyone put this scenario forward for discussion in a seminar, she or he would get laughed out of the room.


----------



## jollyjacktar

We are fools for getting involved in this quagmire.  We should step back and distance ourselves completely.  If the EU is foolish enough to get stuck in, then that's their problem and decision.  Let the Libyan's sort this out amongst themselves and whomever wins, wins.


----------



## matt.flaig

anyone think this may become the new afghanistan?


----------



## Edward Campbell

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> We are fools for getting involved in this quagmire.  We should step back and distance ourselves completely.  If the EU is foolish enough to get stuck in, then that's their problem and decision.  Let the Libyan's sort this out amongst themselves and whomever wins, wins.




Agreed.



			
				E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Just about the last thing Libya (or Tunisia or even Egypt and Bahrain, which "matter" much more) needs, right now, is foreign, especially US, intervention.
> 
> It is not clear who may end up running Libya, nor is it clear, to me anyway, why it matters a whole lot. We, the big, US led Western "we" and the even bigger Sino-Indo-American led "we" do care about Egypt and Bahrain and a few other places that are seething with discontent - Pakistan, too, maybe? - but not about Libya.
> 
> These populist _movements_ may well bring on fundamentalist _Islamist_ government - that was the result of the last really "free and fair" elections (1991) in relatively sophisticated Algeria. Libya has, for over 60 years, been behind its North African neighbours in most socio-economic measures; it depends upon Egypt and others for a steady supply of educated professional and technical people to "operate" the country. It is quite possible that a new military _junta_ of some sort will take over and it _may_ decide to reform and modernize the country - or it may decide that further decades of political repression and socio-economic stagnation are in Libya's best interests.
> 
> In any event, it is of little concern to us ... whoever "us" is.




I was opposed to this mission 20 pages and almost 7 weeks ago.


----------



## CobraBalls

just a quick update, the French have sent in officers on the ground to Libya, other NATO countries to send officers as well.


----------



## old medic

France and Italy to send Libya advisers
Sarkozy promises to ramp up air attacks after meeting rebel leader as nations join UK decision to send military team.
20 April 2011
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2011/04/2011420133013544281.html



> France and Italy are joining Britain in sending military officers to Libya to help advise rebels on technical, logistical and organisational issues.
> 
> Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, offered assistance to Abdel Jalil, the leader of the Libyan Transitional National Council, when they met in Paris on Wednesday.
> 
> "We are going to help you," Sarkozy told him....




Libya: US to deploy armed drones - Robert Gates 
22 April 2011
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13166441


> Armed US Predator drones are to carry out missions over Libya, Defence Secretary Robert Gates has said.
> 
> Mr Gates said their use had been authorised by President Barack Obama and would give "precision capability" to the military operation.
> 
> Unmanned US drones are already used to target militants along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.
> 
> Libyan rebels have been battling Col Gaddafi's troops since February but have recently made little headway.
> 
> "President Obama has said that where we have some unique capabilities, he is willing to use those," Mr Gates told a news conference.
> 
> He said two Predators were being made available to Nato as needed, and marked a "modest contribution" to the military operations.....


----------



## aesop081

Well, since things are working out so well in Libya, shall we go  in Syria too ??

Move TF Libeccio to, lets say, Cyprus ?


----------



## old medic

This article is older, but interesting.  The full article goes into detail.



Hijacking Gadhafi's phone network 
Wall Street Journal
13 April 2011
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703841904576256512991215284.html?mod=wsj_share_twitter



> “A team led by a Libyan-American telecom executive has helped rebels hijack Col. Moammar Gadhafi's cellphone network and re-establish their own communications.
> 
> “The new network, first plotted on an airplane napkin and assembled with the help of oil-rich Arab nations, is giving more than two million Libyans their first connections to each other and the outside world after Col. Gadhafi cut off their telephone and Internet service about a month ago.
> 
> “That March cutoff had rebels waving flags to communicate on the battlefield. The new cellphone network, opened on April 2, has become the opposition's main tool for communicating from the front lines in the east and up the chain of command to rebel brass hundreds of miles away.
> 
> “While cellphones haven't given rebel fighters the military strength to decisively drive Col. Gadhafi from power, the network has enabled rebel leaders to more easily make the calls needed to rally international backing, source weapons and strategize with their envoys abroad.”....................................


 continues at link


----------



## daftandbarmy

Go After Qaddafi

Stop worrying about an "exit strategy." What America needs in Libya is an entrance strategy.

The embarrassing failure of NATO's strategy with the Libyan "rebels" is easier to understand when it is contrasted with its closest parallel case, which is probably that of Kosovo. After Slobodan Milosevic had attempted to cleanse the province of its Albanian minority, and after it had finally become clear to the governments of NATO that he had completely ceased to be a thinkable "partner for peace," a bombing campaign against Serbian units and positions began. To answer those who doubted that aerial strategy alone could do the needful job, it was pointed out that insurgent forces of the Kosovo Liberation Army, operating on the ground, would take their cue from the bombing and work in coordination with it. Those who didn't like this policy used to sneer that it made us "the air force of the KLA." And this sneer, as it happens, was more or less accurate. (I well remember one Kosovar militant crudely rejoicing in the sudden appearance of friends in the sky, and saying that it enabled his comrades to "fuck Milosevic with Clinton's dick"—an arresting image in any context.)

There were other crude things about the KLA as well, such as its sidelines in smuggling and even trafficking, and its lack of tenderness toward Serbian civilians. But it was a genuinely rooted guerrilla force with real knowledge of the terrain and the society, and it had evolved out of a decade-long struggle of wholesale passive and civic resistance under the leadership of Ibrahim Rugova. There were clannish and tribal elements involved in the ranks, inevitably for that region, and I have never seen so much ammunition fired pointlessly into the air as at a KLA rally in the mountains. But the outfit could fight sure enough when it came to it, and the option of restored rule of Kosovo by Belgrade had by then joined the list of things that were no longer feasible or thinkable. As the attrition intensified, military and political logic more and more dictated that the bombing switch to the source—Milosevic's "command and control" in his capital city. It wasn't long before he was raving and ranting in the dock, where he had long belonged. 

Now to Libya: Quite obviously Col. Muammar Qaddafi has joined the list of deranged dictators whose acceptability is at an end, and it is unimaginable that he should emerge from the current confrontation with control over any part of the country. Equally obviously, we shall have to go to Tripoli to remove him. But we will not be doing so in the rearguard of any victorious insurgent army. In Afghanistan we could call upon some fierce and hardened fighters in the shape of the Northern Alliance. In Iraq, the Kurdish peshmerga militias had liberated substantial parts of the country from Saddam Hussein under the protection of our "no-fly zone." But the so-called Libyan rebels do not just fire in the air and strike portentous attitudes for the cameras. They run away, and they quarrel among themselves, and they are not cemented by any historic tradition of resistance or common experience. They are a rabble, in other words, and the proper time to be sending trainers and "advisers" would be after Qaddafi has gone, when it will indeed be helpful and necessary to offer facilities and advice for a reconstituted Libyan army. Meanwhile, it is ridiculous and embarrassing to be their air force.

http://www.slate.com/id/2292067/


----------



## tomahawk6

NATO almost got Gaddafi,but instead got his youngest son Seif and three grandchildren.



> TRIPOLI, Libya – A NATO missile struck a house in Tripoli where Moammar Gadhafi and his wife were staying on Saturday, killing his youngest son and three grandchildren but missing the Libyan leader, a government spokesman said.
> 
> The strike would be a significant blow to the morale of the regime, which is struggling to maintain its hold on the western half of the country despite weeks of NATO-led airstrikes. It came just hours after Gadhafi called for a mutual cease-fire and negotiations with NATO powers to end a six-week bombing campaign.
> 
> Seif al-Arab Gadhafi was the brother of the better known Seif al-Islam Gadhafi, who was widely promoted as a reformer before the uprising began on Feb. 15. The younger Gadhafi had spent much of his time in Germany in recent years.
> 
> Moammar Gadhafi and his wife were in the Tripoli house of his 29-year-old son when it was hit by at least one bomb dropped from a NATO warplane, according to Libyan spokesman Moussa Ibrahim.
> 
> "The leader himself is in good health," Ibrahim said. "He was not harmed. The wife is also in good health."
> 
> On Tuesday, British Defense Minister Liam Fox and U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters at the Pentagon that NATO planes were not targeting Gadhafi specifically but would continue to attack his command centers. White House spokesman Shin Inouye declined to comment on the developments in Libya, referring questions to NATO.
> 
> Ibrahim said Seif al-Arab had studied at a German university but had not yet completed his studies.
> 
> "The attack resulted in the martyrdom of brother Seif al-Arab Gadhafi and three of the leader's grandchildren," Ibrahim said.
> 
> Seif al-Arab "was playing and talking with his father and mother and his nieces and nephews and other visitors when he was attacked for no crimes committed," Ibrahim said.
> 
> Journalists taken to the walled complex of one-story buildings in a residential Tripoli neighborhood saw heavy bomb damage. The blast had torn down the ceiling of one building and left a huge pile of rubble and twisted metal on the ground.
> 
> Ibrahim said the airstrike was an attempt to "assassinate the leader of this country," which he said violated international law.
> 
> Heavy bursts of gunfire were heard in Tripoli after the attack.
> 
> Gadhafi had seven sons and one daughter. The Libyan leader also had an adopted daughter who was killed in a 1986 U.S. airstrike on his Bab al-Aziziya residential compound. That strike — which was separate from the area struck on Saturday — came in retaliation for the bombing attack on a German disco in which two U.S. servicemen were killed. The U.S. at the time blamed Libya for the disco blast.
> 
> Seif's mother is Safiya Farkash, Gadhafi's second wife and a former nurse.
> 
> Gadhafi railed again foreign intervention earlier Saturday, saying Libyans have the right to choose their own political system but not under the threat of NATO bombings.
> 
> "The door to peace is open," Gadhafi said. "You are the aggressors. We will negotiate with you. Come, France, Italy, U.K., America, come to negotiate with us. Why are you attacking us?"
> 
> In Brussels, a NATO official said before Saturday's fatal strike that the alliance needed "to see not words but actions," and vowed the alliance would keep up the pressure until the U.N. Security Council mandate on Libya is fulfilled. NATO has promised to continue operations until all attacks and threats against civilians have ceased, all of Gadhafi's forces have returned to bases and full humanitarian access is granted.
> 
> The NATO official, who spoke on condition of anonymity according to policy, noted that Gadhafi's forces had shelled Misrata and tried to mine the city's port just hours before his speech.
> 
> "The regime has announced cease-fires several times before and continued attacking cities and civilians," the official said.
> 
> "All this has to stop, and it has to stop now," the official said.
> 
> Rebel leaders have said they will only lay down their arms and begin talks after Gadhafi and his sons step aside. Gadhafi has repeatedly refused to resign.
> 
> A rebel spokesman, Jalal al-Galal, called the cease-fire offer a publicity stunt.
> 
> "We don't believe that there is a solution that includes him or any member of his family. So it is well past any discussions. The only solution is for him to depart," he said.


----------



## Kalatzi

In realated news Iread somewhere That HM"'s Government had decided to send the scury Libyan ambassador packing becaause Libyan Mobs had attacked several Foreign embassies to protst the lost of col spell-checks son.  Their embassy being one of the ones targetted. 

I dare say it will teach those uncivilised  treacherous rogues a sound lesson, the very nerve of attacking an embassy!!!

Besides  they might have been injured or worse - by an airstrike. 

To sum up - i think it somewhat surreal taht the brits are raining bombs on Libya, and complain when the libyans attempt retaliation.  Perhaps an A++ for hypocracy and brass

Anyway I'm off  to the  local to organize a "Rule Britannia" sing-song to celebrate this  latest triumph, of diplomacy. 

or perhaps just off to the local iper:


----------



## observor 69

From Twitter:

Canadian Air Force total sorties as of 2359 hr UTC, 3 May 2011: CF-188 HORNET 208; CC-150 POLARIS 80; CP-140 AURORA 32. #Libya #OpMobile


----------



## wannabe SF member

Kalatzi said:
			
		

> In realated news Iread somewhere That HM"'s Government had decided to send the scury Libyan ambassador packing becaause Libyan Mobs had attacked several Foreign embassies to protst the lost of col spell-checks son.  Their embassy being one of the ones targetted.
> 
> I dare say it will teach those uncivilised  treacherous rogues a sound lesson, the very nerve of attacking an embassy!!!
> 
> Besides  they might have been injured or worse - by an airstrike.
> 
> To sum up - i think it somewhat surreal taht the brits are raining bombs on Libya, and complain when the libyans attempt retaliation.  Perhaps an A++ for hypocracy and brass
> 
> Anyway I'm off  to the  local to organize a "Rule Britannia" sing-song to celebrate this  latest triumph, of diplomacy.
> 
> or perhaps just off to the local iper:



Your point would come across a bit better had you actually used spell-check.



			
				Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> From Twitter:
> 
> Canadian Air Force total sorties as of 2359 hr UTC, 3 May 2011: CF-188 HORNET 208; CC-150 POLARIS 80; CP-140 AURORA 32. #Libya #OpMobile



Do you know what's the total amount of sorties for the coalition? For the sake of comparison of course.


----------



## aesop081

Inky said:
			
		

> Your point would come across a bit better had you actually used spell-check.
> 
> Do you know what's the total amount of sorties for the coalition? For the sake of comparison of course.



From NATO's 04 May update :



> Air Operations
> Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 5207 sorties, including 2091 strike sorties* have been conducted.



http://www.nato.int/nato_static/assets/pdf/pdf_2011_05/20110505_110505-oup-update.pdf


----------



## 57Chevy

Shared with provisions of The Copyright Act

Stalled Mission in Libya
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/opinion/06fri1.html?_r=2
The New York Times/Opinion Pages May 5, 2011 

Unless NATO, including the United States, get more serious, Libya’s liberation war could turn into a prolonged, bloody stalemate. Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi is ruthless, and rebel forces are weak and disorganized. NATO still has the military means to help tip the balance if it can summon the unity and the will. 

In their latest horror, Qaddafi forces rained shells this week on the rebel-held port area of Misurata, trying to keep international relief vessels from unloading humanitarian supplies. The civilian death toll from the war is already estimated in the thousands, while streams of desperate refugees keep pouring into Tunisia, Egypt and Europe. The alliance needs to get its act together. 

President Obama was right to hand over this mission to Canadian and European command once the initial American strikes had shattered Libyan air defenses. But crucial momentum was lost in the transition. Coordination with rebel fighters was initially poor, leading to friendly fire disasters. The string of defections from the Qaddafi inner circle came to an end, as government forces dug in. 

NATO allies, particularly Britain and France, have the high performance fighters that can carry the main burden of the air campaign. But the Pentagon needs to send America’s specialized low-flying attack planes, the A-10 and the AC-130, back into action against Libyan Army tanks. These are far more effective at destroying enemy vehicles and avoiding friendly ones. 

Colonel Qaddafi has left no question about his willingness to murder civilians. Bombing strikes against military command centers, including Qaddafi compounds, are well within the United Nations Security Council’s mandate. They need to continue, though innocent Qaddafi family members should not be deliberately targeted. 

Washington and other capitals need to do more intelligence work to figure out how to peel away more important Libyan players — and what mix of pressures and inducements need to be brought to bear. 

And NATO needs to start speaking with one clear voice. We were pleased to hear Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, finally declare that Colonel Qaddafi must “immediately step down.” But Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany remains on the sidelines. All of the public squabbling has played into Colonel Qaddafi’s hands, reinforcing his claims that NATO doesn’t have the stomach or the sticking power. 

Events in Libya pose a more direct threat to Europe than to the United States. Europe relies heavily on Libyan oil and a prolonged crisis will cause serious shortfalls in Italy and other countries. European leaders are already fighting over which country will take Libyan (and Tunisian) refugees, leading panicky French politicians to partially shutter their previously open border with Italy. 

With no quick resolution in sight, the international community must extend a financial lifeline to beleaguered rebel-held regions. Diplomats from 22 NATO and Arab countries met in Rome on Thursday to consider rebel requests for urgent financial assistance. There are legal obstacles to immediately releasing the roughly $30 billion in frozen Qaddafi regime assets to rebel authorities in Benghazi. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton pledged to expedite that process. 

At Thursday’s meeting, diplomats also said they were creating an international fund to channel humanitarian and financial assistance to rebel areas. The United States, Qatar and Kuwait promised generous contributions. European nations and other affluent Arab countries should do the same, with strict monitoring mechanisms put in place to make sure the aid goes to its intended recipients.


----------



## dinicthus

in the short and long run, whatever money and aid we send to rebels throwing off a ruthless dictator will cost less and last longer than sending in a large NATO force, won't it?

But will the next government be an improvement, I guess is the big question.


----------



## CougarKing

The NATO air campaign continues:

link



> ..TRIPOLI, Libya - *NATO warplanes struck Tripoli early Tuesday in the heaviest bombing of the Libyan capital in weeks, while rebels reported battlefront successes in the east and west.*
> 
> In the besieged port city of Misrata, the rebel's only urban stronghold in the west, a doctor said rebel forces had pushed outward to Dafniya, a town on western outskirts.
> 
> The doctor, who asked not to be identified for fear of reprisals, said fighting was taking place both in Dafniya and near the airport south of Misrata. Were the rebels able to punch through past Dafniya, it would increase the prospects of a further advance through the coastal town of Zlitan and toward Tripoli itself.
> 
> The rebels posted video clips calling on Gadhafi's forces in the area to surrender and saying they had advanced about 15 miles (25 kilometres) outward from central Misrata.
> 
> "We are after you Gadhafi," one of the fighters in the video said.
> 
> In eastern Libya, rebels reported ongoing fighting between the towns of Ajdabiya and Brega.
> 
> A rebel commander, Zakaria al-Mismari, told reporters that Gadhafi's forces had advanced on their positions with about a dozen vehicles on Monday, but were beaten back.
> 
> The rebel army has been bogged down for weeks near Ajdabiya, unable to move on to Brega, which has an oil terminal and Libya's second-largest hydrocarbon complex.
> 
> Planes were heard from Ajdabiya later Monday, after the rebels said they had retreated because they were told NATO was launching airstrikes against Gadhafi forces there.
> 
> Rebel appeals for heavier arms from abroad have not met any response, although NATO is carrying out airstrikes on regime forces as many countries demand that Gadhafi — Libya's autocratic ruler for 42 years — relinquish power.
> In the latest strike, NATO planes hit at least four sites in Tripoli, setting off explosions that thundered through the city overnight. One strike hit a building that locals said was used by a military intelligence agency. Another targeted a government building that officials said was sometimes used by parliament members.
> 
> It was not immediately clear what the other two strikes hit, but one of them sent plumes of smoke that appeared to come from the sprawling compound housing members of Gadhafi's family.
> 
> Between explosions, an aircraft dropped burning flares. Some residents responded by raking the sky with gunfire and beeping their horns.
> 
> The two sides have been locked in a standoff, with the rebels controlling most of eastern Libya, and Gadhafi most of the west, including Tripoli. Exceptions in the west include pockets of embattled rebel-held towns along the border with Tunisia, and Misrata on the coast.
> 
> The intensified air campaign comes as NATO faces criticism for not doing enough to break Gadhafi's grip.
> 
> "We have succeeded in taking out a significant part of Gadhafi's military, we have significantly degraded his war machine," NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Monday during a visit to Atlanta. "So far our operation has been a success but there's still work to do."
> 
> NATO said the alliance could not comment immediately on Tuesday's strikes in Tripoli but hoped to say something at a news conference later in the day.
> 
> In Tripoli, government escorts did not allow reporters near the site of one building that was hit in the NATO attack. Residents said the building, which had buckled from the bombing, was used by a military intelligence agency.
> 
> Reporters, who may not leave their Tripoli hotel without government escorts, were shown damage done to a nearby hospital. A physician, Dr. Mustafa Rahim, said a 4-year-old boy was badly injured, but would not allow reporters to see him, saying he was in intensive care.
> 
> Another strike targeted a building — struck once previously — that two employees said was used by parliament members and housed a library for research into Gadhafi's writings.
> 
> The U.N. refugee agency, meanwhile, appealed to European countries to step up efforts to rescue people fleeing Libya in overloaded boats.
> 
> A spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, Melissa Fleming, told reporters in Geneva on Tuesday that any boat leaving Libya should be considered "a boat in need of assistance."
> 
> Fleming said a senior Somali diplomat in Tripoli told the agency that 16 bodies, including those of two babies, have so far been retrieved from a boat carrying 600 people that sank just outside the Libyan capital Friday.
> 
> ___
> 
> Faul reported from Benghazi, Libya. Associated Press writer Frank Jordans in Geneva contributed to this report.
> ...


----------



## OldSolduer

How much longer before someone puts ground troops in? 

Not advisors....but actual combat troops?


----------



## FoverF

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> How much longer before someone puts ground troops in?
> 
> Not advisors....but actual combat troops?



1... 2... 3...

NOT IT!! 


The rebels have lost the momentum. Getting everything sorted quick and dirty-like would have been ideal, but that boat has sailed. Any change of regime now is going to have to be a long and deliberate effort, and should best be done after a lot of preparation. 

I don't think it's really a good idea for the west to be using their soldiers to put in place a rebel government, if that rebel government isn't ready to put organized and competent police in the streets, prudent judges in the courts, and have a workable plan for re-integration. 

Essentially, I think a second state needs to be established under rebel control, and once they've got their own house in order, and an acceptable plan to get the rest of the country in order, we can do what needs to be done to help them conquer the Dear-Brother-Colonel's state. Up to and including supplying arms and commiting ground troops, if need be. 

On the other hand, if the rebel government doesn't pass our foreign policy smell test within a certain period of time (say by the end of summer), then we cut our ties, bring our planes home, and let nature take its' course. 

The absolute worst-case-scenario would be for Canadians to fight, kill, and die, in order to put a ****ty government in place that turns around and starts committing its' own atrocities.


----------



## Sapplicant

FoverF said:
			
		

> a second state needs to be established under rebel control




I think they tried that sort of thing in Sudan, with rather mixed results. Don't quote me on that though...


----------



## old medic

Rebels says they captured Misrata airport
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-cnn-misrata-airport-rebels,0,2722027.story



> BENGHAZI, Libya (CNN) -- Libyan rebels captured the airport in the besieged city of Misrata on Wednesday, a rebel spokesman in Benghazi said.
> 
> Shamsiddin Abdulmolah of the Transitional National Council said the airport, located in the southern region of the war-torn city, fell to "revolutionaries" after opposition fighters nearby in Zlaitin were able to join their counterparts in Misrata.
> 
> The capture of the location is key for the rebels fighting the forces of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi since it would provide important access for humanitarian aid.
> 
> Two months of fighting and the ongoing shelling of the Misrata port have prevented most aid ships from docking there, leaving the city "at the forefront" of U.N. humanitarian concerns, a top U.N. official told the Security Council this week.
> 
> NATO warplanes and missiles have been pounding Gadhafi's forces since March as Gadhafi's troops try to quash a nearly three-month-old revolt against his regime, and the ferocity of the warfare in Misrata symbolizes the animosity between the pro- and anti-Gadhafi forces.
> 
> Abdulmolah said an unknown number of casualties occurred in the fighting. He also reported that the oil-rich town of Jakharrah fell overnight to opposition forces and that Gadhafi's forces are surrounded in the oasis area towns of Awjilah and Jalu.
> 
> The NATO mission is intended to enforce a U.N. Security Council resolution that calls for the protection of civilians.
> 
> In its latest news release on Wednesday, NATO said vehicle and ammunition storage facilities, a surface to air missile launcher and an anti-aircraft gun were hit in the Tripoli area. It also said ambulance storage facilities were struck in Mizdah and Qaryat.
> 
> As for Misrata, Marie Colvin, the Middle East correspondent for Britain's Sunday Times, told CNN that rebel forces defending the city from government troops are making "meter-by-meter" gains despite heavy shelling and rocket attacks.
> 
> Units that remain loyal to Gadhafi have been firing rockets and artillery shells into residential neighborhoods, leaving a nearby emergency room full of women, children and old men, she said.
> 
> "The rebels are very much trying, at a minimum, to push back Gadhafi's lines so he simply can't do that," Colvin said on Tuesday .
> 
> Meanwhile, the rebels are asking why NATO forces aren't targeting the pro-Gadhafi gunners.
> 
> As for aid, a ship carrying supplies from the International Committee of the Red Cross docked in Misrata on Tuesday, but the ongoing fighting has deterred many captains from trying to enter the port, Colvin said.
> 
> The ICRC said the vessel carried medical supplies, spare parts to repair water and electrical supply systems and 8,000 jars of baby food.
> 
> Meanwhile, on the front lines of the battle, bullets are whizzing past "like very angry hornets," Colvin said. At least 70 rebels have been wounded -- but they have held their line, "and meter by meter were able to advance," she said.
> 
> "They're defending their homes. They're defending their families, and they are not giving up an inch. They are fighting," Colvin said.
> 
> The first shipment of nonlethal aid from the United States to the Libyan opposition arrived Tuesday in Benghazi, U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner said.
> 
> It included more than 10,000 MREs -- meals ready to eat -- that are halal, permissible under Islamic law. Other items en route from the U.S. Defense Department include medical supplies, tents, uniforms, boots and personal protective gear.
> ................


----------



## 57Chevy

from: The Last Refuge and shared with provisions of The Copyright Act

Libya: Here Comes The “Ground Troops”…..
http://theconservativetreehouse.wordpress.com/2011/05/05/libya-here-comes-the-ground-troops/
So much for that time-limited, scope-limited, kinetic military action. NATO meets to recommend “It’s time to put boots on the ground”……. watch this one closely.

watch the video at link


----------



## 57Chevy

Shared with provisions of The Copyright Act
The Telegraph/11 May 2011
Libya: Nato doesn't know if Col Gaddafi is dead or alive
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8506311/Libya-Nato-doesnt-know-if-Col-Gaddafi-is-dead-or-alive.html
Nato has admitted that it doesn't know if Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi is dead or alive. 

A spokesman for Nato said its air strikes on Tripoli were not aimed at killing him.

"All Nato targets are military targets, which means that the targets we've been hitting are command and control bunkers," Claudio Gabellini said.

"Nato is not targeting individuals." 

Asked about the whereabouts of Gaddafi, who has not been seen in public since he reportedly escaped an air strike on April 30 that killed his son, Mr Gabellini said: "We don't have any evidence. We don't know what Gaddafi is doing right now.

"And I tell you the truth we're not really interested in what he is doing," 

While the Libyan government insists that Gaddafi is in mourning for his son and will make an appearance in public soon, his absence has led to rumours that he died in the attack, the Guardian reports.

At least two NATO bombs struck the family compound on April 30 while Gaddafi was there, although his supporters said that he had survived "unhurt".

However, he did not attend the funeral of his son Saif al-Arab and three grandchildren who were also reportedly killed in the attack.

Officials blamed security fears for keeping him away and accused Nato of trying to assassinate him.

An FCO spokesman said: "We don't comment on rumour and speculation." 

Nato officials, who began the campaign in March, have stepped up the pace of air strikes in Tripoli in recent weeks, aimed at what they described as the regime's military command and communications centres.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Shared with the usual caveats.

Canadian ship returns fire at Libyan forces
CBC News Posted: May 12, 2011 3:32 PM ET Last Updated: May 12, 2011 3:32 PM

Sailors aboard a Canadian warship helped thwart an attack by Libyan forces in the port of Misrata, according to NATO, firing back after coming under fire.  Several fast small boats were attempting to attack Misrata around 2 a.m. local time, but were pushed back by the Canadian frigate HMCS Charlottetown, working with the British destroyer HMS Liverpool and a French warship.  "The boats were forced to abandon their attack and regime forces ashore covered their retreat with artillery and anti-aircraft cannon fire directed towards the allied warships," NATO said in a statement.  HMCS Charlottetown shot back with a short burst if machine-gun fire and HMS Liverpool also returned fire, NATO said. Neither warship sustained any damage.  "It is most likely [the Canadians] would have fired the ship's main gun — a Bofors 57-mm cannon off the front of the ship," CBC's David Common said.

The attack was the second action by pro-Gadhafi forces at sea, according to NATO.


----------



## The Bread Guy

NATO news release on above:


> In the early hours of Thursday 12 May 2011, while conducting Embargo patrols in the waters off the coast of Libya, NATO warships participated in a coordinated defence against a small boat attack threatening the port city of Misrata.
> 
> Beginning at approximately 2 a.m. the Canadian Frigate HMCS CHARLOTTETOWN acting in concert with the British Destroyer HMS LIVERPOOL and supported by a French warship not under NATO Command, thwarted an attack on the port of Misrata by a number of fast small boats.  The boats were forced to abandon their attack and regime forces ashore covered their retreat with artillery and anti-aircraft canon fire directed towards the allied warships.
> 
> HMCS CHARLOTTETOWN responded with a short burst machinegun fire and HMS LIVERPOOL also returned fire.  Neither warship sustained any damage or injury during this engagement.
> 
> This is the second action by pro-Qadhafi forces at sea and follows the mining of the approaches to Misrata harbour two weeks ago.  NATO forces destroyed two mines and swept the area allowing safe passage for ships ....


----------



## dinicthus

Makes me wonder. The large ships that get taken over by a band of pirates with rifles - why don't they just blow them out of the water with a .50 cal or something before they get TO the ship?


----------



## Navalsnpr

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/05/12/canadian-sailors-libya.html


Canadian ship returns fire at Libyan forces
CBC News Posted: May 12, 2011 3:32 PM ET 

Sailors aboard a Canadian warship helped thwart an attack by Libyan forces in the port of Misrata, according to NATO, firing back after coming under fire.

Several fast small boats were attempting to attack Misrata around 2 a.m. local time, but were pushed back by the frigate HMCS Charlottetown, working with the British destroyer HMS Liverpool and a French warship.

"The boats were forced to abandon their attack and regime forces ashore covered their retreat with artillery and anti-aircraft cannon fire directed towards the allied warships," NATO said in a statement.

HMCS Charlottetown shot back with a short burst of machine-gun fire and HMS Liverpool also returned fire, NATO said. Neither warship sustained any damage.

"It is most likely [the Canadians] would have fired the ship's main gun — a Bofors 57-mm cannon off the front of the ship," CBC's David Common said.

The attack was the second action by pro-Gadhafi forces at sea, according to NATO.


----------



## Occam

Navalsnipr said:
			
		

> HMCS Charlottetown shot back with a short burst of machine-gun fire and HMS Liverpool also returned fire, NATO said. Neither warship sustained any damage.
> 
> "It is most likely [the Canadians] would have fired the ship's main gun — a Bofors 57-mm cannon off the front of the ship," CBC's David Common said.



Apparently David Common can't tell the difference between a .50 cal and a 57 mm.   ;D


----------



## vonGarvin

I think that the Centre of Excellence for Small Arms' Fire ought to conduct a SAV to HMCS CHARLOTTETOWN to see if there is anything we can do to assist in .50 training, as well as to suggest that they take our C-16s for employment on Her Majesty's Canadian Ships.


----------



## The Bread Guy

> NATO said its warships found explosives and mannequins on a small boat off the Libyan port of Misrata on Monday, in what they believe was a plan by Muammar Gaddafi's forces to lure ships and destroy them.
> 
> A NATO statement said the boat was abandoned when NATO forces approached to check two rigid-hull inflatable boats (RHIB) heading toward the rebel-held port. The other craft escaped at high speed.
> 
> "An explosive ordnance disposal team from an allied warship was deployed to inspect the abandoned RHIB and discovered a large quantity of explosives (approximately one tonne) and two human mannequins," the statement said.
> 
> "It looks like they were there to look like people and draw ships in and the explosives could be detonated," a NATO official said.
> 
> A NATO ship destroyed the boat with gunfire, and the explosion could be seen 12 nautical miles away, the official said.
> 
> Last month forces loyal to Gaddafi laid mines in the approaches to the port of Misrata.
> 
> "However this is the first evidence of an attempt to use an improvised explosive device with decoy human mannequins to threaten commercial shipping and humanitarian aid," the NATO statement said ....


A bit more here.


----------



## vonGarvin

Technoviking said:
			
		

> suggest that they take our C-16s for employment on Her Majesty's Canadian Ships.



I'm serious about this.  The limitations of the C-16 (weight, ammo carriage, etc) would be negated.  And with the thermal sight, the gunners could fire at night.  The range is similar, and there are a variety of ammo types to fire.

Navy-dudes: what do you think?


----------



## VIChris

Noob Q: Is that vertical plate on the .50 supposed to be armour? What will it stop? It looks like it's only thick enough for fragmentation, no? I'm no expert, just hoping to learn.

Noob Q #2: In regards to the C-16, how effective would it be from a pitching deck against (potentially) moving targets? Would it's significantly lower muzzle velocity vs. the .50 not mean much greater lead off is required? And is that not made much more difficult when the shooting platform is unstable?


----------



## vonGarvin

VIChris said:
			
		

> Noob Q: Is that vertical plate on the .50 supposed to be armour? What will it stop? It looks like it's only thick enough for fragmentation, no? I'm no expert, just hoping to learn.


It's not armour, it's a sight.  From the side, I see what you mean, it sort of looks like a bit of armour.



			
				VIChris said:
			
		

> Noob Q #2: In regards to the C-16, how effective would it be from a pitching deck against (potentially) moving targets? Would it's significantly lower muzzle velocity vs. the .50 not mean much greater lead off is required? And is that not made much more difficult when the shooting platform is unstable?


It would probably need more lead at longer targets.  I don't know if it would be more difficult, but the navy guys would have to answer how much or how often they fire from a significantly pitching deck.  Maybe some sort of stabilisation system could be mounted?


----------



## observor 69

@HMS_Nonsuch 
HMS Nonsuch
 RT @3PDee Canadian Air Force total sorties as of 23:59Z 16 May: CF-188 HORNET 276; CC-150 POLARIS 104; CP-140 AURORA 44


----------



## GAP

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Maybe some sort of stabilisation system could be mounted?



They did it for the Abrams.....ships should be easy..... ;D


----------



## VIChris

Thanks for the info, TV and GAP.


----------



## vonGarvin

VIChris said:
			
		

> Thanks for the info, TV and GAP.


You're welcome.  And here is an image of a .50 cal sight similar to the type in the picture.







And for reference, here is the C-16 in ground mount role, from the "business end" (eg: you don't want to face this from this end).  






As you can see, there are a variety of sights on it.  Including sights that allow the gunner to "see" at night.  For characteristics, the C-16 is similar to the .50 in terms of range and *some* target effects.  In other words, you can still mess up boats that a .50 can, at the same range with the same limitations that a .50 would have (rough seas, etc).  

I think that the main advantage would be the ability for the gunner to "see" threats in periods of low-light visibility.


----------



## Occam

Technoviking said:
			
		

> It's not armour, it's a sight.  From the side, I see what you mean, it sort of looks like a bit of armour.



I think VIChris was referring to the vertical plate that I've highlighted in red, TV.


----------



## vonGarvin

Occam said:
			
		

> I think VIChris was referring to the vertical plate that I've highlighted in red, TV.



:rofl:

Wow, how on earth did I miss that?


Yes, that's armour.  What it stops?  Other than _some _ sea water, I wouldn't have a clue....


----------



## dapaterson

Technoviking said:
			
		

> And for reference, here is the C-16 in ground mount role, from the "business end" (eg: you don't want to face this from this end).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, there are a variety of sights on it.  Including sights that allow the gunner to "see" at night.  For characteristics, the C-16 is similar to the .50 in terms of range and *some* target effects.  In other words, you can still mess up boats that a .50 can, at the same range with the same limitations that a .50 would have (rough seas, etc).
> 
> I think that the main advantage would be the ability for the gunner to "see" threats in periods of low-light visibility.



Well, that looks nice and man-portable.


----------



## dapaterson

Technoviking said:
			
		

> :rofl:
> 
> Wow, how on earth did I miss that?
> 
> 
> Yes, that's armour.  What it stops?  Other than _some _ sea water, I wouldn't have a clue....



Some people are sent to recce platoon because of their ability to observe and report on what they see.  Others are sent to mortars...


----------



## Occam

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Yes, that's armour.  What it stops?  Other than _some _ sea water, I wouldn't have a clue....



I'm sure it's at least thick enough to defend against an empty bottle of Sangria thrown by an irate Spanish fisherman.  (Lessons Learned from the great Turbot War)


----------



## VIChris

Yeah, that was the plate I was referring to, haha. And that makes a lot more sense. When he said it was part of the sight, I thought, okay, the Navy uses some sort of weird assed siting system to compensate for firing from an elevated position or something.

From reading about the C16, I gather that it would fill a similar role to Ma Deuce, but my thoughts about the slower round still stand in regards to leading off potentially fast and erratically moving targets. I guess stabilization technology is at a point now where that could be somewhat mitigated though? TV, you're probably right too about it not being fired from a heavily pitching deck either. Thinking more about it being a close range system, it would be more likely employed in calmer, coastal or inland waterways vice high seas hi jinx.


----------



## Journeyman

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Some people are sent to recce platoon because of their ability to observe and report on what they see.  Others are sent to mortars...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Occam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure it's at least thick enough......
Click to expand...

Oh, after this discussion, I now suspect that the original poster is "thick enough"   ;D


----------



## NavyShooter

1.  Armour plate.  Yes.  Provides some protection to the gunner.  Better than having no armour plate, right?

2.  C-16?  Sure, why not.   But the last time the Navy asked for a piece of shiny army kit (NODLR) we got smacked down by a 1 Leaf in green.  Can you imagine the hooplah if the Navy deployed an army weapons system operationally before the Army did?  

NS


----------



## vonGarvin

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Some people are sent to recce platoon because of their ability to observe and report on what they see.  Others are sent to mortars...


:rofl:


----------



## vonGarvin

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> 2.  C-16?  Sure, why not.   But the last time the Navy asked for a piece of shiny army kit (NODLR) we got smacked down by a 1 Leaf in green.  Can you imagine the hooplah if the Navy deployed an army weapons system operationally before the Army did?
> 
> NS


On behalf of the infantry, I say to you "Please, do!  No objections here!"  >


----------



## observor 69

FYI:

The first systems will be delivered to train the trainers in February 2011.  The Infantry School and the Canadian Forces School of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering will receive systems in April 2011, and units will begin receiving systems in May 2011.

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/land-terre/news-nouvelles/story-reportage-eng.asp?id=4774


----------



## Journeyman

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Can you imagine the hooplah if the Navy deployed an army weapons system operationally before the Army did?
> 
> 
> 
> On behalf of the infantry, I say to you "Please, do!  No objections here!"  >
Click to expand...

Hell yes!! Take it!
The only people who believe it is even remotely man-portable are staff officers in NCR who will never have to carry even part of it, let alone the ammo allocation.   :


----------



## CougarKing

UPI link



> *Report: Canada buying more bombs for Libya*



Please see link for full article.


----------



## The Bread Guy

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Can you imagine the hooplah if the Navy deployed an army weapons system operationally before the Army did?


How about "parallel deployment"  
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/TrainingAndAdventure/ArmysApacheFiresFirstHellfireMissilesAtSea.htm


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> 1.  Armour plate.  Yes.  Provides some protection to the gunner.  Better than having no armour plate, right?
> 
> 2.  C-16?  Sure, why not.   But the last time the Navy asked for a piece of shiny army kit (NODLR) we got smacked down by a 1 Leaf in green.  Can you imagine the hooplah if the Navy deployed an army weapons system operationally before the Army did?
> 
> NS



We use .50 on ocassion to "fire across the bow" could we use the C16 to do the same? WHat about during night ops, its hard for a ship to miss that burst of tracer fire. Is the C16 fitted with tracers?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Can you imagine the hooplah if the Navy deployed an army weapons system operationally before the Army did?
> 
> NS



Actually, we have before: First Gulf War. We got Javelins in service real quick - and before the Army, to replace the Blowpipes that could not do the job (as demonstrated a few years before in the Falklands).


----------



## Old Sweat

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Actually, we have before: First Gulf War. We got Javelins in service real quick - and before the Army, to replace the Blowpipes that could not do the job (as demonstrated a few years before in the Falklands).


You are absolutely correct. And there was no hoopla. I believe in fact that a British army training team sailed from Halifax with the ships to train the embarked air defence gunners. I don't think it is worth making any fuss about the semantics over the finer details of who owned what. The fact was Javelin was deployed under naval command.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> You are absolutely correct. And there was no hoopla. I believe in fact that a British army training team sailed from Halifax with the ships to train the embarked air defence gunners. I don't think it is worth making any fuss about the semantics over the finer details of who owned what. The fact was Javelin was deployed under naval command.



OGBD and OS- not quite.

Javelin missiles were never own by the Navy- they always belonged to and were operated by 119 AD Bty pers (read Army AD Artymn) , deployed on HMCS ships- obviously placed under Command of the Navy. 

The Blowpipe missile system was quickly replaced in Aug 90 for Gulf War 1 by an emergency buy of Javelin GL aiming units and missiles, following a fairly disasterous missile camp in Gagetown where about 1 in 2 Blowpipe missiles malfunctioned.  Then BGen Baril (Comd CTC) witnessed all of this, got on his new "cellphone" (it was about the size of a shoe box) and called the CDS directly and 3 days later, 3 x C-130 loads of missiles and aiming units arrived in Shearwater from Belfast, along with a UK IG team.

The UK IG team sailed with the Task Group as far as Gibralter to provide training supervision of the live fire camp at sea (which provided a book full of lessons all on it's own).

I "might" have had a front row seat at all of this...


----------



## Old Sweat

Thanks for the clarification. I knew the Brit team sailed as far as Gibraltar. Re the Blowpipe, I saw the first round fired in Canada and my comment "Holy F..., I thought that SOB had thundered in for sure," as the first stage fired and we waited for the second stage to fire was recorded for posterity. My post was not to down play 119 Battery; it was to show how we ignored hat badge politics and got on with the job in a crisis.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

OS
Believe me, there was more than enough hat badge politics to go around during op friction.

Mobile command vs the navy

Artillery vs other regiments and arms

And even the ever popular bird vs steam gunner politics

I saved all of the message traffic covering a 4 month period.  It makes fascinating reading.

I have watched probably 400 blowpipe and javelin missiles fired in my career.  It was exciting each and every time, as you literally had no idea what would happen.  I have seen everything from second stage misfires to detonations on arming to a missile cartwheeling across Centre Lake in Pet.  That one even drew ooohs and aahhs from both the IG team and Shorts tech rep.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

SeakingTacco, I thought the original post mentioned "deployed" by the Navy before the Army. And that was the case with the Javelin, regardless of who "owned" them. But it is just a matter of semantics, the real point is when any of us needs something for an operation, the fact that it has not yet been in regular service is not a bar to getting it.

BTW, the hat badge politics you refer to makes perfect sense. After all, the operation was called Friction.


----------



## old medic

Apache helicopters to be sent into Libya by Britain
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/23/apache-helicopters-libya-britain



> Britain and France are to deploy attack helicopters against Libya in an attempt to break the military stalemate, particularly in the important coastal city of Misrata, security sources have told the Guardian.
> 
> In a significant escalation of the conflict, the Apaches – based on HMS Ocean – will join French helicopters in risky operations which reflect deepening frustration among British and French defence chiefs about their continuing inability to protect civilians.
> 
> Apaches, which are being used in counter insurgency operations in Afghanistan, can manoeuvre and attack small targets in relatively built-up areas. Heavily-armed Apaches and French Tiger helicopters are equipped with night vision equipment and electronic guidance systems.
> 
> Gaddafi forces have shed their uniforms, are using civilian vehicles and hiding armour near civilian buildings, including hospitals and schools.
> 
> The decision to deploy the helicopters is a clear recognition that high-level bombing from 15,000 feet cannot protect civilians who continue to be attacked by rocket and mortar shells. It brings the Nato offensive much closer to the ground at a time when Britain and other Nato countries are insisting they have no intention of sending in troops.
> 
> However, the helicopters could be vulnerable to hand-held rocket propelled grenades and even rifle fire.
> 
> Hospital officials said two people were killed and several wounded during Monday's fighting in Misrata. Later, heavy explosions outside the city were heard, lasting about an hour. Reuters news agency quoted a rebel spokesman as saying that forces loyal to Gaddafi also shelled the rebel-held town of Zintan and moved troops close to the mountainous region bordering Tunisia, intensifying operations on the war's western front.
> 
> Britain and France clearly hope the use of attack helicopters, and revealing the intention to use them, will deter pro-Gaddafi forces and assuage Libyan rebels who have been demanding more effective military action from Nato countries. The sight of Nato forces actually on the ground would be strongly opposed by most Nato countries, including the US and those Arab countries in favour of the air campaign against Gaddafi's forces.
> 
> Foreign secretary William Hague, attending an EU meeting in Brussels, said: "We are very much behind the intensification of the military campaign and so is France. We certainly agree with all our partners that it is necessary to intensify the military, economic and diplomatic pressure on the Gaddafi regime."
> 
> Alain Juppe, France's foreign minister, confirmed that Paris has dispatched a dozen helicopters to add greater strike force to the campaign against Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. He said that the 12 Tiger and Gazelle helicopters sent from Toulon on May 17 would enable "us to better adapt our ground attack capacity with more precise means of striking."
> 
> "Our strategy is to step up the military pressure in the weeks ahead while pushing at the same time for a political solution." ..........



Strike helicopters in Libya is within UN mandate: France
The Associated Press
Date: Monday May. 23, 2011
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110523/france-libya-110523/

BRUSSELS — France and Britain will deploy attack helicopters in Libya as soon as possible, the French defence minister said Monday -- a move that would allow their pilots more precision but also expose them to greater risk.

Gerard Longuet said the helicopters would be used to target military equipment such as Libyan tanker and ammunition trucks in crowded urban areas while causing fewer civilian casualties.

Longuet said he discussed the plan with British military officials and they were "exactly on the same wave length."

The use of attack helicopters would appear to mark a new strategy for NATO, which has relied on strikes by fighter planes and seen that result in a stalemate on the ground.

Nimble, low-flying helicopters have much more leeway to pick targets with precision than high-flying jets. But they also are much more vulnerable to ground fire. The alliance has had no military deaths since it first started enforcing a no-fly zone on March 31.

Longuet said France would essentially use Gazelle helicopters, which have been around for some 40 years.

"It is an old machine but fully adapted to the situation," said Longuet. France also can use the Tigre, a modern helicopter gunship.

In airstrikes using fighter planes, the alliance fears collateral damage can be too great against a foe that can hide in urban areas or mix up with civilian traffic.

"We had to give ourselves the means to strike without hitting civilians," Longuet said.

NATO is operating under a U.N. mandate that authorizes the use of force -- but not ground troops -- to protect Libyan civilians. Forces loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi have been responsible for attacks on civilians, and he has shown no inclination to cede power.

Longuet and French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said the use of the military attack helicopters would fall within the U.N. mandate.

A French military spokesman said Sunday a French amphibious assault ship, Le Tonnerre, had sailed from Toulon, France, last week. The French daily newspaper Le Figaro reported Sunday that the Tonnerre was carrying 12 military helicopters and sailing for the Libyan coast. Longuet would not confirm the number of choppers on board.


----------



## The Bread Guy

This from Postmedia News:


> Two Canadian soldiers in Italy were under medical observation Wednesday after they walked away from a car crash that killed an Italian fighter pilot.
> 
> The Department of National Defence said the two Canadians were unharmed in the accident.
> 
> The accident happened a little after 9 p.m. Tuesday about 100 metres outside the entrance to the Trapani-Birgi airbase where Canada's air force for the Libyan mission is stationed, the department said.
> 
> Local Trapani newspaper Telesud reported Wednesday that the two Canadian women were in a car that collided with a Ducati motorcycle. Telesud reported that 33-year-old Francesco Rinciari, a sergeant in the Italian air force, was killed in the accident.
> 
> On Wednesday, Canadian Forces spokesman Brig-Gen. Richard Blanchette expressed his condolences to Rinciari's family ....



Here's the Telesud story (a TV station, not a paper - here's a link to the 25 May newscast, where the story starts around 9:18 into the newscast).  Also, I'm not sure senior NCO's (which is what a suttufficiale is) are pilots in the ITA Air Force.

Condolences, nonetheless, and hopes for a full recovery on the part of the Canadians involved in the accident.


----------



## The Bread Guy

This from Embassy - highlights mine:


> A Canadian frigate stopped and boarded a ship off the coast of Libya, but then let the vessel go despite the fact it was ferrying a large amount of arms and explosives to the rebel movement fighting Moammar Gaddafi’s regime.
> 
> The revelation, stemming from a video posted on NATO’s website on May 24, has some experts fearing Canada and the military alliance are picking and choosing how they apply the UN-mandated arms embargo—and effectively allowing the ongoing Libyan civil war to continue.
> 
> The video, which was also posted on YouTube follows the men and women of the HMCS Charlottetown in early April as they stop a tugboat in international waters near the Libyan port of Misrata. The Charlottetown has been patrolling in the Mediterranean since April and is Canada’s major contribution to enforcing the UN arms embargo.
> 
> In the video, the Charlottetown’s captain, Craig Skjerpen, says he has received information that the ship—flying the flag of the Libyan rebels and appearing in the video jam-packed with people—is carrying weapons.
> 
> The Canadians subsequently send a boarding team that uncovers what the video’s narrator describes as “lots of weapons and munitions on board,” including “small ammunition to 105mm Howitzer rounds and lots of explosives.”
> 
> However, when the Canadians relay the findings up the chain of command to NATO headquarters, they are ordered to let the tugboat go without confiscating the arms.
> 
> When asked to explain why NATO chose not to enforce the resolution in this instance, a NATO official who asked not to be named said “obviously it’s a fairly fine line.”
> 
> *NATO says it does not consider internal movements between Libyan cities to be a breach of the arms embargo at sea, especially between Misratah and Benghazi, two rebel-controlled cities that the alliance says has fairly frequent maritime traffic now* ....



Relevant para from UNSR res'n 1973 (2011), attached:


> .... Calls upon all Member States, in particular States of the region, acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, in order to ensure strict implementation of the arms embargo established by paragraphs 9 and 10 of resolution 1970 (2011), to inspect in their territory, including seaports and airports, and on the high seas, vessels and aircraft bound to or from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the cargo contains items the supply, sale, transfer or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 9 or 10 of resolution 1970 (2011) as modified by this resolution, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel, calls upon all flag States of such vessels and aircraft to cooperate with such inspections and authorises Member States to use all measures commensurate to the specific circumstances to carry out such inspections ....



and from UNSCR 1970 (2011), also attached:


> .... 9. .... all Member States shall immediately take the necessary measures to prevent the direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, from or through their territories or by their nationals, or using their flag vessels or aircraft, of arms and related materiel of all types, including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and spare parts for the aforementioned, and technical assistance, training, financial or other assistance, related to military activities or the provision, maintenance or use of any arms and related materiel, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel whether or not originating in their territories, and decides further that this measure shall not apply to:
> (a) Supplies of non-lethal military equipment intended solely for humanitarian or protective use, and related technical assistance or training, as approved in advance by the Committee established pursuant to paragraph 24 below;
> (b) Protective clothing, including flak jackets and military helmets, temporarily exported to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya by United Nations personnel, representatives of the media and humanitarian and development workers and associated personnel, for their personal use only; or
> (c) Other sales or supply of arms and related materiel, or provision of assistance or personnel, as approved in advance by the Committee;
> 
> 10. Decides that the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya shall cease the export of all arms and related materiel and that all Member States shall prohibit the procurement of such items from the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya by their nationals, or using their flagged vessels or aircraft, and whether or not originating in the territory of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya ....


----------



## GAP

240 missiles dropped by Canadian pilots in Libya: DND
8:58 pm, May 25th, 2011
Article Link

KRIS SIMS, PARLIAMENTARY BUREAU | QMI AGENCY

OTTAWA -- Canadian pilots flying CF-18 fighter jets in the NATO mission over Libya have dropped 240 laser-guided missiles, but the targets cannot be revealed because of security concerns.

The department of national defence released several statistics and totals related to the United Nations-sanctioned mission Wednesday.

Canadian Forces have flown 324 "strike sorties" - jet flights that destroy targets - since the mission began in March.

There are 600 Canadian Forces soldiers involved in the operation, flying seven CF-18s, two Auroras, three refuelling planes, one Sea King helicopter and serving aboard the HMCS Charlottetown.

Allied countries are providing air support to Libyan rebels who have been trying to topple dictator Moammar Gadhafi since February.

NATO has been increasing the pressure on Gadhafi recently, bombing the port of Tripoli.
More on link


----------



## vonGarvin

GAP said:
			
		

> *There are 600 Canadian Forces soldiers involved in the operation,* flying seven CF-18s, two Auroras, three refuelling planes, one Sea King helicopter and serving aboard the HMCS Charlottetown.


What?  No sailors, airmen or airwomen?


----------



## GR66

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> This from Embassy - highlights mine:
> Relevant para from UNSR res'n 1973 (2011), attached:
> and from UNSCR 1970 (2011), also attached:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The revelation, stemming from a video posted on NATO’s website on May 24, has some experts fearing Canada and the military alliance are picking and choosing how they apply the UN-mandated arms embargo—and effectively allowing the ongoing Libyan civil war to continue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NATO says it does not consider internal movements between Libyan cities to be a breach of the arms embargo at sea, especially between Misratah and Benghazi, two rebel-controlled cities that the alliance says has fairly frequent maritime traffic now ....
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


This sure _seems_ to suggest that the reason the shipment was allowed to go through was because it was an internal movement of arms within the territory of Libya (by sea from Misratah to Benghazi) rather than arms being imported (through the blockade) into Libya.

If that is true it sure seems like a case of poor and misleading reporting of the incident and paints both Canada and NATO in an unfairly negative light.  Internal movement of arms and ammunition through the territorial waters of Libya to my mind would be no different than a truck convoy of arms an ammunition driving between two rebel held towns.   Nothing in the UN resolution says that the rebels are to be prevented from moving arms and ammunition within their own territory, only that member nations are to prevent the export of arms and ammunintion INTO Libya.


----------



## observor 69

Canada looking to extend mission in Libya
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Friday he expects broad support for extending Ottawa's participation in the NATO-led mission in Libya when parliament debates it in June.

"It will be debated in June," he told a press conference at the end of a Group of Eight summit in France.

"We will be looking for an extension to our mission," he said. "We've had good, strong support across parties in parliament for this mission. I would hope now that we continue to have it."

"I think significant progress has been made," the prime minister added. "The rebels have sustained their gains in the east of the country, and I think there continues to evidence that the power of the Kadhafi regime continues to be degraded."

Harper pointed to Russia's dramatic change of tone in calling for Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi "to go" as encouraging.

Moscow had previously criticized the air strikes on Kadhafi's forces as they try to quash a pro-democracy rebellion.

Given this international consensus, "I would hope that would encourage parliament to continue to support the actions of the Canadian forces which we're very proud as part of the international effort," Harper said.



© 2011 AFP

http://www.expatica.com/fr/news/french-news/canada-looking-to-extend-mission-in-libya_152492.html


----------



## NavyShooter

Technoviking said:
			
		

> What?  No sailors, airmen or airwomen?



"Soldiers first"....anyone can be given a rifle and be told to stand a post.


----------



## 57Chevy

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Friday he expects broad support for extending Ottawa's participation in the NATO-led mission in Libya when parliament debates it in June.
> 
> "It will be debated in June," he told a press conference



Canadians from coast to coast to coast, as they say, have a vested interest in the Libyan mission. And Harper recognized that when he committed Friday to consult Parliament on his wish to extend the Canadian military mission in Libya beyond the three-month limit approved by the Commons in mid-March.

“We had unanimity before,” Harper told CBC. “I don’t know that we can get that again. I’d obviously welcome that. I think all of the reasons all parties agreed to go into Libya are still present. I think we should be encouraged by the success.”

With his majority, Haper doesn’t have to ask the House of Commons for approval, but it’s the right thing to do.

full article...
An extended Libyan mission
Staff/The Cape Breton Post/May 30, 2011
http://www.capebretonpost.com/Opinion/Editorial/2011-05-30/article-2543882/An-extended-Libyan-mission/1


----------



## CougarKing

Major defections from Qaddafi loyalists to the rebel side.

link



> *Over 100 Libyan army members defect from Gaddafi*
> 
> ROME (Reuters) - *Eight Libyan army officers appeared in Rome on Monday, saying they were part of a group of as many as 120 military officials and soldiers who defected from Muammar Gaddafi's side in recent days.
> 
> The eight officers -- five generals, two colonels and a major -- spoke at a news conference organised by the Italian government, which is one of a handful of countries that has recognized the Libyan rebel movement fighting Gaddafi as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people.*
> 
> Libyan U.N. ambassador Abdurrahman Shalgam, who has also defected from Gaddafi, said all 120 of the military personnel were outside Libya now but he did not say where they were.
> 
> Earlier, Al Arabiya television said 120 Libyan officers had arrived in Rome. The Libyan ambassador to Rome, who has also defected from Gaddafi, said only the eight present at the hastily called news conference were in the Italian capital.
> 
> The eight officers said they defected in protest at Gaddafi's actions against his own people, saying there had been a lot of killing of civilians and violence against women.
> 
> They said that Gaddafi's armed forces' campaign against rebels was rapidly weakening.
> 
> British-based Libyan opposition activist and editor Ashour Shamis said he was aware of reports from opposition sources that eight high ranking Libyan officers including four generals had defected and were in Rome.
> 
> "This will create its own momentum against Gaddafi, increasing the pressure on him," he said. He said he had no word on the defection of as many as 100 officers.
> 
> Noman Benotman, another opposition activist who works as an analyst for Britain's Quilliam Foundation think tank, said he had heard that many officers had defected, without elaborating.
> 
> *Every individual defection was the result of a combination of factors, he said, but the latest group had been spurred largely by tensions arising from the appointment of what he called newcomers to senior positions in the security services.
> 
> The behavior of these men, many of them relatively youthful Gaddafi loyalists in their mid-30s, had stirred anger and dismay among the army's officer ranks, who regarded their actions as overbearing and brutal, Benotman said.*
> 
> "The army officers feel they are being watched all the time. They feel uncomfortable because they feel a lack of trust. So at the first chance of defection they took it," he said.
> 
> He added that many of the newly appointed senior security officials were Gaddafi relatives.
> ...


----------



## observor 69

LE DEVOIR.com

La mission canadienne en Libye se poursuivra

Le premier ministre Stephen Harper a annoncé hier, en marge du sommet du G8 à Deauville, en France, qu'il va prolonger la mission canadienne en Libye. Les Forces canadiennes ont d'ailleurs commandé 1300 bombes guidées au laser, qui coûtent environ 100 000 $ chacune, pour la suite des opérations.

 Selon l'Ottawa Citizen, les Forces canadiennes ont commandé 1300 bombes guidées au laser dans les dernières semaines pour remplacer les 240 utilisées et faire des provisions pour la suite de la mission. Advenant que la commande concerne des bombes Paveway II GBU-12 au même prix, la facture atteindrait 130 millions de dollars.

Le Canada a déployé six chasseurs CF-18 et un autre CF-18 de réserve pour cette mission, en plus de deux appareils de patrouille maritime CP-140 Aurora, trois avions ravitailleurs en vol (deux hercules et un CC-150 Polaris) et une frégate de la marine canadienne. Près de 600 militaires canadiens sont déployés, alors qu'ils étaient 150 au premier jour de la mission.

Le gouvernement n'a toujours pas dévoilé la facture de cette intervention. Mais en plus du coût des bombes, du logement des militaires en Italie et de leur déplacement, il faut ajouter que chaque heure de vol d'un CF-18 coûte environ 12 000 $ au trésor public. Un coût élevé qui comprend l'essence, l'entretien des avions au retour des missions, ainsi que les salaires des pilotes. Un CF-18 brûle de 1200 gallons (4542 litres) de carburant par heure.

Voir reste de l'article au lien:

http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/324306/la-mission-canadienne-en-libye-se-poursuivra#haut


----------



## The Bread Guy

This from NATO:


> *Statement by the NATO Secretary General on the extension of the mission in Libya*
> 
> NATO and partners have just decided to extend our mission for Libya for another 90 days.
> 
> This decision sends a clear message to the Qadhafi regime: We are determined to continue our operation to protect the people of Libya. We will sustain our efforts to fulfil the United Nations mandate. We will keep up the pressure to see it through.
> 
> Our decision also sends a clear message to the people of Libya: NATO, our partners, the whole international community, stand with you. We stand united to make sure that you can shape your own future. And that day is getting closer.


----------



## 57Chevy

quote:
This decision sends a clear message......
Our decision also sends a clear message.......
....And that day is getting closer.

And if that day doesn't get closer, someone else will be sending more clear messages ;D


----------



## aesop081

57Chevy said:
			
		

> someone else will be sending more clear messages ;D



The messages sent so far have been pretty clear, trust me.


----------



## 57Chevy

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> The messages sent so far have been pretty clear, trust me.



Trust me.....That was sarcasm.


----------



## Privateer

Per CBC:  http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2011/06/02/ns-hmcs-charlottetown-rockets.html

"*Rockets fired at HMCS Charlottetown*

A dozen rockets were fired at HMCS Charlottetown off the coast of Libya on Monday.

Officials on the vessel told CBC News on Thursday that 12 BM-21 rockets were fired in the direction of the Halifax-based ship.

None of the rockets hit the ship and there were no injuries."


----------



## NavyShooter

Interesting....

I didn't know it was 12....


----------



## Old Sweat

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Interesting....
> 
> I didn't know it was 12....


Somebody may have checked Jane's before doing the press release for the number of tubes on a BM21 or whatever they figured it was. Or they counted the distant booms and the closer booms and divided by two. That's how we do it in the artillery intelligence world, not. 

Sounds like the bad guys are getting desperate.


----------



## aesop081

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Sounds like the bad guys are getting desperate.



They were doing the same thing a month or so ago.


----------



## NavyShooter

"distant"  ....  ?????

Who said the boom/splashes were "distant"....

Don't believe everything in the media.  LOL


----------



## Old Sweat

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> "distant"  ....  ?????
> 
> Who said the boom/splashes were "distant"....
> 
> Don't believe everything in the media.  LOL


When I said distant, I meant the sound of the rockets firing, while nearer referred to the detonations of the incoming rounds.


----------



## 57Chevy

old medic said:
			
		

> Apache helicopters to be sent into Libya by Britain
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/23/apache-helicopters-libya-britain
> 
> Strike helicopters in Libya is within UN mandate: France
> The Associated Press
> Date: Monday May. 23, 2011
> http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110523/france-libya-110523/
> 
> BRUSSELS — France and Britain will deploy attack helicopters in Libya as soon as possible...



NATO helicopters join Libya mission
Patrick J. McDonnell, Los Angeles Times/June 5, 2011
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-helicopters-20110604,0,3673618.story

French and British helicopters attack targets around Port Brega, the first use of such aircraft in the NATO campaign. Rebel leaders hail the move, but it is unclear whether it will signal a new rebel offensive.

Reporting from Tripoli, Libya— 
French and British attack helicopters hit targets in Libya in the first use of such aircraft as part of the NATO-led campaign against the government of Moammar Kadafi, authorities said Saturday.

The helicopters, including British Apaches firing Hellfire missiles and 30-millimeter cannon rounds, struck targets around Port Brega, a strategic oil port that is the easternmost city still under the control of Kadafi's forces. The targets hit included a radar installation and a military checkpoint, officials said.

The helicopters flew from British and French ships in the Mediterranean and returned to the vessels afterward, authorities said. No injuries to the crews or damage to the aircraft was reported.

"This successful engagement demonstrates the unique capabilities brought to bear by attack helicopters," said Canadian air force Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard, NATO commander for the Libya mission.

Meanwhile, more explosions rocked Tripoli on Saturday, apparently the latest in a punishing series of NATO-led bombing raids on the Libyan capital. There was no immediate word on damage or injuries.

The deployment of attack helicopters in Libya after much debate could represent a significant escalation of the 3-month-old conflict that pits rebels against forces loyal to Kadafi, who has led the oil-rich nation for more than four decades. Rebels who first rose against Kadafi in February now control most of eastern Libya, while Kadafi remains in power in Tripoli and much of the west.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces are acting under a United Nations mandate to protect civilians from Kadafi's forces, a mission that has limited the mobility of his troops and in effect aided the rebels' cause. 

Rebel leaders who have been pushing NATO to step up attacks hailed the helicopter deployment. Until the helicopter strikes, the Western-led alliance had deployed fast-flying jet fighters and drone aircraft and fired missiles from offshore vessels. 

Although helicopters have indisputable strengths — they can get closer to targets than high-altitude jet fighters and hover over the battlefield — the aircraft are also more vulnerable to ground fire, including ground-to-air missiles. The fear that a helicopter with a foreign crew could be shot down is probably one reason why NATO, which says it has no troops on the ground, took so long to decide to deploy them.

It was unclear whether a limited number of helicopters will be decisive in the battle for Libya or will drive Kadafi from power, a stated goal of NATO powers. Rebels have made recent advances in the western mountains and in the western coastal city of Misurata, 120 miles east of Tripoli. But the major east-west front outside Port Brega has been static for several months. And Kadafi has declared that he will not leave.

Last week NATO said it was extending its mission in Libya for another 90 days, signaling that a military campaign initially expected to last weeks could drag on for months more.

Port Brega is an important oil refining and shipping center and lies along the strategic coastal road from Benghazi, the rebel stronghold, to Tripoli, which passes through Libya's major population centers.

Port Brega changed hands several times during the early days of the uprising against Kadafi. But the city wound up under government control while the next city to the east, Ajdabiya, about 50 miles away, remained in rebel hands. The front line separating the government and rebel armies is said to be about halfway between the two cities.

Whether the helicopter attacks signal the beginning of a long-anticipated rebel offensive toward Port Brega and the west remains to be seen.

Photo:
A British Apache attack helicopter takes off from the deck of the Royal Navy's HMS Ocean, which is deployed off the north African coast. British and French forces launched helicopter strikes against Moammar Kadafi's forces in Libya on Saturday. (British Ministry of Defense / EPA / June 4, 2011)


----------



## Edward Campbell

See here, please.

I repeat: Libya is a _strategic_ sideshow, at best. And, compared to China-India the en tire _Islamist_ problem is a sideshow, too.


----------



## The Bread Guy

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Interesting....
> 
> I didn't know it was 12....





			
				NavyShooter said:
			
		

> "distant"  ....  ?????
> 
> Who said the boom/splashes were "distant"....


That's what happens when you don't get the paper on a timely basis  ;D

Joking aside, though, _if quoted correctly_, that's what someone in a uniform (in this case, someone on the ship) told at least one media outlet:


> .... *Lt. Michael McWhinnie, who is on the vessel, told CBC News on Thursday that 12 BM-21 rockets were fired in the direction of the Halifax-based ship*.
> 
> None of the rockets hit the ship and there were no injuries.
> 
> "‪It is important to understand that NATO maritime forces are aware of the military weapon systems possessed by the Gadhafi regime and operate with consideration of their capabilities," McWhinnie said ....


Also, this from CEFCOM, again _if properly quoted_:


> About 12 rockets were fired this week at a Canadian frigate deployed to Libya, the Department of National Defence said.
> 
> The rockets landed far enough away from HMCS Charlottetown that there was no damage to the ship or any injuries or casualties to the crew, said spokeswoman Capt. Jennifer Stadnyk.
> 
> On Monday, the crew of the Charlottetown observed about a dozen BM21 rockets fired at them, *all of which landed in the water well away from the ship*. The BM21 is a 122-millimetre rocket fired from a vehicle-mounted launching system with a range of up to 40 kilometres. The Charlottetown did not return fire and has not come under fire since the incident, Stadnyk said ....



All that said, stay safe, folks!


----------



## NavyShooter

It's hard to look a PAO in the face and believe anything he says.

But, he said it, so it must  be true and correct.


----------



## 57Chevy

Shared with provisions of the Copyright Act

China steps into Libya crisis
5 June 2011
http://www.bfbs.com/news/navy/china-steps-libya-crisis-48259.html

China has made its first confirmed contact with Libyan rebels in the latest diplomatic setback for Muammar Gaddafi.

Meanwhile France has said it is working with those close to the veteran ruler to persuade him to leave power.

The meeting in Qatar between a Chinese diplomat and the leader of the rebel National Transitional Council follows a spate of defections by high profile figures this week including top oil official and former prime minister Shukri Ghanem.

Libyan rebels and NATO have made Gaddafi's departure a condition for agreeing a ceasefire in a conflict that has killed thousands, but he emphatically told visiting South African President Jacob Zuma this week he would not leave Libya.

The NATO-led military alliance extended its mission to protect civilians in Libya for a further 90 days this week.

Chief of the Defence Staff Strategic Communication Officer Major General John Lorimer said on Friday: "NATO's Operation Unified Protector continues apace to protect Libyan civilians under threat of attack and enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973."

He said: "Royal Air Force Tornado aircraft yesterday (Thursday) patrolled over Yafran, where Colonel Gaddafi's forces continue to attack the peoples of the western highlands. Our aircraft identified a small formation of regime armour deployed in the area and destroyed two main battle tanks and two armoured personnel carriers with Paveway guided bombs."


----------



## GAP

Rare daytime NATO airstrikes hit Libyan capital
Article Link
The Associated Press  Tue. Jun. 7 2011 7:50 AM ET

TRIPOLI, Libya — Low-flying NATO military craft hit Tripoli at least a dozen times Tuesday in rare daytime strikes on the Libyan capital that were designed to step up pressure on Moammar Gadhafi to leave power.

The morning air raids shook the ground in a series of sharp explosions that thundered over the capital. Some of the strikes were believed to have targeted a military barracks near Gadhafi's sprawling central Tripoli compound, said spokesman Moussa Ibrahim. Others hit the compound itself, Libyan television reported. Pro-Gadhafi loyalists in the capital fired weapons into the air but after the NATO strikes had ended.

NATO officials have warned for days that they were increasing the scope and intensity of their two-month campaign to oust Gadhafi after more than 40 years in power. The alliance is assisting a four-month old rebel insurgency that has seized swaths of eastern Libya and pockets in the regime's stronghold in the west.

"Instead of talking to us, they are bombing us. They are going mad. They are losing their heads," said Ibrahim.

The spokesman said the daylight strikes were particularly terrifying because families were separated during the day. Libyan school children are taking final exams at the end of the school year. 

More on link


----------



## The Bread Guy

1)  NATO defence ministers "endorse" 90-day mission extension - more from NATO here.

2)  Opposition, Liberals:  When are we going to debate this?

3)  Defence Minister:  15 Jun 11


----------



## GAP

Canadian directing war in Libya calls it ‘a knife-fight in a phone booth'
PAUL KORING ALLIED JOINT FORCES COMMAND, NAPLES, ITALY— From Monday's Globe and Mail
Published Monday, Jun. 13, 2011
Article Link

For the self-effacing helicopter pilot from Chicoutimi, the deputy commander’s office in the prestigious but hardly over-worked NATO’s regional command in Naples could have been a very pleasant last posting, a fitting swan song to a stellar 30-year-plus military career.

Exquisite Capri is close, the food is sublime, the living is easy and the Med is far from a hardship posting like Afghanistan or Haiti, nor is it the bureaucratic jungle of Ottawa. 

Instead, Charles Bouchard, the Canadian three-star air force general, is running NATO’s trickiest war to date: 10,000-plus sorties, taking out Libyan tanks, fighting in alleyways with no boots on the ground while sending food and medicine to both sides and keeping the United States out of the uncomfortable limelight of commanding hostilities in a third Muslim nation.

It’s a war suddenly in the spotlight. In Ottawa, MPs want to know about mission creep: How a no-fly zone turned into daily, methodical destruction of most everything that props up the Libyan regime. Some countries are running out of bombs, sparking new U.S. accusations that NATO means Europeans playing mutual defence on the cheap while the United States pays the bills and bears the burdens. 
More on link


----------



## The Bread Guy

Meanwhile, the Brits are busy, too:


> Members of the UK Armed Forces saw further action in Libya yesterday as RAF aircraft conducted strikes against two of Colonel Gaddafi's ammunition depots.
> 
> While participating in NATO's Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR, Tornado and Typhoon ground attack aircraft conducted strikes against two depots at Waddan and Al Qaryat Ash Sharqiyah, destroying in total some nine underground storage bunkers.
> 
> Major General Nick Pope, the Chief of the Defence Staff's Strategic Communications Officer, said:
> 
> "At sea, a NATO vessel conducting surveillance operations to enforce the maritime embargo detected high speed inflatable boats approaching Misurata; these craft have previously been used by Gaddafi's special forces in attempts to attack the harbour.
> 
> "The British Army Apaches aboard HMS Ocean were duly alerted and intercepted the boats, destroying two with 30mm cannon fire. They then successfully engaged a ZSU-23-4 self-propelled anti-aircraft system on the coast near Zlitan, as well as a number of armed vehicles in and around regime checkpoints."
> 
> On Saturday, RAF aircraft destroyed four of Colonel Gaddafi's main battle tanks hidden in an orchard near Al Aziziyah, south west of Tripoli.
> 
> RAF Tornado and Typhoon jets also participated in further co-ordinated NATO strikes against key regime military installations in and around the capital, with the British aircraft attacking a major military base at Al Mayah on the western outskirts of the city; nine Paveway guided bombs were dropped.
> 
> These missions were conducted under NATO's Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR to protect Libyan civilians under threat of attack and enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973.
> 
> RAF VC-10 and TriStar tankers, and Sentinel, Sentry and Nimrod R1 surveillance aircraft, continue to provide vital and widespread support to UK and NATO operations over Libya.


----------



## old medic

Canada backs anti-Gadhafi rebels, pledges aid for Libyan rape victims
CAMPBELL CLARK
OTTAWA— The Canadian Press
14 June 2011
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-backs-anti-gadhafi-rebels-pledges-aid-for-libyan-rape-victims/article2060025/


> Canada has recognized the council of Libyan rebels as the “legitimate representative” of the Libyan people, joining an international move to legitimize the nascent organization as a government-in-waiting in Libya.
> 
> Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird said he will try to engage in direct talks with the rebels’ National Transition Council of Libya. He announced the move at the kick-off of a day-long debate on extending Canada’s role in the international military mission until the end of September.
> 
> His speech was aimed at meeting opposition concerns in a bid to win support for a vote expected on Tuesday night. Mr. Baird also announced Canada will contribute $2-million for humanitarian aid in Libya, with a portion to go to victims of sexual violence – a nod to the NDP’s call for Canada to do more to address the use of rape as a weapon of war.
> 
> Opposition parties have called on the government to step up diplomatic and aid efforts, to add to the military role.
> 
> The Canadian move to recognize the Libyan rebel council as the “legitimate representative” of the people is a step short of recognizing them as the legitimate government of Libya – just as four European nations have already done.
> 
> Many other allies have taken a similar step to Canada to bolster the council’s role, and make them a central player in any talks seeking some kind of settlement to end the talks.
> 
> Although Defence Minister Peter MacKay said last week the goals of the mission cannot be met as long as Moammar Gadhafi remains in power. Mr. Baird has since Sunday worked to downplay that line – that the goal of the mission is to change the Libyan regime – in a bid to keep unanimous support in the Commons.
> 
> In reality, the mission has moved to heavy airstrikes on Tripoli in a bid to push Colonel Gadhafi out, but Mr. Baird returned to the line used in the early days of the mission: that the goal of the military mission is to protect civilians, but the political goal is to see the Libyan strongman go.
> 
> In the Commons Tuesday morning, the Foreign Affairs Minister stressed the goal “is to protect civilians” but that “it goes without saying that at the political level ... most actors believe Col. Gadhafi must go.”


----------



## The Bread Guy

Stay calm now.... The latest from the Canadian Peace Alliance:


> .... Canada has already done 300 bombing runs and the cost of keeping planes, ships and more than 500 military personnel in Libya is at least $100 million a month according to retired Col. Michel Drapeau. The Harper government had also just purchased an additional 1300 "smart bombs" for a total price of $130 million.
> 
> The NATO intervention in Libya has nothing to do with supporting the legitimate struggle of the Libyan people for freedom and democracy. The attack on Libya has but one goal in mind – control of the Arab uprisings by western nations intent on the plunder of the resources of the region.
> 
> There have been multiple proposals for a ceasefire by the African Union and Tripoli has agreed to talks. It is NATO that refuses to enter into any dialogue to stop the killing.
> 
> We demand that the government of Canada call for an immediate ceasefire and support talks aimed at a mediated settlement. We demand that the opposition stand against this new war and call for Canadian forces to be brought home.


No word yet on the the Alliance's position on the Libyan government's approach to, um, win hearts and minds?


----------



## a_majoor

Given our escalating involvement, how soon until we see a "boots on the ground" mission like an OMLET for the reble forces or a PRT to rebuild the devastated areas?

Sadly, we rushed in for poorly defined reasons, supporting a rebelion who's leaders and aims we still don't fully know on an open ended mission which really has more to do with the protection of British and French oil interests in the region.

I don't see this going well at all


----------



## jeffb

Canada's mission in Libya extended
National Transitional Council recognized as representative of Libyan people
By Laura Payton, CBC News
Posted: Jun 14, 2011 10:17 AM ET 

The House of Commons has overwhelmingly voted to extend Canada's mission in Libya for three and a half months.

The Conservative motion passed by a vote of 294-1, with Green Party Leader Elizabeth May being the lone member of Parliament to vote against.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/06/14/pol-libya-debate.html?ref=rss


----------



## vonGarvin

Ms May got her name in the news, I see... :facepalm:


----------



## NavyShooter

Rushed in yes, but with no boots on the ground, perhaps the directness of the involvement is different.

Airplanes can be re-tasked.

Ships can be re-deployed.

It is a mission that is not without risks, but sending more air assest and extending the sea-based portion of the mission is not as great an involvement as putting people ashore.

NS


----------



## The Bread Guy

The debate, if you're interested, here in Hansard.


----------



## Good2Golf

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> The debate, if you're interested, here in Hansard.



I must say, the debate was a refreshingly responsible and informed plural discourse on an important issue.  :nod:


----------



## Redeye

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Given our escalating involvement, how soon until we see a "boots on the ground" mission like an OMLET for the reble forces or a PRT to rebuild the devastated areas?
> 
> Sadly, we rushed in for poorly defined reasons, supporting a rebelion who's leaders and aims we still don't fully know on an open ended mission which really has more to do with the protection of British and French oil interests in the region.
> 
> I don't see this going well at all



It's actually Italian oil interests that are the largest, and Canada has a fairly sizeable investment there as well.  The debate in Hansard was an interesting read, becasue there's a lot of good we seem to want to do there, and certainly Libya will need a lot of help once the rebellion succeeds in ousting Mr. Gadhafi.  The involvement we have throughout will likely go a long way to influence the direction that whatever new government emerges choose to take.  What role will the CF have then?  Not clear yet - we haven't actually committed to anything, after all.  Good thing, too.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Given our escalating involvement, how soon until we see a "boots on the ground" mission like an OMLET for the reble forces or a PRT to rebuild the devastated areas?
> 
> Sadly, we rushed in for poorly defined reasons, supporting a rebelion who's leaders and aims we still don't fully know on an open ended mission which really has more to do with the protection of British and French oil interests in the region.
> 
> I don't see this going well at all


I stand to be corrected, but I don't see a huge any public appetite for Canadian boots on the ground here.  More likely outcome to me would be keep extending status quo until rebels get a grip (when - ?), then GTFO.

_- edited to qualify even more -_


----------



## OldSolduer

I cannot see the public supporting a "boots on the ground" scenario.  Just my  :2c:


----------



## old medic

Canada's Hercs star in dangerous ballet of mid-air refuelling
PAUL KORING 
14 June 2011
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/canadas-hercs-star-in-dangerous-ballet-of-mid-air-refuelling/article2061109/



> It only looks easy.
> 
> A pair of needle-nosed warplanes suddenly appear, needing fuel before they make the last dash across the Libyan coast to their targets. In the next few minutes, the bomb-laden Italian Tornados will stage a delicate, high-speed, close encounter with lumbering Canadian Hercules, and as a matter of practised routine transfer 10 tonnes of fuel in midair.
> 
> “They are bit early,” chides the Canadian pilot, who like the rest of the crew aboard the air refueller can’t be named. The Tornados, far faster and manoeuvrable, close in on the left side of the Herc. One slides behind and below, and reappears behind the right wing. Then, edging forward, the fighter pilots poke probes that jut ahead and above their cockpits into a pair of fanlike drogues streaming back from the Herc’s wings and start taking on fuel. In less than six minutes it is over....................


 continues at link above.



How social media users are helping NATO fight Gadhafi in Libya
GRAEME SMITH 
14 June 2011
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/how-social-media-users-are-helping-nato-fight-gadhafi-in-libya/article2060965/


> Every morning at 7:30 a.m., in the picturesque woodlands of rural Ontario, a retired auto shop manager named Janice Clinch helps her grandson get ready for school and fires up her computer for another day of battle in the Libyan desert.
> 
> The 59-year-old has never met anybody from Libya. She has not visited the Arab world; chronic pain makes it hard for her to get around. But from her home near Seeley’s Bay, 40 kilometres northeast of Kingston, she joined a committed cadre of social media users who have become, in effect, volunteer intelligence analysts. On Twitter, Facebook and other services, they discuss satellite images, vessel tracking data and the latest gossip from their sources inside the country. ....................


 continues at link above


----------



## The Bread Guy

Shared in accordance with the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the _Copyright  Act_


> ....Only eight of the 28 NATO states have provided planes for strike missions in Libya and pressure by Gates on others with available resources to do so, such as Spain, the Netherlands, Turkey and Germany, appear to have fallen on deaf ears.
> 
> Already Norway has announced it will have to scale back its contribution of strike aircraft this month and end their role in August, while European NATO stalwart Britain has said continuing the mission beyond September could be a challenge that could require diversion of resources from elsewhere.
> 
> Analysts say this could mean from NATO's war in Afghanistan, still termed the alliance's number-one priority.
> 
> Worse looms over the horizon, with France indicating it will need in the autumn to withdraw the Libyan mission's only aircraft carrier, the Charles de Gaulle, on virtually continuous operations since last year -- with no replacement in the offing.
> 
> ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM
> 
> "The elephant in the room is the imminent departure of the French carrier, given it has been flying 30-40 percent of all NATO strike sorties," said Tim Ripley, of Jane's Defense Weekly.
> 
> "It's a looming problem, so sustaining this operation, particularly if it's going to grind past September or October, is going to be a problem."
> 
> In the absence of other allies coming forward with strike aircraft that could be flown from land bases -- which would necessitate a fleet of refueling tankers only the United States could provide -- one radical solution would be for Britain to redeploy decommissioned Harrier aircraft to its carrier HMS Illustrious, which was designated for conversion into a helicopter ship in Britain's defense review.
> 
> However, even if such a tricky political decision were taken by British Prime Minister David Cameron, it would be up to four months before the ship was ready for action, Ripley said.
> 
> A senior NATO commander conceded the extent of the worry on Tuesday. French General Stephane Abrial said the Libyan crisis had come as "a surprise" and if it were to last a long time "the resources issue will become critical."
> 
> Douglas Barrie, a military aviation specialist at London's International Institute of Strategic Studies, said that when Western powers launched the war in March, they appeared to be anticipating a quick mission.
> 
> "There may have been the view they would be pushing on an open door, but as the campaign has developed, it's become apparent that Gaddafi is not simply going to hang up his hat and leave the country," Barrie said ....


Source:  Reuters


----------



## old medic

Canadian jet fighters join NATO raids on Tripoli
The Canadian Press
16 June 2011
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20110616/nato-canada-bombing-110616/



> OTTAWA — Canadian warplanes have bombed the Libyan capital of Tripoli.
> 
> A Canadian Forces spokesman confirms that CF-18 jet fighters took part in four days of targeted strikes last weekend.
> 
> But the spokesman could not say whether any of the strikes came close to hitting Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi.
> 
> The Canadian jets were involved in day and night raids on Tripoli, which has recently been the focus of more intense NATO bombing.
> 
> They struck at depots housing armoured vehicles in an attempt to degrade Gadhafi's command-and-control structures.
> 
> Canada has six fighter jets taking part in the NATO-led bombardment enforcing a United Nations resolution to protect civilians from Gadhafi.


----------



## The Bread Guy

*<foilhat>*?


> Infowars.com has received alarming reports from within the ranks of military stationed at Ft. Hood, Texas confirming plans to initiate a full-scale U.S.-led ground invasion in Libya and deploy troops by October.
> 
> The source stated that additional Special Forces are headed to Libya in July, with the 1st Calvary Division (heavy armor) and III Corps deploying in late October and early November. Initial numbers are estimated at 12,000 active forces and another 15,000 in support, totaling nearly 30,000 troops.
> 
> This information was confirmed by numerous calls and e-mails from other military personnel, some indicating large troop deployment as early as September. Among these supporting sources is a British S.A.S. officer confirming that U.S. Army Rangers are already in Libya. The chatter differs in the details, but the overall convergence is clear– that a full-on war is emerging this fall as Gaddafi continues to evade attempts to remove him from power.
> 
> A caller identified as “Specialist H” working for mortuary affairs under USCENTCOM revealed that there have already been American casualties inside Libya. He confirmed that at least 2 soldiers and 3 civilians have died from combat bullet wounds, something the media has yet to report, and needs to investigate and address.


Source
*</foilhat>*


----------



## The Bread Guy

> Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird says he's planning a trip to eastern Libya so he can see first-hand how the country's rebels are doing.
> 
> Baird says he will go to Benghazi, the base for the National Transitional Council, and says he's still making plans.
> 
> Baird met Thursday's with the council's Canadian liaison, Ottawa businessman Sufyan Maghur.
> 
> Baird said it was a good meeting but he wants to hear more from the council's more senior members ....


Source


----------



## GAP

Killing Gadhafi not my job: Canadian general
11:43 am, June 22nd, 2011
Article Link

BRYN WEESE | QMI AGENCY
OTTAWA - Moammar Gadhafi is a "formidable" enemy who is hiding out in hospitals and mosques to avoid NATO bombs and has lost the moral authority to govern, says the Canadian general heading up NATO's mission in Libya.

But Lt.-Gen. Charles Bouchard said it's not his job to seek out Gadhafi and kill him - or even remove him from power - despite what allied politicians might say.

"I do not have a mandate to engage Gadhafi directly. I engage...bona fide military targets, and will continue to run this campaign that way," Bouchard said by telephone from Naples, Italy, Wednesday. "My commitment is to ending the violence...The NATO mission is clear, and I'm committed to meeting those ends."

Last week, Canada's ministers of foreign affairs and defence hinted Gadhafi would have to be removed from power before Libyans could achieve peace.

Bouchard says NATO has launched more than 4,500 strikes against pro-Gadhafi forces since the campaign began earlier this year, and the pro-Gadhafi forces are attacking Libyan civilians less frequently and in fewer parts of the country.

Humanitarian aid is getting through without problems in most areas, especially the rebel-controlled east, and Bouchard estimates pro-Gadhafi forces have shrunk by "more than half" since the campaign began.

"But it's not a question of numbers for me," he said. "It's a question of effect. Is the population still under fire, and is the population still in danger today?"

As for an end to the NATO mission - British officials have guessed it could be finished by December - Bouchard said it's impossible to predict, though he won't initiate a ceasefire.
More on link


----------



## kilekaldar

Libya: Is Nato-rebel alliance turning sour? 

BBC NEWS
By Andrew Harding, Africa Correspondent.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13792846

There's a joke going around the frontlines here in Misrata - one borne of growing frustration with Nato.

When the rebels see jets overhead failing to attack any of the rocket launchers pounding their positions they shrug and say: "It must be _Canada_'s turn this week."

I'm sure the Canadians don't deserve to be the brunt of such dark humour, but the sense of disappointment with Nato's military performance around this besieged city is palpable.

"I feel upset… I'm not satisfied," says Fathi Bashaga, when I ask him to sum up his attitude to Nato.

Mr Bashaga, a senior military official here and the man who acts as coordinator between the rebels and Nato, says he speaks constantly by satellite phone to "a man" from the western security alliance who is based in Benghazi, the rebel headquarters.

"Nato decisions are very slow and very complicated. Nato send aircraft for reconnaissance, they take a picture, they take time to analyse the picture, then take time to take the decision to send the fighter to attack the target. Then the target moved.

"Gaddafi forces now learn Nato [are] forbidden to attack schools and mosques so they hide their tanks and rockets near them. Also, Nato only striking at night-time for two or three hours. Apaches also attacking in night-time. Not one of our fighters saw Apaches until now," Mr Bashaga says.
Rebel rivalry

I asked him if he complained to Nato.

"Yes, we complain and tell them," he says.

And Nato's reply? "They listen to us, but they are not saying anything."

_The Canadian air force is the butt of jokes in rebel circles in Libya_

Is it fair criticism? Or is this simply the coming-down-to-earth frustration of a rebel movement that managed, against the odds, to win control of its own city in close-combat fighting, but now finds itself struggling on open ground without the necessary equipment and against a far better armed enemy?

The rebels are trying to advance, on various fronts, towards Zliten - a town some 50km (31 miles) to the west of Misrata. But it is complicated.

"It's pride mostly," says Lameen Mustapha Ashwedi, who commands one of the battalions on the western front.

Anti-Gaddafi forces in Zliten have made it clear they don't want to be "liberated" by their neighbours from Misrata.

"They want to do something by themselves for their city, so that they can say in the future that they liberated their own city. It's about history for them," explains Mr Ashwedi.

His forces are still pushing forward and trying to outflank Col Gaddafi's forces around Zliten. But he reckons it could be several weeks before the town falls.


----------



## HavokFour

Hey, NATO could just pack it's bags and leave allowing this civil war to run its natural course. The rebels should stop whining and be grateful for the help their little faction has received.


----------



## NavyShooter

Little help??

Um....yeah....ok....pretty sure they got more than just a "little" help....

NS


----------



## GAP

Cleaning Up Libya
June 26, 2011
Article Link

The U.S. has arranged for experienced mine clearing and explosives disposal crews to find and dispose of landmines and abandoned (but still dangerous) munitions in Libya. The United States will pay for this with the understanding that emphasis will be on finding and handing over shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles. Libya is believed to have thousands of these, stored at many locations. Most of these missiles are quite old. But because they are Russian, there are new batteries and other replacement parts available on the black market.

These missiles are much sought after by terrorists, but have become harder to get during the last few years. That's largely because of an eight year old American program that hunts down and destroys these missiles. Over 32,000 have been found and destroyed so far. That's out of about a million that have been manufactured in the last half century. Most have been destroyed (because of old age or obsolescence) in that time, but thousands are believed to be unaccounted for and possibly in the wind.

Until quite recently, shoulder fired surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), usually Russian SA-7s, could be had for less than $20,000 each on the black market. Helicopters are easy targets for older SAMs like the SA-7, and it's usually helicopters that terrorists fear most. More advanced missiles, like the SA-14 or 18, cost upwards of $100,000 dollars each, but are even more effective against helicopters, and have a chance against fast moving jets (while coming in low to attack.) Sa-7 type weapons can also be used against commercial airliners while taking off and landing, but that is not how terrorists prefer to use the missiles. The main target is police or soldiers in helicopters, searching for terrorists.

For terrorists, the problem is that the black market for arms has been heavily infiltrated by American agents, especially since September 11, 2001. For this reason, the arms merchants are unwilling to move SA-7 type weapons to terrorists. The reason is simple. If the missiles are used successfully, Americans will likely trace the weapon back to the source, and keep coming. Gunrunners are basically out to make money, not play hardball with U.S. counter-terrorism agencies. Nations that manufacture these low budget SAMs (Russia, China) do not want a spat with the U.S. over this, and warn their customers that there will be repercussions if the missiles fall into the wrong hands, and the Americans come looking for suppliers.

Islamic groups are sending people to Libya, hoping to score some loose Sa-7s. The U.S. and NATO told the Libyan rebels that financial, military and diplomatic assistance was contingent on cooperation in rounding up Sa-7s. A deal was struck, and the search is on. An initial survey found that most Libyan ammo storage sites had been looted. A few Sa-7s had been found abandoned, and it is feared that many of the ones recently taken from arms depots may be on their way out of the country.
end


----------



## old medic

HMCS Vancouver headed to join Libyan mission
The Canadian Press
29 June 2011
copy at: http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110629/hmcs-vancouver-sailing-for-libya-110629/



> ESQUIMALT, B.C. — The frigate HMCS Vancouver is preparing to leave for the Mediterranean Sea to take part in the NATO-led mission in Libya.
> 
> Vancouver, a Halifax-class frigate, carries about 250 officers and crew and includes a CH-124 Sea King helicopter and air detachment.
> 
> The ship will replace HMCS Charlottetown, which has been on patrol with NATO forces in the region since the early spring.
> 
> In March, Canada sent fighter jets, patrol planes, aerial tankers and the warship to join a United Nations-sanctioned mission to protect civilians from Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.
> 
> The mission includes bombing by NATO countries who are trying to drive Gadhafi from power.
> 
> Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird visited Libya this week after Canada recognized rebels fighting Gadhafi as the legitimate government of that country.


----------



## VIChris

Not exactly sure what you wish a bunch of sailors on a mission, but here's to calm seas and a safe return for the crew of the Vancouver.


----------



## tomahawk6

The Sudanese Army has moved 400 miles into Libya to take control of the strategic town of Kufrah. Kufrah is the gateway to the southern oil fields.







http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8611199/Sudanese-army-seizes-southern-Libyan-town.html

The Sudanese army has seized a town in southern Libya that is the gateway to oilfields crucial to rebel hopes of establishing financial independence. 

Officials overseeing the no-fly zone enforced by Nato over Libya said the Sudanese move north of border had not encountered resistance from troops loyal to Col Muammar Gaddafi.

Since the February uprising against his regime, the Libyan leader’s forces have been concentrated around Tripoli, the capital; Sirte, the eastern town that is Col Gaddafi’s birthplace and Sebha, the desert outpost where the dictator grew up.

Officials said control of the town of Kufra and nearby military base granted the Sudanese a key strategic foothold between the regime and the opposition Transitional National Council (TNC) which holds the eastern seaboard and a series of rebel enclaves.

The Sudanese have not disrupted efforts to resume oil production on nearby southern oilfields.

“Our surveillance shows that they are not moving oil, so its not about money in the short term,” said one Western official. “The commercial oil companies monitoring is reporting that there has been no movement of oil out of Libya.

But the Sudanese clearly now have a stake in Libya re-emerging in the oil market.

“The Gaddafi army was coming in and taking out the oilfields every time the rebels start pumping oil. They’ve dismantled the fields quite carefully so the rebels need security down there. Clearly there needs to be tribal support but the Sudanese could make it too risky for Gaddafi’s intervention as well.”

The last attack on the Mislah and Sarir oilfields took place on June 12, just days before the deployment of Sudanese forces to Kufra.

Rebel spokesmen said they hoped to produce up to 250,000 barrels per day from the oilfields and pump it along a pipeline to the Marsa al-Haringa depot near Tobruk.


----------



## old medic

Turkey recognizes Libya rebels, gives $300 million
AP foreign, Sunday July 3 2011
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/9725648


> BENGHAZI, Libya (AP) — Turkey's foreign minister says his country recognizes the leadership of the Libyan rebels as the sole legitimate representatives of the country.
> 
> The show of diplomatic support by Turkey, a key regional player and the only Muslim-majority member of NATO, gave a boost to the rebels. The nod comes amid growing international isolation of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.
> 
> Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu visited the rebel stronghold of Benghazi in eastern Libya on Sunday. He says his country has given the rebels' Transitional National Council $300 million, two-thirds as a loan and one-third as a grant.
> 
> France, Italy, Qatar and several others in the region have already recognized the rebel government.


----------



## CougarKing

Qaddafi offering to leave/go into exile?

link



> *Gaddafi would go in exchange for security: report*
> By Steve Gutterman | Reuters – Tue, 5 Jul, 2011
> 
> 
> MOSCOW (Reuters) - *A Russian newspaper said Tuesday that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was willing to give up power in exchange for security guarantees, citing a high-level Russian official.*
> 
> The report in the respected daily Kommersant, which did not identify its source, came a day after the search for ways to end the war in Libya dominated Russia's talks with NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen and South African President Jacob Zuma.
> 
> "The colonel (Gaddafi) is sending signals that he is prepared to relinquish power in exchange for security guarantees," Kommersant quoted what it called a high-level source in the Russian leadership as saying.
> 
> The source said in the report that other nations, potentially including France, were willing to provide those guarantees.
> 
> *The Kommersant report also said Gaddafi wanted his son Saif al-Islam to be permitted to run in elections if he steps down, a condition the rebels might not accept.*
> 
> The Libyan government said Monday that it was in talks with opposition figures, but the other side stuck to entrenched positions on Gaddafi's fate.
> 
> Saif al-Islam told a French newspaper there was no question of negotiating an end to his father's 42-year rule, and the rebel National Transitional Council backtracked on its statement that Gaddafi could stay in Libya if he gave up all power.
> 
> (Reporting by Steve Gutterman; editing by Ralph Boulton)
> ...


----------



## CougarKing

Colombian mercenaries in Libya?



> *AP Interview: Libyan official says NATO ramping up campaign to clear ground for rebel advance*
> 
> TRIPOLI, Libya - A senior Libyan official Thursday accused NATO of intensifying its bombing campaign and backing foreign mercenaries to lay the groundwork for an advance by rebels trying to topple Moammar Gadhafi's regime.
> 
> Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kaim told The Associated Press in an early morning interview that the alliance's increased bombings represent the "final phase" of the air campaign. But he said the push will fail and that civilians will be the ones to pay the price.
> 
> Kaim said NATO targeted police checkpoints in the Nafusa mountains southwest of Tripoli ahead of a rebel advance toward the village of Qawalish, which rebel fighters claimed they seized Wednesday. They were later pushed back by government troops, he said.
> 
> A fuel depot in the key eastern oil town of Brega was also destroyed, Kaim said. NATO said it hit equipment used to refuel government military vehicles.
> 
> The intensified campaign, he said, is focused on targeting civilian infrastructure and police checkpoints, and providing additional weapons to rebel fighters.
> 
> "The aim of these attacks is to help the rebels to advance. But I assure you, it will be another failure for them," he said.
> 
> *Kaim also said Libyan forces have evidence that Colombian mercenaries funded by the West and its Arab allies have joined the rebel fighters trying to advance toward the capital Tripoli from the western rebel-held city of Misrata.*
> Some of the Colombian fighters had been killed in clashes near Misrata on Wednesday, he said. While Kaim was not immediately able to provide evidence to substantiate the allegation, he said it would soon be shown to journalists based in Tripoli.
> 
> NATO began airstrikes against Libya in March. The coalition and its Arab allies are operating under a U.N. mandate to protect civilians.
> 
> Some countries in the coalition have interpreted that mandate broadly, with France acknowledging it has provided weapons to rebels operating in the mountains and other countries providing non-lethal aid to rebel-held areas.
> 
> Libyan officials earlier this week showed journalists assault rifles and ammunition they claimed had been shipped to rebels by the wealthy Gulf Arab state of Qatar.
> 
> *Rebel forces took heavy losses in the fighting outside Misrata Wednesday as Gadhafi's soldiers fired more than 500 rockets at rebel positions near the town of Zlitan, west of the city. Dr. Ayman Abu Shahma, a physician in Misrata, said 18 fighters had been killed along with two civilians, including a 12-year-old girl. Thirty other people were wounded.
> 
> NATO late last week announced it had begun ramping up its airstrikes on military targets in the western part of Libya. It said it is targeting government forces in cities and along "major lines of communication."*
> On Wednesday, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, NATO's secretary-general, said the alliance had damaged or destroyed more than 2,700 military targets since its campaign began.
> 
> "The momentum is against Gadhafi, his economic strength to sustain war is declining, his generals and ministers are deserting, the international community has turned against him," he told reporters in Brussels. "For Gadhafi, the game is over."
> 
> Fighting between rebels and government troops began in February when a popular movement against Gadhafi quickly escalated into armed conflict.
> 
> The civil war has been largely deadlocked, with the rebels controlling the east and Gadhafi clinging to large parts of western Libya, but unable to retake rebel bridgeheads there.
> 
> Along with Qawalish, rebels were able to push into the nearby mountain village of Kikla on Wednesday morning, said Col. Gomaa Ibrahim, a member of the local military council. It wasn't immediately possible to confirm the Libyan government's claim that the rebels had been forced back from Qawalish.
> 
> While the two towns are small, their capture would further expand the area seized from government troops in recent months by relatively small bands of mountain rebels. A string of similar victories has left rebels in control of most of the Nafusa mountains, bringing them within about 100 miles (160 kilometres) of Tripoli.
> 
> In Tripoli on Wednesday, Gadhafi's regime sought to show it remains in control of the country by laying out plans to try rebel leaders for treason in court next week.
> 
> A judge compiling the charges laid out his case against 21 rebel officials, including the National Transitional Council's head, Mustafa Abdul-Jalil. Defendants will be tried in absentia.
> 
> Rebel spokesman Jalal Galal dismissed the charges as a political stunt.
> 
> "He (Gadhafi) thinks it's a joke or a game, but now the people have awakened, and the people have spoken," he said in response to the allegations.
> 
> The charges include facilitating foreign intervention in Libya, providing aid to the enemy and seeking to topple Gadhafi.
> 
> Judge Khalifa Isa Khalifa told reporters in Tripoli that he will present the case before a special court presided over by a three-judge panel next week.
> 
> The allegations "amount to treason of the homeland of Libya," government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said. Those found guilty of treason could face the death penalty.
> 
> Last week, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Gadhafi, his son Seif al-Islam and Libyan intelligence chief Abdullah al-Sanoussi for alleged crimes against humanity. International prosecutors at the Netherlands-based court allege government troops fired on civilian protesters during anti-Gadhafi demonstrations inspired by the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt earlier this year.
> 
> Libyan officials reject the ICC's authority, saying their special court will bring justice to anyone who committed crimes during the uprising. Khalifa declined to say whether this also meant Gadhafi and his inner circle.
> 
> "We are ready and prepared to investigate any person in this country if there are people who are willing to come to the (attorney general) with accusations or complaints," he said.
> 
> In rebel-held Benghazi, tens of thousands of demonstrators poured into Martyrs' Square for what observers described as one of the biggest rallies in months. They waved the rebels' tricolour flag along with those of allied nations including Qatar, France and Britain.



link


----------



## Sigs Pig

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/troops-welcomed-home-from-libya-125620933.html

I just don't know what to say about the shoulder patch "THAT OTHERS MAY KILL".
Do some feel that is good PR? 

ME

Sorry, forgot to add "Welcome Home"


----------



## brihard

Out of curiosity, has anyone figured out what medal will be awarded for Libya yet?


----------



## MikeL

IMO it's not a big deal ref that patch.. I'm pretty sure the general public realize that bombs being dropped means bad guys are being killed in Libya.


----------



## Rheostatic

Brihard said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, has anyone figured out what medal will be awarded for Libya yet?


If ALLIED FORCE is any sort of precedent, my guess is GCS/GSM.


----------



## The Bread Guy

-Skeletor- said:
			
		

> IMO it's not a big deal ref that patch.. I'm pretty sure the general public realize that bombs being dropped means bad guys are being killed in Libya.


Agree.  Odd how some don't like it clearly stated that militaries use killing as the final sanction.

Welcome home all who're back!


----------



## brihard

Rheostatic said:
			
		

> If ALLIED FORCE is any sort of precedent, my guess is GCS/GSM.



Ugh. I was sitting here thinking perhaps the OSM- how Allied Force didn't occur to me, I have no idea. Colour me stupid. Very good hypothesis on your part. It would be hard *not* to justify a campaign star for Libya with that in mind.


----------



## Zoomie

I believe the crews were told that they would be in the running for the SSM with LIBYA bar.


----------



## aesop081

Original message traffic when we deployed mentioned the NATO Non-Article 5 medal.

Last *rumour* i got was GCS/GCM depending on individual role.


----------



## Infanteer

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Last *rumour* i got was GCS/GCM depending on individual role.



That makes the most sense, considering it was in the presence of an armed enemy.

It took a while, but the system works quite well - just do up a new ribbon and the medal is ready to go.


----------



## brihard

Infanteer said:
			
		

> That makes the most sense, considering it was in the presence of an armed enemy.
> 
> It took a while, but the system works quite well - just do up a new ribbon and the medal is ready to go.



I like the historical parallel for a rack of stars as someone takes part in a number of different ops over the years.


----------



## Wookilar

Sigs Pig said:
			
		

> I just don't know what to say about the shoulder patch "THAT OTHERS MAY KILL".
> Do some feel that is good PR?



It seems to me a play on the SAR Tech motto "So Others May Live."

Wook


----------



## The Bread Guy

My, my, wherever could they have gone?


> Five months after the armed uprising erupted in Libya, a new round of portable antiaircraft missiles — weapons that governments fear could be obtained by terrorists and then fired at civilian jetliners — have been slipping from storage bunkers captured by rebels.
> 
> In February, in the early stages of the uprising, large numbers of the missiles slipped from the hands of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s government as the rebels established control over eastern Libya and the ammunition depots there. The leakage resumed recently with rebel gains here in the western mountains, which opened up new ammunition stores.
> 
> The new leakage of the missiles, which are of the same type that officials in other African nations have said have already been trafficked over Libya’s borders, underscores the organizational weakness of the forces opposed to Colonel Qaddafi; it also raises concerns that if more Qaddafi depots fall to the rebels, then further stocks of the weapons could become accessible to black markets.
> 
> Signs of the diversion are readily visible here, at an ammunition depot captured late last month from the Qaddafi forces after repeated NATO bombings.
> 
> On a recent day, 43 emptied wooden crates — long, thin and painted in dark green — had been left behind on the sand inside the entrance. The boxes had not been there during a visit to the same spot a few days before, and the weapons were gone.
> 
> The stenciled markings showed each crate had contained a pair of lightweight missiles called SA-7s — early Soviet versions of the same class of weapon as the better known American-made Stingers, which were used by Afghan fighters against the Soviets in Afghanistan. It was not clear who had taken them. The rebel guards variously blamed Qaddafi forces and misinformed opposition fighters .... The president of Chad and officials in Algeria have been quoted since the war began as saying that Manpads diverted from Libya have traveled over their borders to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, which operates in North Africa. Neither Chad nor Algeria has publicly offered evidence for the claims, and (Andrew J. Shapiro, U.S. assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs) declined to comment on the matter ....


Source:  _New York Times_, 15 Jul 11


----------



## dimsum

Wookilar said:
			
		

> It seems to me a play on the SAR Tech motto "So Others May Live."



It's the Air-to-Air Refuelling detachment, so the motto sounds appropriate.  Better than something like "we pass the gas."


----------



## aesop081

Dimsum said:
			
		

> It's the Air-to-Air Refuelling detachment, so the motto sounds appropriate.  Better than something like "we pass the gas."



"You can't kick ass without tanker gas"


----------



## SeaKingTacco

"Save a$$, haul trash, pass gas"

The 435 Sqn, unofficial, motto.


----------



## Zoomie

Wookilar said:
			
		

> It seems to me a play on the SAR Tech motto "So Others May Live."


This is exactly the case as 435 Sqn has two separate and distinct missions (for now) AAR and SAR - their crews don't mix and there is most definitely some inter-squadron rivalry.


----------



## Zoomie

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Last *rumour* i got was GCS/GCM depending on individual role.


If that's the case then from what I have heard most of the crews will get the GSM until they get at least 30 sorties.  Then they would be able to trade up and get the GCS.  We find that our AWACs crews are struggling to get 30 sorties in 4 months overseas.  Now that they have moved up the deployments to 6 months they shouldn't have any problems.


----------



## GAP

Libyan rebels say military commander killed
Article Link

The Associated Press

Date: Thursday Jul. 28, 2011 7:08 PM ET

BENGHAZI, Libya — The head of the Libyan rebel armed forces was shot and killed Thursday just before arriving for questioning by rebel authorities, their political leader said in a carefully worded statement to reporters that gave few details on who was behind the killing.

Adding to the confusion, the rebels had said hours earlier they had already detained the commander, Abdel-Fattah Younis, on suspicion his family might still have ties to the regime of Moammar Gadhafi, raising questions about whether he might have been assassinated by his own side.

Such a scenario would signal a troubling split within the rebel movement at a time when their forces have failed to make battlefield gains despite nearly four months of NATO airstrikes against Gahdafi's forces. It could also shake the confidence of the United States, Britain and several dozen other nations that have recognized the rebel council as Libya's legitimate leaders.

Announcing the killing at a press conference where he did not take questions, Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, head of the rebels' National Transitional Council, called Younis "one of the heroes of the 17th of February revolution," a name marking the date of early protests against Gadhafi's regime.

He said two of the commander's aides, both colonels, were also killed in the attack by gunmen and that rebels had arrested the head of the group behind the attack. He did not say what he thought motivated the killers.

Younis was Gadhafi's interior minister before defecting to the rebels early in the uprising, which began in February. His abandoning of the Libyan leader raised Western hopes that the growing opposition could succeed in forcing out the country's ruler of more than four decades.

Rebel forces, however, held mixed views of the man, with some praising him for defecting and others criticizing his long association with Gadhafi.

Hours before the commander's death was announced, rebel military spokesman Mohammed al-Rijali had said Younis was taken for interrogation from his operations room near the front line to the de facto rebel capital of Benghazi in eastern Libya.
More on link


----------



## The Bread Guy

> They are wars apart but while he never pounded the hard-baked fields of Panjwaii on foot, Lt.-Col. Daniel McLeod shares more with Canadian soldiers returning from Kandahar than he cares to admit.
> 
> As a career fighter pilot flying the air force's premier CF-18 jets, McLeod recently got a cold introduction to the stark choices that have to be made in the electronic-twilight environment of today's wars.
> 
> High above the vast deserts of Libya, McLeod spotted what he thought was rocket fire in the distance — an impression quickly confirmed by drones or other surveillance aircraft that crowd the sky near the embattled country in north Africa.
> 
> He was what the air force calls "feet dry" over the coast on a interdiction mission _ an armed air patrol that looks for targets of opportunity on the ground. It's a task that makes up about 80 per cent of the missions flown by Canada as part of the NATO operation to dislodge Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi.
> 
> And on that day, McLeod thought he had a target.
> 
> "You could see there was a battle raging on the ground and we were there and able to interdict, when required," McLeod, the 409 Squadron detachment commander, said in a recent interview ....


Source:  The Canadian Press, 28 Jul 11



> Canada has joined an air war of a different kind in the skies over Libya, one where persuasion and sometimes insults are the weapons.
> 
> Canadian CP-140 Aurora surveillance planes recently started broadcasting propaganda messages aimed at forces loyal to Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi.
> 
> It's a psychological warfare operation, or PSYOPS, initially started by the Americans but now overseen by NATO _ the kind of mission western militaries are reluctant to talk about openly.
> 
> The Canadian broadcasts are relatively benign in comparison to some of the harsher messages NATO has aimed at Gadhafi's troops, in which women's voices are telling them to stop "killing the children."
> 
> The Canadian messages, in English, are read hourly during patrols along the Libyan coast over AM/FM frequencies that Libyans usually monitor.
> 
> "For your safety return to your family and your home," says the message, which can be heard over unencrypted frequencies the military uses to broadcast basic information.
> 
> "The Gadhafi regime forces are violating United Nations resolution 1973."
> 
> The message goes on to urge Gadhafi's troops not to take part in further hostilities and not to harm their fellow countrymen.
> 
> The Libyans have apparently yelled back telling the "Yankee pigdogs" to go home. On at least one occasion last week, an Arabic sounding voice challenged the broadcasts.
> 
> "Who are you talking to?" the voice asked.
> 
> "Anyone who will listen," replied the other voice who had read the message.
> 
> Gadhafi's regime has tried to jam the transmissions.
> 
> A Canadian air force spokeswoman wouldn't talk about the broadcasts, calling it "a NATO policy." She referred all questions to the alliance's southern headquarters in Naples.
> 
> NATO officials were also reluctant to talk and asked not to be quoted on the record ....


Source:  The Canadian Press, 29 Jul 11


----------



## aesop081

> Canadian CP-140 Aurora surveillance planes *recently started * broadcasting propaganda messages aimed at forces loyal to Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi.



"Recently"  :


----------



## The Bread Guy

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> "Recently"  :


The CF-18 pilot's interview was also "recent", if it's any comfort....


----------



## AJFitzpatrick

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> The CF-18 pilot's interview was also "recent", if it's any comfort....


In some contexts Recent < last Ice Age


----------



## CougarKing

> Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- *Libyan government forces fired a missile at an Italian warship  *  in the Mediterranean Sea on Wednesday in a rare attack on the NATO fleet offshore, a government spokesman said.
> *The frigate Bersagliere *  was about 19 kilometers (12 miles) off the Libyan city of Zlitan when the missile fell harmlessly into the sea about 2 km away, the Italian defense ministry and NATO reported
> 
> (...)
> 
> link


----------



## Sythen

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110809/libya-diplomats-attempt-to-stay-canada-110809/



> At least two of four Libyan diplomats are attempting to stay in Canada after Ottawa ordered the officials out of the country within five days.
> 
> The two diplomats are trying to claim refugee status or political asylum to avoid returning to Libya where nearly six months of unrest continues.



They seemed more than happy to support the regime while they were safe. Nothing more than opportunists, and I hope they get removed ASAP.


----------



## CougarKing

The tide is turning against Qaddafi again even more now:

Defense News link



> *Gadhafi Unable to Launch Offensive: NATO*
> 
> AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
> Published: 11 Aug 2011 13:55
> 
> MONTREAL - *Forces loyal to Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi are no longer able to launch a credible military offensive, the commander of NATO-led Libyan operations told AFP in an interview Aug. 11.
> 
> "The Gadhafi regime's forces continue to be weakened, both in strength and their will to fight," Canada's Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard said, speaking from his Italy headquarters, as rebel troops made new advances.*
> "They are no longer able to launch a credible offensive," he added.
> 
> NATO was authorized in March by U.N. Security Council resolution 1973 to defend Libya's civilian population from attacks by Colonel Gadhafi's regime, which faced a popular revolt after 42 years in power.
> 
> As NATO-led airstrikes have helped the rebels on the ground without managing to decisively turn the tide in the conflict, Gadhafi has brought in fighters from other African countries to bolster his embattled forces.
> 
> "We're seeing lots of mercenaries, ruthless mercenaries that come from other countries and are enlisted by Gadhafi's forces to inflict extreme violence on men, women and children," Bouchard said.
> 
> "The recruiting of these mercenaries continues," he said. "There is a growing demand for their services which lends credibility to the fact that Gadhafi's forces are being affected by NATO's actions as well as defections of generals, policemen and even politicians."
> 
> The rebels, meanwhile, have treaded water since scoring early victories that led to their control of Cyrenaica in the west, and enclaves in Tripoli.
> 
> *Today, there's "activity" on three fronts, in Brega in the east, and in Misrata and Jebel Nefoussa in the west. Gadhafi forces are "shooting blindly on civilians," Bouchard said.
> 
> "On the three fronts, we're seeing changes as anti-Gadhafi forces march forward to stop the attacks on the population," he added.*
> 
> Gadhafi's regime this week accused NATO airstrikes on the village of Majer of killing 85 people, including women and children, south of the disputed city of Zliten.
> 
> "I can assure you that the target was a legitimate one that contained mercenaries, a command centre and 4x4 vehicles modified with automatic weapons, rocket launchers or mortars," Bouchard said.
> 
> "I cannot believe that 85 civilians were present when we struck in the wee hours of the morning and given our intelligence" on the target, he added.
> 
> "I can assure you that there wasn't 85 civilians present, but I cannot assure you that there were none at all."
> 
> "Frankly, I cannot say if there were any civilian deaths or how many," said the general, who accused Gadhafi forces of often leaving already dead corpses at military sites after they have been leveled by NATO airstrikes to make the bombings appear like blunders.
> 
> The NATO mission is due to wrap up in September unless it is extended by states participating in it, including Britain, Canada, France, Italy and the United States. Their governments are under increasing fiscal pressure to pull back.
> 
> And if the mission "Unified Protector" is not renewed? "It's just speculation," said Bouchard. "My goal is to bring this conflict to an end before the mission is over."


----------



## GAP

From the the looks of it, they may just be advisors....

U.S. Marines fighting with rebels in Misurata - Video
 Added by Diana Gariany on August 17, 2011
Article Link

A U.S. Marine talking on what they are going to do & how they are going to aid the rebels! oops I thought Obama said that no U.S. Army/Marine would put foot on the ground of Libya.
Here is the proof that American Troops are on the ground of the Libyan soil!
end


----------



## aesop081

GAP said:
			
		

> From the the looks of it, they may just be advisors....
> 
> U.S. Marines fighting with rebels in Misurata - Video
> Added by Diana Gariany on August 17, 2011
> Article Link
> 
> A U.S. Marine talking on what they are going to do & how they are going to aid the rebels! oops I thought Obama said that no U.S. Army/Marine would put foot on the ground of Libya.
> Here is the proof that American Troops are on the ground of the Libyan soil!
> end



All i see in that video is a guy wearing a helmet and speaking English..........


----------



## Old Sweat

Dave

I'm with you. He could be a journalist or a rep from a NGO. The last thing he probably is, is military.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Dave
> 
> I'm with you. He could be a journalist or a rep from a NGO. The last thing he probably is, is military.


Agree with both of you.  Verbal mannerisms like "former soldier guy" and talking about "plasters" instead of "bandages" or "dressings" point away from U.S. military, while talking about "injuries we get" sorta suggests a medical NGO-ite going someplace to help tend to said injuries.

Edited to add:  Check out one of the other videos on the same YouTube account, and by what sounds like the same guy on camera (face not visible):
http://www.youtube.com/user/hero3331000#p/a/u/0/8WasYqLKevE
and he talks about "I tried to start a line on the guy's left foot...."  Suggests medical NGO/MSF-esque guy, not a Marine.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Tough words from a Twitter post by the U.S. envoy to NATO:


> There's no scaling back by #NATO. Strikes will continue until all conditions have been met. Qaddafi's days R #ed.


----------



## midget-boyd91

> There's no scaling back by #NATO. Strikes will continue until all conditions have been met. Qaddafi's days R #ed.



It is now official; 
Twitter was the final nail in the coffin for proper spelling in the English language.


----------



## old medic

Things are moving very quick ... hourly now. 
This morning, Reports had the rebels overtaking a military base 25 km outside Tripoli.
Early reports talked about uprising in Tripoli.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2011/08/18/libya-rebels-hit-hard-in-west

Rebels enter Tripoli, crowds celebrate in streets
By Ulf Laessing and Missy Ryan, Reuters
First posted: Sunday, August 21, 2011 3:06:59 MDT PM



> AL-MAYA/TRIPOLI – Rebel fighters streamed into Tripoli as Moammar Gadhafi's forces collapsed and crowds took to the streets to celebrate, tearing down posters of the Libyan leader.
> 
> A convoy of rebels entered a western neighborhood of the city, firing their weapons into the air. Rebels said the whole of the city was under their control except Gadhafi's Bab Al-Aziziya-Jazeera stronghold, according to al-Jazeera Television.
> 
> Gadhafi made two audio addresses over state television calling on Libyans to fight off the rebels.
> 
> "I am afraid if we don't act, they will burn Tripoli," he said. "There will be no more water, food, electricity or freedom."
> 
> Gadhafi, a colorful and often brutal autocrat who has ruled Libya for over 40 years, said he was breaking out weapons stores to arm the population. His spokesman, Moussa Ibrahim, predicted a violent reckoning by the rebels.
> 
> "A massacre will be committed inside Tripoli if one side wins now, because the rebels have come with such hatred, such vendetta...Even if the leader leaves or steps down now, there will be a massacre."
> 
> NATO, which has backed the rebels with a bombing campaign, said the transition of power in Libya must be peaceful.
> 
> After a six-month civil war, the fall of Tripoli came quickly, with a carefully orchestrated uprising launched on Saturday night to coincide with the advance of rebel troops on three fronts. Fighting broke out after the call to prayer from the minarets of the mosques.
> 
> Rebel National Transitional Council Coordinator Adel Dabbechi confirmed that Gadhafi's younger son Saif Al-Islam had been captured. His eldest son Mohammed Al-Gadhafi had surrendered to rebel forces, he told Reuters............................









http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/middle-east-live/2011/aug/21/libya-syria-israel-middle-east-unrest


12.26am: Mahmoud Nacua, Libya's recently appointed charge d'affaires in London, sets out a rough timetable for what will happen next. He tells Sky News:

    We are confident that our people in Tripoli are very organised and they have planned how to keep everyone safe and everything will go smoothly as we see tonight and as we saw in the other cities which were liberated during the last six months. So we're very confident that our people will control every part of the city.

    The plan first of all is to have security. I think the National Transitional Council will come to Tripoli in a few days and they will start to establish a new national assembly, a new transitional government, to prepare for...the election of a permanent national assembly and it will take in the beginning about eight months, and will take in the whole about two years to start a new state, a constitutional, democratic state.

1.04am: Libyan rebels say they will rename central Libya's Green Square as Martyrs' Square, its original name, Al Jazeera reports. Jubilant opponents of Gaddafi are shooting at a poster of him.

12.56am: Rebel spokesman Mahmoud Shammam promises that Gaddafi will not be harmed and that the rebels want to see him stand trial in Libya. He tells Sky News:

    We're not going to put (supporters of the regime) on trial, we're going to tell them they are Libyan, they are our brothers and sisters and we are going to ask them to join the revolution. We're going to build a state where everyone can get a good education, etc etc.

    There are many rumours about (Gadaffi's) location. We're going to guarantee his safety and the safety of his family. We want to see him be tried in Libya and not in any other place in the world. We're establishing a state of law and we would like to see him in the court.


Asked about reports that looters are moving into the Rixos hotel in Tripoli, he says:

    It's very hard to control the people and this emotion but we're asking them... not to take revenge. We're doing every possible thing but after 42 years of dictatorship, people have the right to carry out their emotion. But we would like to tell them to control that emotion and don't be against law and order.

12.30am: Reports suggest the African Union may be offering Gaddafi exile in Angola or Zimbabwe, Al Jazeera says.

12.11am: The International Criminal Court prosecutor's spokeswoman says it has been confirmed that Gaddafi's son Saif al-Islam has been detained, Reuters reports.

12.09am: The Libyan rebels reach Green Square in the centre of Tripoli, Sky News reports.

12.01am: Tripoli resident Hakeem Guja has told the BBC: "We celebrate the victory. The people are very happy and want to thank the Nato forces for helping us."


----------



## old medic

Rebels celebrate in Tripoli's Green Square, heart of Gadhafi regime 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/rebels-celebrate-in-tripolis-green-square-heart-of-gadhafi-regime/article2136488/

DARIO LOPEZ, KARIN LAUB and BEN HUBBARD
TRIPOLI— The Associated Press 



> Libyan rebels raced into Tripoli in a lighting advance Sunday that met little resistance as Moammar Gadhafi's defenders melted away and his 40-year rule appeared to rapidly crumble. The euphoric fighters celebrated with residents of the capital in the city's main square, the symbolic heart of the regime.
> 
> Opposition fighters captured Colonel Gadhafi's son and one-time heir apparent, Seif al-Islam. The prosecutor at the International Criminal Court in the Netherlands said he would contact the rebels to discuss his handover for trial on charges of crimes against humanity.
> 
> Associated Press reporters with the rebels said the fighters rebels easily advanced 30 kilometres on Sunday from the west, took town after town — welcomed by residents — overwhelmed a major military base, then swept into the capital in a stunning turning of the tide in the 6-month-old Libyan civil war. ............
> 
> But it appeared that key parts of Col. Gadhafi's military were peeling away.
> 
> The rebels' way into Tripoli was opened when the military unit in charge of protecting Col. Gadhafi and the capital surrendered, ordering his troops to drop their weapons, the rebel information minister Mahmoud Shammam said.
> 
> In a sign of the coordination among rebels, as the main force moved into the city from the west, a second force of 200 opposition fighters from the city of Misrata further east landed by boat in the capital, bringing weapons and ammunition for Tripoli residents who join the rebellion, said Munir Ramzi of the rebels' military council in Misrata.
> 
> The rebels' speedy leap forward over just a few dramatic hours was a stunning reversal for Col. Gadhafi, who earlier this month had seemed to have a firm grip on his stronghold in the western part of Libya, despite months of NATO airstrikes on his military. Rebels had been unable to make any advances for weeks, bogged down on the main fronts with regime troops in the east and center of the country.


----------



## old medic

http://www.canada.com/news/Harper+hopes+near+Gadhafi/5286387/story.html

Harper hopes ‘end is near’ for Gadhafi



> OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper hopes the end is near for Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi as rebels continue to tighten their noose around the capital Tripoli.
> 
> “Canada is hopeful that the end is near for the Gadhafi regime and that authority will soon transition to the National Transitional Council of Libya, the recognized governing body of Libya,” the Prime Minister’s Office said in a release Sunday night.
> 
> Harper has been receiving regular updates on the situation in Libya and continues to monitor the situation closely, the Prime Minister’s Office said.
> 
> Canada has been part of the NATO-led mission in Libya. In all, there are about 650 military personnel in the region, a Royal Canadian Navy frigate and seven Royal Canadian Air Force fighter jets.


----------



## The Bread Guy

From the PMO's Twitter feed:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is receiving regular updates on the situation in Libya and continues to monitor the situation closely.
Cda is hopeful that the end is near for the Qadhafi regime & that authority will soon transition to the Ntnl Transitional Council of Libya
We are hopeful that the end is near for the Qadhafi regime & authority will soon transition to the National Transitional Council of Libya.


----------



## Infanteer

It is interesting to watch this unfold.  Militarily, it is very similar to the ousting of the Taliban in Afghanistan, where a anti-government faction, backed by western fires, is able to throw out the ruling power.  Yes, there are differences, but the method of achieving overthrow is similar.

After "surges" in Iraq and Afghanistan have failed to deliver the hearts and minds promised by FM 3-24, I can see this model of intervention as the likely COA for Western nations when dealing with civil wars/uprisings/less then friendly regimes.

Implications for the military?  Fading of "policing" strategies that are landpower intensive and back to the "fires" arguments (hinged off things like theories of RMA) which sees fleets and aircraft favoured over land intervention?  A distaste for "nation-building" in military discourse?

Libya begs the question of Syria.  I don't think Syria can automatically be assumed to be next.  Libya, like Afghanistan 10 years ago, was an international pariah.  The vested interests of Iran in Syria will make it a little difficult to simply shift NATOs campaign to the Levant.  As well, knocking down the Taliban, Saddam and now Qaddaffi are the easy parts; its what follows the breaking of the dishes that has been a problem for all involved in the past.  Don't count some sort of deployment to Libya out yet....


----------



## The Bread Guy

Any ideas whether the pro-Gadafi-ites'll create some insurgency trouble once he's gone?


----------



## GAP

I wonder if that will kill the next roto scheduled for Sept.....


----------



## 57Chevy

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Any ideas whether the pro-Gadafi-ites'll create some insurgency trouble once he's gone?



More than likely.....
                           Shared with provisions of The Copyright Act
A post-Gaddafi Libya   
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8715033/A-post-Gaddafi-Libya.html

In considering what comes after, both the rebel National Transitional Council (NTC) and Nato will be only too aware of the mistakes made in Iraq. Those at the top must obviously go but at lower levels co-option is preferable to wholesale disbandment, as happened under the Iraqi de-Baathification programme. The Benghazi-based NTC will have to reconcile the two halves of the country, whose traditional rivalry has intensified in recent months. It will also have to bridge tribal divisions exploited by Gaddafi to ensure his hold on power. Its task is no less than creating conditions conducive to democratic elections in a country whose institutions have been all but destroyed.

full article at link...


----------



## The Bread Guy

So far, reporters are hearing initial "no troops destined for Libya" messages from the British and American government folks.


----------



## old medic

Rebels battle loyalist snipers in Gaddafi hunt
http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/08/22/libyan-rebels-seize-much-of-tripoli/
By Ulf Laessing and Missy Ryan



> TRIPOLI — Muammar Gaddafi was a hunted man on Monday as loyal remnants of his forces made last-ditch stands in the capital while world leaders rushed to embrace the fractious rebel movement as new masters of Libya’s oil riches.
> 
> Two days after their irregular armies launched pincer thrusts into Tripoli in tandem with an uprising in the city, Gaddafi’s tanks and sharpshooters appeared to hold only small areas, including his Bab al-Aziziya headquarters compound.
> 
> Gaddafi’s whereabouts were not known. Rebels said they held three of his sons, including his heir apparent Seif al-Islam.
> 
> Civilians, who had mobbed the streets on Sunday to cheer the end of dictatorship, stayed indoors as machinegun fire and explosions punctuated some of the heaviest fighting of the Arab Spring uprisings that have been reshaping the Middle East.
> 
> President Barack Obama said the conflict was not quite finished but that Gaddafi’s 42-year rule was over. He urged him to surrender to end the bloodshed. Obama and his NATO allies backed the six-month revolt with air power but eschewed the ground combat that cost American lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.
> 
> “Your revolution is your own,” he told Libyans, offering U.S. aid but not troops and urging the rebels to avoid settling scores in blood. “The Libya you deserve is within your reach.”
> 
> Reuters correspondents witnessed firefights and clashes with heavy weapons, including anti-aircraft guns, as rebels tried to flush out snipers and pockets of resistance. Hundreds of people seem to have been killed or wounded since Saturday.
> 
> Al-Jazeera said that of three Gaddafi sons captured, one — Mohammed — had escaped. It added that the body of a fourth, military commander Khamis, might have been found along with that of powerful intelligence chief Abdullah al-Senussi.
> 
> The station, based in Qatar whose rulers have provided the most visible Arab support to the rebels, cited unnamed sources.
> 
> In a last, defiant, audio broadcast on Sunday before state television went off the air, Gaddafi said he was still in Tripoli, and would stay “until the end.” There has been speculation he might seek refuge in his home region around Sirte, or abroad.
> 
> It is over two months since he was last seen in public.......


----------



## The Bread Guy

From the "Play with the bull, don't be surprised at the horn" department....


> Friends of a Canadian freelance journalist stuck in Libya as a violent rebellion seems poised to sweep dictator Moammar Gadhafi from power say they have grave concerns for his safety after frequent communications from him stopped Monday morning. Mahdi Nazemroaya, a 29-year-old from Ottawa, has been in Tripoli for two months covering the situation in the region for a number of international news agencies, including Al Jazeera and Russia Today. "We are fearing for his life," said Michel Chossudovsky of the Centre for Research on Globalization, with which Nazemroaya is affiliated. "He is a Canadian. . . . (He's) in a hostile environment and there's no exit strategy for an independent journalist," said Chossudovsky, a professor at the University of Ottawa ....


Postmedia News, 23 Aug 11

His mom wants Canada to do more to help, too.

I guess NATO forces are too busy to help given, as mentioned in a Centre for Research on Globalization article:


> .... a NATO warship sailed up and anchored just off the shore at Tripoli, delivering heavy weapons and debarking Al Qaeda jihadi forces, which were led by NATO officers ....



Besides, how bad can it be?  An article quoting the missing chap says the mainstream media have it all wrong and that the rebels aren't even winning - no sweat.


----------



## The Bread Guy

EUCOM boss Admiral James Stavridis:  Beginning of the end?


> I spent much of last night working on what appears to be the endgame of the Libyan campaign. By the morning of 22 August, it seemed clear that the end was in sight for the Kaddaffy regime .... now we come to the endgame for this mission. As the NATO Secretary General said this morning: “The Qadhafi regime is clearly crumbling. The sooner Qadhafi realises that he cannot win the battle against his own people, the better — so that the Libyan people can be spared further bloodshed and suffering. The Libyan people have suffered tremendously under Qadhafi’s rule for over four decades. Now they have a chance for a new beginning.”  There are still many challenges ahead for Libya, but it seems clear that NATO’s role in its UN mandated missions has played an important part in protecting the people of Libya from a brutal and repressive regime during a dangerous time. A new dawn is breaking in Libya, and it seems that the future of Libya will be in the hands of the Libyan people — as it should be.


EUCOMversations (official blog of EUCOM), 23 Aug 11


----------



## midget-boyd91

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> I guess NATO forces are too busy to help given, as mentioned in a Centre for Research on Globalization article



Thierry Meyssan, who wrote that piece also wrote a piece stating that the CIA placed an agent in France... the name of that agent; Nicolas Sarkozy.


----------



## RangerRay

Terry Glavin exposes the "Centre for Research on Globalization" here:

http://transmontanus.blogspot.com/2011/08/gaddafist-propaganda-central-ottawa.html


----------



## The Bread Guy

> While NATO countries fly unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) high above Libya, none of these UAVs, or the vital intelligence they provide, was available to the Libyans fighting to free their country – they were fighting blind. So, they got one of their own. It can now be disclosed that the Libyan rebels have been using the Aeryon Scout Micro UAV to acquire intelligence on enemy positions and to coordinate their resistance efforts.
> 
> Mission Video
> 
> Representatives from the Transitional National Council (TNC) were looking for an imagery solution to provide to the troops on the ground. They evaluated a series of micro UAVs and chose the Aeryon Scout – and they needed it delivered immediately to those fighting at the front. Large UAVs are often flown far away from the frontline – often overseas – making it difficult to get the imagery to troops in combat. With the Aeryon Scout, the operator has direct control over the UAV and is able to see imagery in real-time.
> 
> The Aeryon Scout is a small, easy-to-fly man-packable flying robotic reconnaissance system design for operation in real-world, harsh conditions. It weighs just 3 pounds, packs into a suitcase or a backpack and can be quickly and easily deployed and operated by soldiers in the field. Instead of using joysticks, the Scout uses a map-based, touch-screen interface that allows new users to pilot the system in just minutes. The Scout essentially flies itself allowing the operator to focus on acquiring imagery ....


Company news release, 23 Aug 11 - more from Wired.com's Danger Room blog and CBC.ca - photos of imagery also attached

Looks like it might also be used by the OPP - check attached photo from this article from May of this year.

H/t to MarkOttawa for this.


----------



## a_majoor

Longer term look at the diplomatic falloout and the strategy (if any) behind things:

http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2011/08/22/the-day-of-the-jackal/?print=1



> *The Day of the Jackal*
> 
> Posted By Richard Fernandez On August 22, 2011 @ 3:06 pm In Uncategorized | 47 Comments
> 
> Hanin Ghaddar [1] asks “Is the Arab Spring coming back to Lebanon?” That depends on where it’s headed. There is one fact and one question about the Arab Spring. The indisputable fact is that regimes are falling across the region. The question is in what direction they are falling? Kathryn Jean Lopez interviewed Barry Rubin at National Review [2] and got a critical estimate of the way Western diplomacy has handled things so far. In his view the Obama administration may have enabled the bad guys and crippled the good guys. Administration sources on the contrary are claiming that the international community is being vindicated all around. First Rubin:
> 
> KJL: How would you rate U.S. leadership on all of this?
> 
> RUBIN: Terrible! For a number of reasons: mishandling Egypt; empowering the Muslim Brotherhood; failing to support democratic oppositions in Turkey and Lebanon, and waiting too long to call for the downfall of the Syrian government; failing to consult with moderate Arab allies and totally dissing Saudi Arabia; not giving Israel strong support at a time when its security situation is worsening; ignoring the increasing Islamization and repression in Turkey; actually acting to help the survival of Hamas in the Gaza Strip by forcing reduced sanctions and supplying funds indirectly; and being far too slow and weak to respond to the Palestinian Authority’s unilateral independence bid.
> 
> It is really amazing how badly they’ve done. And the above paragraph is not at all a partisan critique. Each of these factors is very obvious and visible even if they aren’t being covered in the MSM very much. It can be summed up as failing to recognize the revolutionary Islamist threat; failing to support allies; being too soft on enemies; and not showing American leadership.
> 
> Obviously, the jobs and the economy will be the number-one issue in the 2012 elections. But if crises in the Middle East blow up — as I think they will — and make Obama’s foreign policy look like a disaster, might that be the number-two issue?
> 
> But that is in stark contrast to David Cortright’s evaluation at CNN [3]. He calls it a victory for the international community:
> 
> Never before has the international community demonstrated such immediate and forceful resolve in responding to government abuse against its own people.
> 
> Whether this action will serve as a model for other interventions against brutal regimes is uncertain. Some are asking if the Arab League and NATO should now take action to save the people of Syria from the murderous actions of Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
> 
> That seems unlikely in the near term, but the apparent success of intervention in Libya may give pause to tyrants who claim the right to massacre their own citizens with impunity. The NATO-led action in Libya may signal a more active international commitment to opposing genocide and mass murder.
> 
> The president himself [4] gave the “international community” center stage and pride of place, specially emphasizing his skill at avoiding putting troops on the ground. “And all of this was done without putting a single U.S. troop on the ground.” But he did not claim complete victory yet for two probable reasons. The first is because he doesn’t know how post-Gaddafi Libya will turn out. Second, he may want to avoid being asked for an encore.
> 
> As we move forward from this pivotal phase, the opposition should continue to take important steps to bring about a transition that is peaceful, inclusive and just. As the leadership of the TNC has made clear, the rights of all Libyans must be respected. True justice will not come from reprisals and violence; it will come from reconciliation and a Libya that allows its citizens to determine their own destiny.
> 
> In that effort, the United States will be a friend and a partner. We will join with allies and partners to continue the work of safeguarding the people of Libya. As remaining regime elements menace parts of the country, I’ve directed my team to be in close contact with NATO as well as the United Nations to determine other steps that we can take. To deal with the humanitarian impact, we’re working to ensure that critical supplies reach those in need, particularly those who have been wounded.
> 
> Secretary Clinton spoke today with her counterparts from leading nations of the coalition on all these matters. And I’ve directed Ambassador Susan Rice to request that the U.N. secretary general use next month’s general assembly to support this important transition.
> 
> For many months, the TNC has been working with the international community to prepare for a post-Gadhafi Libya. As those efforts proceed, our diplomats will work with the TNC as they ensure that the institutions of the Libyan state are protected, and we will support them with the assets of the Gadhafi regime that were frozen earlier this year. Above all, we will call for an inclusive transition that leads to a democratic Libya.
> 
> As we move forward, we should also recognize the extraordinary work that has already been done. To the American people, these events have particular resonance. Gadhafi’s regime has murdered scores of American citizens in acts of terror in the past. Today we remember the lives of those who were taken in those acts of terror and stand in solidarity with their families. We also pay tribute to Admiral Sam Locklear and all of the men and women in uniform who have saved so many lives over the last several months, including our brave pilots that have executed their mission with skill and extraordinary bravery. And all of this was done without putting a single U.S. troop on the ground.
> 
> What neither side has mentioned in the Arab Summer calculus is oil. The presence of oil is the major external variable which might explain the activist policy toward Libya and the passive one toward Syria.  Already there is expectation that Libyan oil production can be ramped up. Already the Chinese and the Russians are jockeying with the French and Italians for the rights to it.
> 
> Oil is to the Middle East as meat on the hoof is to the Serengeti plain.  The cameraman on safaris see the beautiful animals, but the players are thinking in other terms: “How much meat is there on that hoof?”
> 
> The West will go to the mat for oil. While the “international community” may portray this as a victory for “human rights,” the more tangible benefit will be to European economies which are teetering on the brink of recession. Oil is that commodity which America is supposedly always going to war for but which mysteriously winds up in the possession of someone else.
> 
> In all other cases — Egypt comes to mind — the policy appears to be opportunistic. If the “street” works up, the administration will be glad to provide verbal support. But only in the case of Libya would it invest real hardware — and even then, not much of it to achieve an outcome. This suggests that the “Arab Spring” isn’t going to have a single trajectory but several. For countries in the region with large oil reserves, the Obama administration can be expected to make some effort to preserve its flow. But in countries like Lebanon or Syria, the insurgents are largely on their own. If the democrats can win, the Obama administration will gladly take credit. But if the Muslim Brotherhood or other Islamist groups win out, they will live with that too.
> 
> The underlying logic of the West’s policy since the Arab Spring started has been that of the scavenger. Except where oil is concerned, it won’t bring down a kill and then only when it is truly starving. In all other cases, it will act as opportunity presents itself, stealing a bone here and there. But it will leave the regime-hunting on the Middle Eastern plain to forces native to the region.
> 
> The Obama administration has approached events in the Middle East not as a lion but as a jackal. It reflects the weakened position of the West and not its strength. What happens next in the Arab Spring will be less due to the initiative and genius of  Washington, but how it fares according to luck. If the Libyans turn against the West, will the president overturn the anti-Western elements in them? If  Assad continues to hold on, will Obama push him over? If Lebanon makes a move to free itself, will Washington aid it?
> 
> The probable answers are no, no and no. That would take too much effort. “All of this will be done without putting a single U.S. troop on the ground” is necessity masquerading as virtue.  It would be good if things worked out well for all concerned, but for now the West is hostage to both fortune and its own weakness.  It is scouring the region for political bargains. One senses that even in the case of Libya, they hardly believed they could be so fortunate.
> 
> But they should not congratulate themselves yet. Gaddafi is gone. But who comes next?
> 
> “No Way In” print and Kindle edition at Amazon [5]
> Tip Jar or Subscribe for $5 [6]
> 
> Article printed from Belmont Club: http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez
> 
> URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2011/08/22/the-day-of-the-jackal/
> 
> URLs in this post:
> 
> [1] Hanin Ghaddar: http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=303693
> 
> [2] National Review: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/275161/watching-tripoli-arab-spring-dominos-falling-kathryn-jean-lopez
> 
> [3] David Cortright’s evaluation at CNN: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/22/cortright.obama.libya/
> 
> [4] president himself: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jloo2SaLJEn2tg86RXpJlTGiKcIA?docId=d969ef870fe54e6caa9b1a26183a4069
> 
> [5] “No Way In” print and Kindle edition at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1453892818/wwwfallbackbe-20
> 
> [6] Tip Jar or Subscribe for $5: http://wretchard.com/tipjar.html


----------



## Edward Campbell

The time is now ripe to withdraw Canada's military contribution ... while the sweet smell of victory is in our nostrils. It is also time to turn our diplomatic and political attention elsewhere: let France, and a few others, try (because it's not clear anyone can manage) the governance issues. There is an ongoing commercial role for Canada in the reconstruction and we must insist that we have a slice of that pie but we need to be wary of military boots civil service brief cases on the ground.

Is it now time to prepare for Syria? Who will lead? Why will we go, or not?


----------



## Infanteer

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Is it now time to prepare for Syria? Who will lead? Why will we go, or not?



As I said above, unless sufficient political capital is invested in outflanking Iran, I don't see Op MOBILE II kicking off anytime soon.  As well, I'd argue that the Syrian Army is likely more capable than the Libyan forces and likely won't fold as easy.  I don't have anything to support this other than my personal hunch, but I think dealing with Israel every now and then means you have more than just a tin-pot force.

If anyone want's to test scenarios, this game is awesome!


----------



## GAP

There isn't the gonads in the EU or NA to do anything they've been doing in Libya in Syria.....someone might get hurt...


----------



## Old Sweat

The following story from the Daily Telegraph is reoroduced under the Fair Dealings provision of the Copyright Act.

Libya: SAS leads hunt for Gaddafi

 British special forces are on the ground in Libya helping to spearhead the hunt for Col Muammar Gaddafi, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

By Thomas Harding, Gordon Rayner and Damien McElroy in Tripoli

9:19PM BST 24 Aug 2011

As a £1 million bounty was placed on Gaddafi’s head, soldiers from 22 SAS Regiment began guiding rebel soldiers after being ordered in by David Cameron. 

For the first time, defence sources have confirmed that the SAS has been in Libya for several weeks, and played a key role in coordinating the fall of Tripoli.

With the majority of the capital now in rebel hands, the SAS soldiers, who have been dressed in Arab civilian clothing and carrying the same weapons as the rebels, have been ordered to switch their focus to the search for Gaddafi, who has been on the run since his fortified headquarters was captured on Tuesday.


Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC) said Gaddafi was wanted “dead or alive” and promised an amnesty to any of his inner circle prepared to betray his whereabouts.


Nato still has no idea where the despot is holed up, and on Wednesday he taunted his opponents by claiming in a television interview that he had secretly toured the streets of Tripoli without being spotted.


Gaddafi said he would fight on “until victory or martyrdom”, while his spokesman said loyalist soldiers were well prepared to carry on the battle “for years”.

In other developments: 

* Dozens of journalists who had been held against their will for five days in a Tripoli hotel were freed without bloodshed

* Fierce fighting continued in Tripoli and elsewhere in Libya as hopes that Gaddafi’s forces would surrender proved to be fanciful

* Aid agencies warned of a humanitarian “catastrophe” on the horizon as food, water and medical supplies started to run out in the capital

* One of the leaders of the de facto government flew to Paris to ask western nations to speed up the unfreezing of £60 billion of Libyan assets held abroad.

With pro-Gaddafi forces putting up stubborn resistance in Tripoli and in loyalist towns including Sirte, the NTC and its Nato allies made urgent appeals for the swift capture of the former leader and his family.

Nato has ordered all available surveillance aircraft, including British spy planes, to focus on tracking Gaddafi.

Meanwhile SAS soldiers who had been sent to Libya several weeks ago to coordinate air strikes on key military targets have been ordered to stay on and help the rebels on the ground who are hunting him down.

After announcing the £1 million reward for anyone who turns in Gaddafi – put up by two Benghazi-based businessmen - the NTC added that any loyalists who provided information would be given immunity from prosecution.

Mustafa Abdel Jalil, leader of the NTC, said: “We know Gaddafi’s regime is not over yet. The end will only come when he’s captured, dead or alive.

“Gaddafi’s forces and his accomplices will not stop resisting until Gaddafi is caught or killed.”

The jubilation which followed Tuesday’s rout of Gaddafi’s Bab al-Azizia headquarters gave way to the grim reality of a guerrilla battle for the suburbs of Tripoli that are still held by the despot’s supporters.

Throughout the day fierce gun battles raged in Abu Salim, a mile-wide corridor to the south of Bab al-Azizia which is one possible location of Gaddafi’s current hideout.

While rebel fighters used Gaddafi’s compound as their new base, helping themselves to weapons left behind by his retreating soldiers, the loyalists took up positions in a wildlife park nearby and fired rockets and mortars into the compound.

With snipers trying to pick off anyone using the ports and airports, aid agencies have been unable to deliver fresh supplies of medicines, food or water, and hospitals in Tripoli have been overwhelmed with casualties, who include children.

Rosa Crestani, of the charity Medecins Sans Frontieres, said: "The situation is very tough…it's almost a catastrophe. There are clearly shortages of life-saving medication and equipment. There are no antibiotics and instruments for life-saving surgery."

There were also reports of gunfights going on underground in the maze of tunnels below Bab al-Azizia through which Gaddafi is thought to have slipped away.

The former leader continued to urge on his supporters, using a telephone interview with a loyalist TV station to call for Tripoli to be “cleansed” of the “devils and traitors” who had captured it.

He also claimed to have toured Tripoli, saying: “I walked incognito, without anyone seeing me, and I saw youths ready to defend their city.”

Meanwhile his daughter, Aisha, told Libyans to “stand hand-in-hand against Nato”.

Gaddafi’s spokesman Moussa Ibrahim boasted that loyalist forces had the supplies and capability to fight on “not just for months, for years”, adding: “We will turn Libya into a volcano of lava and fire under the feet of the invaders and their treacherous agents.”

Scud missiles were reported to have been fired from Sirte, Gaddafi’s home town to the east of Tripoli, for the second day running,

But fears that 36 journalists and foreigners would be used as human shields after being held against their will for five days at Tripoli’s five-star Rixos Hotel proved unfounded.

The hotel guests, who included a former US congressman, were allowed to leave yesterday afternoon after persuading the last remaining guard to lay down his weapon.

As Mahmoud Jibril, the rebels’ deputy leader, flew to Paris for talks with Nicolas Sarkozy, who promised continued air strikes on Gaddafi hardware, the United Nations Security Council prepared to vote on the unfreezing of Libyan assets so they could be used by the NTC to rebuild the country.

William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, said the assets “ultimately belong to the Libyan people”.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Further to this....


			
				milnews.ca said:
			
		

> From the "Play with the bull, don't be surprised at the horn" department....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of a Canadian freelance journalist stuck in Libya as a violent rebellion seems poised to sweep dictator Moammar Gadhafi from power say they have grave concerns for his safety after frequent communications from him stopped Monday morning. Mahdi Nazemroaya, a 29-year-old from Ottawa, has been in Tripoli for two months covering the situation in the region for a number of international news agencies, including Al Jazeera and Russia Today. "We are fearing for his life," said Michel Chossudovsky of the Centre for Research on Globalization, with which Nazemroaya is affiliated. "He is a Canadian. . . . (He's) in a hostile environment and there's no exit strategy for an independent journalist," said Chossudovsky, a professor at the University of Ottawa ....
> 
> 
> 
> Postmedia News, 23 Aug 11
Click to expand...

.... here's the latest:


> Dozens of journalists, including a Canadian, who were stranded in a hotel in downtown Tripoli by the fighting were released Wednesday.
> 
> *Journalists had been holed up inside the Rixos hotel under the watch of armed men loyal to Col. Moammar Gadhafi.*
> 
> Among those released from the hotel was Mahdi Nazemroaya, a 29-year-old freelance journalist from the Ottawa area. His friend, Briton Amos, said Wednesday that Nazemroaya left the hotel with the other journalists and was "out of danger."
> 
> The Centre for Research on Globalization, for which Nazemroaya works as a correspondent, said in a statement Wednesday that he was safe aboard a chartered boat from the International Organization for Migration. It said Nazemroaya was set to return to Canada ....


Funny, the statement from the Centre for Research on Foil Hats Globalization didn't mention the bit I highlighted in yellow.  But it's _still_ all NATO's fault, right?

Now we return to your regularly scheduled programming....


----------



## old medic

Here's another article about events in the hotel.

Journalist won Gadhafi gunman over: 'In the end, we're all human'
By Wayne Drash, CNN
August 25, 2011 4:02 p.m. EDT
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/08/25/libya.freed.journalists/index.html?hpt=hp_t2



> (CNN) -- The gunman showed that he was human.
> 
> Most of the others who stalked the lobby of Tripoli's Rixos Hotel were young, brash, hostile Gadhafi diehards. Yet this man in his 50s, armed with a Kalashnikov, longed to see his children.
> 
> His kids were out there somewhere in the Libyan capital, he said, gunfire and explosions erupting around them.
> 
> "I really miss my family, too," CNN producer Jomana Karadsheh told him in Arabic. "I really want to go out and see my family. They're worried about me."
> 
> Tears welled in the gunman's eyes. Rebels were taking over the Libyan capital. And this man, who had known nothing but the Gadhafi regime for 42 years, wanted to go home, too.
> 
> It was in this moment that Karadsheh knew she had a chance. If the three dozen journalists being held against their will inside the five-star hotel for five days had a shot of being freed, it was now.
> 
> At 29, Karadsheh has a lifetime of experience in hostile regions. A native of Jordan who is fluent in Arabic and English, she's a stalwart of CNN's Baghdad bureau and known for her professionalism, persistence and persuasiveness.
> 
> If you encounter trouble, you want her at your side.
> 
> She'd come to Libya weeks before, meeting up with CNN Senior International Correspondent Matthew Chance. She'd built relationships with the government officials, media minders and security in the hotel, including this gunman. Now she and an Arabic-speaking cameraman from another news organization were negotiating to secure the journalists' safe release.
> 
> On her Facebook page, Karadsheh lists her favorite quote: "Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, champagne in one hand ... strawberries in the other and screaming: 'Woo Hoo! What a ride!' "
> 
> In the Rixos Hotel, Karadsheh wasn't ready for life's wild ride to end.
> 
> Phoning home to say goodbye
> 
> It had become apparent days earlier that the journalists -- from an array of news organizations, including BBC, Reuters, Fox and China's CCTV -- were prisoners of a dying Gadhafi regime.
> 
> The government officials and minders who'd monitored the journalists abandoned the hotel August 21. About 15 gunmen loyal to the regime remained behind, roaming the halls with Russian assault rifles. They told the journalists they could not leave the hotel.
> 
> Most of the loyalists were irritable, young, reckless. They adorned their weapons with the green flag of Gadhafi's regime. To avoid contact with this volatile bunch, the journalists moved to an upper floor.
> 
> A hotel chef initially took care of the group. One 21-year-old gunman -- a "nice guy," Karadsheh says -- ran through the hotel with his jeans covered in the blood of his cousin, killed in the fighting outside.
> 
> By Monday, tensions between the journalists and their captors escalated. Gunfire erupted outside the hotel, and smoke could be seen coming from the direction of Gadhafi's nearby compound. The gunmen were enraged.
> 
> "NATO spies," they shouted. "There are spies amongst the journalists!"
> 
> They walked amid the journalists, their guns drawn. They were angry, bitter.
> 
> "This could really turn out terribly for us," Chance thought.
> 
> The journalists tried not to antagonize. "We all had a calm panic, if there is such a thing," he recalled............




continues at the link.


----------



## old medic

Bling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DfclXiJXvo
Sky News Video
Libyan tries the Colonel's finery on for size


Gaddafi compound reveals dictator's taste for bling - and Condoleezza Rice

Bab al-Aziziya ruled by 'bigger, better and with more gold on' interior design principle beloved of other deposed despots
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/25/gaddafi-compound-condoleezza-rice-photos







Rebel fighters pose for a photo on a golden couch in the house of Gaddafi's daughter in Tripoli, Libya. Photograph: Sergey Ponomarev/AP


> There was the gilded bronze statue, of course, the golden pistols and a peacock-feather flyswat topped with a gold elephant. But among all the grotesque finery seized by jubilant rebels from Muammar Gaddafi's Bab al-Aziziya compound since his ignominious flight, one item emerged yesterday that may give a more revealing insight into the dictator's thinking than all his bling.
> 
> A group of rebels accompanied by an Associated Press photographer found an album full of pictures of the former US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice. Here she is in a smart black suit and gold necklace, addressing an unidentified gathering, here speaking from a podium, perhaps at the UN. Here consulting with an unnamed world leader or diplomat.................



continues at link


----------



## Old Sweat

The following story from the National Post is reproduced under the Fair Dealings provision of the Copyright Act.

Canada contributed a disproportionate amount to Libya air strikes: sources

Tom Blackwell Aug 25, 2011 – 9:17 PM ET


Canadian fighter jets were in the air again this week, striking at the Gaddafi regime’s tanks and artillery, part of this country’s surprisingly substantial contribution to the five-month-long NATO bombing campaign in Libya.

As one of three nations carrying out the bulk of the sometimes-controversial air war, Canada with its aging CF-18 fighters has made a contribution clearly disproportionate to the compact size of its air force, say alliance and academic sources.

While Britain and France have about three times as many fighter-bombers in the operation as this country and are usually credited with most of the fighting, Canada has been close behind in its role, said a NATO official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

It has also provided three planes for air-to-air refuelling and two reconnaissance aircraft, all of the crews based in the Italian island of Sicily. Canada is among a handful of NATO members that took on the bulk of the mission after the U.S. withdrew its 50 or so fighter jets early in the campaign.

“The burden of the strike sorties fell on the shoulders of predominately the Canadians, the British and the French,” said the NATO official. “I must say that, Canada in particular, being the smaller of the three air forces, once again punched well above its weight.”

NATO was keeping up its campaign on Thursday — bombing Sirte, Col. Gaddafi’s birthplace. Meanwhile, fighting continued to rage over pockets of Tripoli and rebel leaders, who are believed to be in control of much of the capital, said the war would be over only when the now fugitive Libyan leader was found, “dead or alive.”

Support for the operation among Canadians has been mixed, amid accusations of mission creep and controversy about civilian casualties; it seems clear, however, that for better or worse this country has well exceeded the peripheral role that many observers expected it to play.

The six CF-18s — backed up by one spare — have logged 733 bombing sorties above the North African nation, while the Canadian refuelling and reconnaissance aircraft have added hundreds more flights.

“The folks that are flying are flying hard and they’re flying a high tempo of operations,” said Brigadier-General Derek Joyce, commander of Task Force Libeccio, as the Italy-based Canadian team is called. “I’m very, very proud of what they’ve accomplished.”

It is difficult to get a precise picture of who is contributing what to the campaign, said Prof. Michael Clarke, director of the Royal United Services Institute, a British defence think-tank.

However, “the Canadians are reported to be doing a lot of [sorties],” he said in an emailed response to questions. “Only Canada, France and the U.K., among the allies, have kept up a constant high tempo of ground attacks. The other five who have done some attacking have been more variable. Also, Canada has the right aircraft for the role and has more appropriate weapons systems to deploy than some other allies.”

The mission began as Col. Gaddafi threatened to exact bloody revenge on opponents, with United Nations resolution 1973 authorizing member countries to take measures to protect civilians. Critics complain that the campaign has morphed into an attempt to overthrow the Gaddafi regime, as targets have grown to include the ruler’s family compounds in Tripoli, and several of his family members were reportedly killed by NATO bombs.

The Canadian CF-18s conduct two types of missions — planned “air interdiction” attacks on static military infrastructure, including buildings used for command and control, plus “surveillance, co-ordination and reconnaissance” sorties where pilots hunt for government tanks and other mobile weaponry to bomb, said Brig.-Gen. Joyce from his Naples headquarters. There was an initial sense of “euphoria” among the Canadians this week when rebels started streaming into Tripoli, but the pilots have continued their strikes, as it became clear the regime was still alive, firing artillery and rockets into Tripoli and other cities, the commander said.

NATO and Canadian officials insist that they have gone out of their way to try to avoid civilian casualties, creating a bombing war of “unprecedented precision.” Among those who screen targets before the Canadian pilots push the fire button is a National Defence lawyer, said Brig.- Gen. Joyce.

Civilian casualties have repeatedly sparked concern, with Italy at one point calling for a pause in bombing. Human Rights Watch investigators spent a week in Libya this month, visiting bombing sites with government minders, said the group’s Fred Abrahams.

Some sites clearly had been doctored, as evidenced by spotless baby bottles strewn around a crater where every other object was covered in dust, he said, but at other places, civilians definitely did die. They included one recent attack at Majer, where the regime said 85 were killed. Human Rights Watch and journalists found evidence of 19 or 20 bodies, he said.

“The evidence suggests [NATO] did exercise great care, but questions still exist about some of the choices,” said Mr. Abrahams. “The onus is on them to explain those cases.”

Steven Staples of the left-leaning Rideau Institute, usually a stiff critic of Canada’s foreign military adventures, said Thursday he was concerned about civilian casualties. He stopped short, though, of condemning Canada’s involvement in the Libya operation, saying it had a particular obligation to support the opposition, given that Canadian firms had been heavily involved with the Gaddafi regime.


----------



## The Bread Guy

How's HMCS _Vancouver_ doing?


> HMCS Vancouver steams out of port, her wake frothing the Mediterranean waters. After taking the baton of Operation MOBILE from HMCS Charlottetown on 18 August, the Esquimalt-based frigate is bound for the Gulf of Sidra, off Misrata, Libya .... In Operation MOBILE, “Task Force Charlottetown” becomes “Task Force Vancouver” as HMCS Vancouver moves into the combat operations area. NATO warships patrol in plain sight to warn and deter those who would harm civilians ....


CEFCOM Info-Machine, 25 Aug 11


----------



## Rifleman62

Watching various video news feeds, it appears to be extremely dangerous to be anywhere near the rebels who have "traditional" fire discipline. I have yet to hear of anyone being shot other than by a sniper. Repeated by Cdn media. 

What goes up, must come down.

Yesterday's firefight near the hotel commenced with sniper fire from highrises than appeared in the distance. Vigorous automatic fire, including from the hip,  was returned in the general direction of several distant highrises.


----------



## a_majoor

Governor Palin's proposal:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/08/sarah-palin-libya.html



> *Sarah Palin's four-point plan on Libya*
> August 26, 2011 |  5:12 am
> 
> President Obama may still be dining with the elite at fancy island restaurants on Martha's Vineyard, but Sarah Palin is pondering the future of Libya and wisely pushing to wind down American involvement in that latest military entanglement.
> 
> Palin may not be in the race for her party's 2012 presidential nomination, but the Republican former governor released her four-point Libya plan late Thursday night to her 3.2 million fans on Facebook. Her first concern is to protect U.S. interests in that troubled land.
> 
> "The fall of a tyrant and sponsor of terrorism is a great day for freedom-loving people around the world," she wrote. But then warned that the path to democracy is incomplete there and "we must make wise choices to ensure that our national interests are protected."
> 
> First, Palin said, the Obama White House must avoid celebrating too heartily and recall instead that tribal and sectarian fighting can erupt as it did in previous conflicts, such as in Kosovo, Bosnia and Iraq.
> 
> Second, Palin said, "history teaches that those with the guns usually prevail when a coalition overthrows a tyrant." And she warned the rebel command is an outgrowth of the Islamic Libya Fighting Group, some of whose commanders have links to Al Qaeda.
> 
> Third, Palin writes, "we should not commit U.S. troops or military assets to serve as peacekeepers or perform humanitarian missions or nation-building in Libya. Our military is already over-committed and strained, and a vaguely designed mission can be the first step toward a quagmire."
> 
> Finally, Palin said terrorist groups are trying to co-opt the Libyan revolution and the United States must use its intelligence assets to thwart that.


----------



## Kalatzi

Not that the end game is developing some interesting details are coming out

Remember GW1 - The Iraqis killing kids in incubators that sort of thing. 

Sooo, Blood thirsty tyrant - Monster Crazy yes???? Da??? 

Take a look this http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/16session/A-HRC-16-15.pdf

UN Commission on human rights report on Libya. 

After reading that I'm sure that we'll al be glad when the Oily bast*rd is gone. Oil's well that ends well.


----------



## Good2Golf

Kalatzi said:
			
		

> Not that the end game is developing some interesting details are coming out
> 
> Remember GW1 - The Iraqis killing kids in incubators that sort of thing.
> 
> Sooo, Blood thirsty tyrant - Monster Crazy yes???? Da???
> 
> Take a look this http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/16session/A-HRC-16-15.pdf
> 
> UN Commission on human rights report on Libya.
> 
> After reading that I'm sure that we'll al be glad when the Oily bast*rd is gone. Oil's well that ends well.



UNHCR?   

Yeah, whatever....  :


----------



## frank1515

To add to G2G. Isn't the UN Disarmament Conference headed by a North Korean???  Just goes to show how much of a farce and no-value-added organization the UN has become. 

Looks like the UN has a bad track record when choosing its Leaders...

_Edited for grammar_


----------



## The Bread Guy

So, how much longer are we staying?


> Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird is leaving open the possibility of continuing Canadian military involvement in Libya after the scheduled Sept. 27 end date.
> 
> Canada's participation in NATO's air mission over Libya has been extended once, but the government hasn't yet said whether it will propose another extension. The NDP, the official Opposition, is against another extension.
> 
> Asked what happens after Sept. 27, Baird said he's taking the situation one day at a time.
> 
> "This is quickly coming to an end. It's not over yet. Canada will obviously be there in theatre to support the Libyan people," Baird told host Evan Solomon on CBC's Power & Politics.
> 
> "The end is in sight. We're not there yet, but let's take it one day at a time," he said.
> 
> Pressed again on whether the troops will return to Canada on Sept. 27, Baird reiterated "the job is not yet complete."
> 
> "I would think that once the people of Libya are safe, that'll be something that we’ll consider," he said ....


CBC via Yahoo News, 30 Aug 11


> The apparent overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi’s regime may not signal an end to Canada’s military involvement in Libya, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird says.
> 
> Canada’s role in NATO’s close support of the rebels-turned-rulers is due to end on Sept. 27, when Parliament’s mandate for involvement expires. But Mr. Baird is not ruling out continuing that mission into October and beyond.
> 
> Although the civil war appears to be ending, “It’s not over yet,” Mr. Baird said on CBC’s Power & Politics. “Canada will obviously be there in theatre to support the Libyan people.”
> 
> He added that the Conservative government was taking the situation “one day at a time.” ....


_Globe & Mail_, 30 Aug 11


----------



## frank1515

I don't anticipate having ground troops in Libya unless there is a direct request from the Libyan Rebel Leaders to have Canadians in their country. If there is such a request, I guess it would be sort of like a PRT element; we help them rebuild what NATO bombed.

This is all speculation, of course.


----------



## The Bread Guy

frank1515 said:
			
		

> I don't anticipate having *ground troops* in Libya unless there is a direct request from the Libyan Rebel Leaders to have Canadians in their country. If there is such a request, I guess it would be sort of like a PRT element; we help them rebuild what NATO bombed.
> 
> This is all speculation, of course.


May not necessarily be ground troops, if one believes the mutterings from unidentified sources in Brussels:


> NATO explored on Wednesday options for a role after the war in Libya ends, including the possibility of continuing to patrol the country's skies and enforce an arms embargo.
> While NATO warplanes are maintaining pressure on diehard remnants of Moamer Kadhafi's regime, alliance
> ambassadors reviewed in Brussels a set of post-war scenarios presented by military staff, officials said.
> 
> Any role for NATO in Libya after hostilities there end would depend on requests from the United Nations, the officials stressed, noting that the alliance wants the UN to take the lead in post-conflict management.
> 
> NATO insists that it will not send any ground troops to keep the peace in Libya whenever the war ends. This appears to be a "firm view" maintained by alliance members, a NATO official told AFP on condition of anonymity.
> 
> "I see the primary area of interest as some form of logistical support" to a UN mission, the official said, adding that this could include a sealift and an airlift.
> 
> The military alliance could also maintain its no-fly zone and a maritime arms embargo if the UN requests it, the official said .....


Get out while the getting's good.


----------



## frank1515

Yeah, I figured.  Keeping the skies clear and a Warship in the area might be the best way to serve the Libyan people. Status Quo for now until the UN says otherwise, I suppose.


----------



## The Bread Guy

> Prime Minister Stephen Harper warned dictators of the world Thursday that Canada will not shy from using force to oust them, even as he told Canadian troops here that *their role in Libya is not yet finished*. "There is, I am afraid, as we have just been briefed, still fighting to be done," Harper said in a strident address to several hundred Canadian soldiers at this military airfield in southern Italy. "And undoubtedly, there will be, even after that, difficult days ahead." ...."





> Prime Minister Stephen Harper says the work of Canadian forces in Libya has given the country new hope. He says Canada punched above its weight in the international military effort to oust Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi. And he says NATO’s success proves soldiers, not diplomacy, were the only way to end his bloody regime. “For the Gadhafis of this world pay no attention to the force of argument,” he told around 100 soldiers gathered at the NATO military base in southern Italy. “The only thing they get is the argument of force itself. And that you have delivered in a cause that is good and right.” But *Mr. Harper told the troops the fighting isn’t over yet* ....



And one man's opinion from QMI/Sun Media:


> Enough. Bring them home. For the most part, Canadians have accepted the rationale for our military's involvement in the Libyan civil war, now apparently winding down. We know that, as NATO partners, we must stand alongside our allies when the shooting starts. We've done that for nearly a decade in Afghanistan. Moammar Gadhafi was a madman and one of the most cruel tyrants in a part of the world known for producing them. His role in the Lockerbie bombing alone justifies Canada's active participation in his ouster. To date, that participation has included 650 Canadian forces personnel, a flight of CF-18 fighters, refueling planes, surveillance craft and a ship. At last count, Canada has dropped 550 bombs in the Libyan campaign. We're proud of our pilots and their support crews. We're proud of our sailors. We applaud the work they've done in bringing, we hope, democracy to Libya. We're happy that Gadhafi is no longer running Libya. Now bring them home ....


----------



## Edward Campbell

I agree with the editorial's prescription, "Bring them home," but not with the rationale.

We can and should take a role - even "punching above our weight" - in selected military adventures missions like Afghanistan and Libya. We should steer clear of most _nation building_, especially in places like Afghanistan and Libya where the culture is poorly understood (by us) and is resistant to our tender ministrations.

I am especially wary of CivPol training missions. My suspicion is that our training in Afghanistan, Iraq and, if we go, Libya will just produce better armed thugs to serve dictators and, in a few years, the government of the day will have to answer for headlines like *"Canadian trained cops arrest and torture democracy activists."*

There is plenty of _national building_ needed all over the world - let the Saudis, Qataris and maybe the Chinese do it in Islamic states. we have a "back yard," the Caribbean, that needs a lot of help - military, CivPol, political and economic - which we can provide at least as well as e.g. America and Britain, allowing them to go fiddle in the Islamic Crescent.


----------



## The Bread Guy

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> There is plenty of _national building_ needed all over the world - let the Saudis, Qataris and maybe the Chinese do it in Islamic states. *we have a "back yard," the Caribbean, that needs a lot of help - military, CivPol, political and economic - which we can provide at least as well as e.g. America and Britain*, allowing them to go fiddle in the Islamic Crescent.


But would that get Canada enough access to the "big kids table"?  Not saying that, in and of itself, access to the table should be the main reason to go bigger.  I like your idea of dealing with our backyard first, but when we're being sold as "punching above our weight", my read into that is that it sorta-kinda means "so we should be considered with the heavy weights".


----------



## frank1515

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> There is plenty of _national building_ needed all over the world - let the Saudis, Qataris and maybe the Chinese do it in Islamic states. we have a "back yard," the Caribbean, that needs a lot of help - military, CivPol, political and economic - which we can provide at least as well as e.g. America and Britain, allowing them to go fiddle in the Islamic Crescent.



There's also no significant oil pits in the Caribbeans... That is what they mean by "Defending Canada's interest abroad". If we're going to go help people in other countries, we have to get something in return, like an oil contract or a discount of some sort. (this is simplified, obviously)


----------



## GAP

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I am especially wary of CivPol training missions. My suspicion is that our training in Afghanistan, Iraq and, if we go, Libya will just produce better armed thugs to serve dictators and, in a few years, the government of the day will have to answer for headlines like *"Canadian trained cops arrest and torture democracy activists."*
> 
> There is plenty of _national building_ needed all over the world - let the Saudis, Qataris and maybe the Chinese do it in Islamic states. we have a "back yard," the Caribbean, that needs a lot of help - military, CivPol, political and economic - which we can provide at least as well as e.g. America and Britain, allowing them to go fiddle in the Islamic Crescent.





> will have to answer for headlines like *"Canadian trained cops arrest and torture democracy activists."*


  We just allow them to immigrate to Toronto....for the next G20... ;D

Seriously, by not putting our toes in the water, we leave the ideology in the hands of precisely the people with whom our ideology differs......


----------



## Edward Campbell

Both milnews.ca and frank1515 are, sadly, correct. But that still doesn't make _nation building_ in the Islamic Crescent a good idea, nor does it make it one that has a better than 10% chance of success, in my opinion.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Tea leaves to be read from the PM's remarks in Trapani today?  Highlights mine....


> “Thank you very much, thank you General Bouchard, for your kind introduction.
> 
> “I want to thank our Italian hosts. I also want to give greetings to Minister Baird, to Ambassador Fox, to everyone who is with us today.
> 
> “Particularly greetings to you, the men and women of the Royal Canadian Air Force.
> 
> “Indeed, greetings to every member of Canada's Armed Services here today.
> 
> “As you will have heard by now, there is a meeting of leaders later today in Paris.
> 
> “There, we will take stock of the recent, remarkable progress in Libya and we will discuss that country’s future.
> 
> “But I wanted to come here first, to thank you personally.
> 
> “And to congratulate all of you for a job that has been very well done.
> 
> “For without your commitment, your bravery and your actions, there would be no reason to meet later today.
> 
> “Nothing to talk about, nothing to plan for, no hope for the Libyan people.
> 
> “But, thanks to you, there is new hope.
> 
> *“Which gives some proof to the old saying: ‘a handful of soldiers s better than a mouthful of arguments.’ 1*
> 
> “For the Gaddafis of this world pay no attention to the force of argument.
> 
> “The only thing they get is the argument of force.
> 
> “And that you have delivered in a cause that is good and right.
> 
> “And all Canadians thank you for the great job you have been doing.
> 
> “Ladies and gentlemen, Gaddafi is now out of power – not yet finished – but his remaining control is inexorably ebbing away.
> 
> “And history will record this: that it was the good work of *Canada’s Armed Services 2* – your work – working with our allies, that enabled the Libyan people to remove Gaddafi from power.
> 
> “They used to claim that in international affairs, and you’ve heard the quote many times: *‘Canada punched above its weight.’*
> 
> “Well, to *punch above your weight*, you first have to be able to punch.
> 
> “And that is what you have done here.
> 
> “Numbers don't tell the whole story, but it bears repeating that the RCAF has flown – *without caveats 3* – more than 750 strike sorties against Gaddafi’s forces – a good 10 per cent of the strikes.
> 
> “And Canadians should also know that the taking of Tripoli by rebel forces was materially assisted by CF-18 missions clearing away Gaddafi mechanized forces before the rebel advance.
> 
> “Meanwhile, the Royal Canadian Navy frigate Charlottetown, and now her sister ship, Vancouver, have done splendid work, *also without caveats3* enforcing the maritime blockade of Gaddafi’s forces.
> 
> “In other words, in the job of neutralizing Gaddafi, *Canada played a part well out of all proportion4*.
> 
> “My friends, that unwavering professionalism reflects the greatest possible credit upon every one of you.
> 
> “Last week a NATO official told the world's press that Canada had indeed, and I quote, *‘punched above its weight’*
> 
> “That’s what others say.
> 
> “This is what I say:
> 
> “Soldier for soldier, sailor for sailor, airman for airman, the Canadian Armed Forces are the best in the world.
> 
> “Of course, no one claims we have done this alone.
> 
> “*We are under a UN mandate*5 and part of a NATO force, led with great distinction, I am proud to say, by the Royal Canadian Air Force’s own Lieutenant-General Charlie Bouchard.
> 
> “And I would be remiss if I did not praise the leaders who are co-chairing this evening’s meeting – President Sarkozy and Prime Minister Cameron – for their resolve in guiding the international response to Gaddafi’s brutality.
> 
> “They have stayed the course.
> 
> “And the world – a world which will not include Muammar Gaddafi – will be a better place for it.
> 
> “As Canadians, we have not forgotten his complicity in the 1988 Lockerbie bombing.
> 
> “That vile attack upon a defenseless U.S. airliner took the lives of two Canadians, along with 268 other innocent people.
> 
> “But that was routine for Gaddafi. Terrorism was what he did. He bankrolled terrorists
> the world over.
> 
> “And, of course, Gaddafi terrorized Libyans for 42 years – 42 years, to this very day.
> 
> “Therefore, when in March he turned his guns upon his own, reform-minded citizens, he was again acting true to form.
> 
> “But this time, the people, even as ill-equipped and poorly organized as they were, would not yield.
> 
> “And this is, above all else, their victory.
> 
> “And their opportunity for a better future.
> 
> “So, as we look ahead, we presume no right to tell the Libyans how they should govern themselves.
> 
> “Nor do we have unrealistic expectations.
> 
> “*There is, I am afraid to say as we were just briefed, still fighting to be done. And undoubtedly, there will be, even after that, very difficult days ahead6*.
> 
> *“The National Transitional Council has before it a formidable task.
> 
> “It must avoid reprisals.
> 
> “It must repair the most basic functions.
> 
> “And the Council must create a representative government that speaks for all Libyans.*7
> 
> “But because you held the ring while Libyans fought their own fight with their oppressor, the Libyan people are now free to choose.
> 
> “This is the best of Canada’s military tradition.
> 
> “For we are not a country that makes war for gain or for territory.
> 
> “We do not fight for glory.
> 
> “And if we covet honour, it is only a reputation for doing the right thing in a good cause.
> 
> “That is all.  And that is enough.
> 
> “So, let me leave you with this: just as Canadians thank you for your work here, I know that countless thousands of Libyans have reason to be grateful too.
> 
> ”Few will ever know you by name.
> 
> “Some may not even yet be born.
> 
> “But if Libya can seize the opportunity that now lies before it, the real results of your actions these past five months will be seen in little things.
> 
> “Things we in Canada take for granted in our country.
> 
> “Families going about their lives without fear. Children, for the first time, with hope for the future.
> 
> “Freedom of speech, freedom of assembly – the freedom of simply being left alone.
> 
> “You will never know them, but in their silent gratitude for a better life, you can take great pride.
> 
> “Just as all Canadians can take pride in the difference that you have made.
> 
> “Congratulations, and on behalf of all of us, thank you and God bless all of you. God bless Canada.”


1 - Watch the usual anti-war suspects pick on this line as proof that Canada's tone and approach will be getting more militaristic ....
2 - ..... balanced by the use of "Armed Services" instead of the official "Armed Forces" title - and I see it as a title because it's been capitalized in the speaking notes.
3 - Not like some of the NATO allies in Afghanistan in the past  
4 - Variation on the "punching above our weight" theme, highlighted elsewhere in red
5 - Something the usual anti-war suspects will ignore.
6 - Just what it says, carried over from previous media interviews.
7 - New government, be sure to play nice, so you don't become like the old government, as can happen in these sorts of revolutionary situations.

Edited to add following:
1)  PM:  No more Canadian sanctions against Libya.
2)  Welcoming home HMCS Charlottetown (media advisory attached):  Note the message development - we've gone from deploying to "Enforce UNSCR 1973" through deploying "In Response To Situation In Libya" and "(Enforcing) A No-fly Zone Over Libya" to now "Fighting The Gaddafi Regime".


----------



## Edward Campbell

The _Globe ans Mail_ (John Ibbitson) is predicting that _"Sometime before Sept. 27, Stephen Harper will likely ask Canada’s Parliament to renew the federal government’s mandate to use force in support of what used to be rebel forces in Libya.

Parliament will give him that mandate. That’s one benefit of having a majority government. It’s also a recognition that, on this file at least, the Prime Minister has played his hand exceedingly well."_

Ibbitson concludes by saying (my emphasis added): _"We’re not home yet. The new regime is untested and potentially unstable. Colonel Gadhafi remains at large, and pockets of the country appear to still be loyal to the old regime. Continued NATO support could be needed for months to come, in which case Mr. Harper has promised Canada will continue to do its part. And he’ll have Parliament’s support to do it.

*In the meantime, maybe, just for a moment, we can stop the partisan sniping back here and celebrate the past six months*. The Arab Spring has been messy since the first demonstrations in Tunis, but it is still spring. Just as so many of us never thought the Berlin Wall would fall, so too many of us never imagined a wave of popular uprisings would bring down so many Arab strongmen.

But they did. And Canada was there, in the thick of it, doing everything it could to help. *In our nation’s story, this is a good page*."_

I hope the PM notes what we have done well, in Afghanistan and Libya: combat operations - what soldiers do best; and what has been more problematical: _nation building_. Now, it's not that I am against nation building or even against trying but I believe that when we embark on nation building campaigns we must do so with the reasonable _certainty_ that we will fail ~ we mustn't plan on failure but we need to be prepared for that very real possibility, even probability.


----------



## FoverF

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I believe that when we embark on nation building campaigns we must do so with the reasonable _certainty_ that we will fail ~ we mustn't plan on failure but we need to be prepared for that very real possibility, even probability.



Well, here's my take on this subject:

You have to define your goals clearly and realistically. For example, nation building in Afghanistan is a credible mission. But many of the Canadian public consider that to mean we are aiming for a box-standard western liberal democracy. Which is wholly unrealistic. 

Instead, I look at Afghanistan's neighbors, such as Iran and Pakistan. If we could help Afghanistan achieve a stable authoritarian theocracy like Iran, or the kind of long-standing intermittent democracy seen in Pakistan, then that would be fantastic. It would be leaps and bounds better than any other government seen in Afghanistan in decades. We're not going to turn Afghanistan, or Libya, into a liberal utopia, some kind of Islamic version of Holland. But if we can help implement a substantial upgrade over a military tyrant, or the Taliban, which lasts for more than a few years, then we have helped build a nation. 

If we can help Afghanistan catch up to its' neighbors, such as Iran, or help Libya catch up to nations like Algeria or Egypt, then we have done a tremendous good. It will of course be called an atrocity by those who insist that their own agenda will lead to a global utopia. But in my humble opinion I would call that successful nation building.


----------



## Edward Campbell

FoverF said:
			
		

> Well, here's my take on this subject:
> 
> You have to define your goals clearly and realistically. For example, nation building in Afghanistan is a credible mission. But many of the Canadian public consider that to mean we are aiming for a box-standard western liberal democracy. Which is wholly unrealistic.
> 
> Instead, I look at Afghanistan's neighbors, such as Iran and Pakistan. If we could help Afghanistan achieve a stable authoritarian theocracy like Iran, or the kind of long-standing intermittent democracy seen in Pakistan, then that would be fantastic. It would be leaps and bounds better than any other government seen in Afghanistan in decades. We're not going to turn Afghanistan, or Libya, into a liberal utopia, some kind of Islamic version of Holland. But if we can help implement a substantial upgrade over a military tyrant, or the Taliban, which lasts for more than a few years, then we have helped build a nation.
> 
> If we can help Afghanistan catch up to its' neighbors, such as Iran, or help Libya catch up to nations like Algeria or Egypt, then we have done a tremendous good. It will of course be called an atrocity by those who insist that their own agenda will lead to a global utopia. But in my humble opinion I would call that successful nation building.




I nominate FoverF for Minister of Foreign Affairs US Secretary of State.


----------



## The Bread Guy

And how'd Gadafi's wife and three kids get to Algeria, if you believe the South African media?


> Thirty-five Special Forces-trained South Africans were responsible for this week’s audacious operation that spirited Muammar Gaddafi’s wife and three children from Libya to safety in Algeria.
> 
> The “battle hardened Iraq veterans”, who were apparently paid $15000 (R105000) each, were recruited three weeks ago, after being interviewed at a Sandton hotel.
> 
> Details of the operation were revealed to The New Age this week by a source close to the group, who said he was invited to take part but declined.
> 
> And while Libya’s Transitional National Council was this week seeking the return of Gaddafi’s family from Algeria, the group of mercenaries is believed to be on standby to conduct further similar operations.
> 
> “We’d like those persons to come back,” rebels’ spokesperson Mahmud Shammam said of the Gaddafi family after Algiers on Monday announced that Gaddafi’s wife, Safiya, two sons, a daughter and their children, had crossed the border into that country.
> 
> The New Age has learnt reliably that interviews for the extraction operation were conducted on August 17 at the Balalaika hotel in Sandton by *Sarah Penhold**, who operates from Kenya.
> 
> The New Age has seen copies of an email sent to a former SA Special Forces operative, inviting him for an interview.
> 
> Penhold describes herself on the internet as an executive protection and security specialist proficient in a wide range of firearm handling and safety techniques.
> 
> Her LinkedIn profile reads: “Trained in advanced and tactical high-speed driving. Medically trained to first aid level 2 and 3, with a focus on trauma injuries.”
> 
> She describes herself as an “excellent communicator, with good interpersonal skills” who is “able to work as part of a team or as an individual”.
> 
> She describes herself as being a “resourceful operator, with well-honed planning and communication skills, who is adaptable and able to work well under pressure and to tight deadlines”.
> 
> The mercenary group left South Africa two days after the interviews, flying from OR Tambo airport to Dubai.
> 
> From there they flew to Tunisia, which shares borders with Algeria and Libya, where they were issued with firearms. They then travelled by road into Libya.
> 
> According to a source close to the men involved, some members of the group last week phoned home, saying that they were holed up in a Tunisian hotel.
> 
> “They described their situation as very complicated,” according to the source, who asked not to be named as he feared retribution from the South African authorities ....


_The New Age_, 2 Sept 11

** *- there is a Sarah Pen*f*old listed in LinkedIn with all the info mentioned above.


----------



## canada94

FoverF said:
			
		

> Well, here's my take on this subject:
> 
> You have to define your goals clearly and realistically. For example, nation building in Afghanistan is a credible mission. But many of the Canadian public consider that to mean we are aiming for a box-standard western liberal democracy. Which is wholly unrealistic.
> 
> Instead, I look at Afghanistan's neighbors, such as Iran and Pakistan. If we could help Afghanistan achieve a stable authoritarian theocracy like Iran, or the kind of long-standing intermittent democracy seen in Pakistan, then that would be fantastic. It would be leaps and bounds better than any other government seen in Afghanistan in decades. We're not going to turn Afghanistan, or Libya, into a liberal utopia, some kind of Islamic version of Holland. But if we can help implement a substantial upgrade over a military tyrant, or the Taliban, which lasts for more than a few years, then we have helped build a nation.
> 
> If we can help Afghanistan catch up to its' neighbors, such as Iran, or help Libya catch up to nations like Algeria or Egypt, then we have done a tremendous good. It will of course be called an atrocity by those who insist that their own agenda will lead to a global utopia. But in my humble opinion I would call that successful nation building.



My opinion is that nation building simply does not work. People don't like to be told that what they have been doing since they were born is the wrong way of doing things. Think of it, people are about to get mad at me because they believe nation building is the way to go. Because as a western civilization we have been doing it for a very long time now with little success we leave countries crumbling into depths they can't get out of and just harm the surrounding areas. 

As much as I hate Qaddafi, lets worry about our fiscal responsibility at home before we start blowing money that doesn't even exist.


----------



## old medic

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/05/chinese-arms-companies-weapons-gaddafi-regime

Chinese arms companies 'offered to sell weapons to Gaddafi regime'

Documents found in Libyan capital show firms breached UN embargo by offering weaponry, but Beijing says no deliveries were made

Tania Branigan in Beijing and agencies
guardian.co.uk, Monday 5 September 2011 11.58 BST 


> In the final weeks of Muammar Gaddafi's regime, Chinese arms companies offered to sell around $200m (£124m) worth of weaponry to Muammar Gaddafi's government in breach of a UN arms embargo, according to documents found in Tripoli.
> 
> The Chinese foreign ministry has confirmed that Libyan officials travelled to Beijing to buy arms in July, although it said no contracts were signed and no weapons delivered.
> 
> A spokeswoman said the Chinese government had not known of the state-owned firms' meetings.
> 
> According to the documents, obtained by Canada's Globe and Mail newspaper, the Chinese firms offered to sell rocket launchers, anti-tank missiles and other weapons.
> 
> The paper named the firms as the China North Industries Corporation (Norinco), China Precision Machinery Import-Export Company and China Xinxing Import and Export Company.
> 
> The companies either could not be contacted or said no one was available to comment.
> 
> It said the firms had suggested deals could be made via third countries such as Algeria or South Africa, both of which had said they supported the arms embargo.
> 
> Algeria's foreign minister, Mourad Medelci, said last week that the country had "resolutely applied" the terms of UN resolutions.
> 
> Omar Hariri, the chief of the rebels' military committee, told the newspaper he was "almost certain" that the guns arrived and were used against them, saying it explained how brand-new weaponry had reached the battlefield.
> 
> "We have hard evidence of deals going on between China and Gaddafi, and we have all the documents to prove it," a rebel military spokesman, Abdulrahman Busin, told the New York Times. He added that there was evidence of "at least ten" other governments or companies supplying arms to Gaddafi illegally.
> 
> The Globe and Mail reporter Graeme Smith said he found the documents, printed on the stationery of a government procurement department, in rubbish in a neighbourhood where many officials had lived.
> 
> "After the passing of resolution 1970 by the security council, we notified relevant government departments to strictly implement it," China's foreign ministry spokeswoman, Jiang Yu, told a daily news conference in Beijing.
> 
> "We have clarified with the relevant agencies that, in July, the Gaddafi government sent personnel to China without the knowledge of the Chinese government and who engaged in contact with a handful of people from the companies concerned.
> 
> "The Chinese companies did not sign arms trade contacts, and nor did they export military items to Libya.
> 
> "I believe that the agencies in charge of the arms trade will certainly treat this seriously."
> 
> In 2003, the US imposed sanctions on one of the firms involved, Norinco, alleging that it had sold missile-related parts to Iran. The firm said the accusations were "groundless and unjustified".
> 
> The China Xinxing Import and Export Company was set up in 1984 under the People's Liberation Army and has struck deals with more than 100 countries, according to its website.
> 
> The news comes at an extremely delicate time for Beijing, which has sought to improve relations with the Libyan rebels. Last month, an official with a rebel oil firm suggested they might freeze out countries that had not supported them.
> 
> China – which, as a permanent member of the UN security council, has veto power – surprised many by backing the arms ban in February and abstaining on the vote on Nato air strikes.
> 
> But it later condemned the bombing and has not formally recognised the National Transitional Council (NTC) as the legitimate authority in Libya, although it has held talks with rebels and said it values the NTC's "important role".
> 
> China is the third-largest importer of Libyan crude oil, and a foreign ministry spokesman, Ma Zhaoxu, said last week that it was "ready to maintain close contact" with the NTC.
> 
> But at the weekend, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, the head of the NTC, complained that China had obstructed the release of some of Libya's frozen assets.
> 
> China had agreed $15bn of Libyan assets held overseas should be unfrozen, but a rebel spokesman said it had opposed handing control of more to the interim ruling council.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

Libya being where it is, is in the Chinese sphere of influence and the West backing the NTC has as much to do with keeping China out as it does with getting rid of Gaddafi.


----------



## OldSolduer

How long will it be before this new government starts acting like the old one?


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> How long will it be before this new government starts acting like the old one?



Just rinse and repeat Jim that seems to be Africa in a nutshell


----------



## lucciano-malke

*RAF Tornados conduct strikes on Gaddafi troops at Sirte...*





British aircraft yesterday mounted a long-range mission against a military facility in the Libyan city of Sebha and conducted strikes on pro-Gaddafi troops at Sirte.

A formation of Royal Air Force Tornado GR4s took off from RAF Marham in Norfolk on Sunday, 4 September 2011, and, flying south to the Mediterranean, rendezvoused with allied aircraft to lead a long-range strike mission.

read more-->> http://www.xairforces.net/newsd.asp?newsid=506&newst=12


----------



## aesop081

This is but one of several such missions conducted by Tornados from RAF Marham, the first one having been on march 17th.


----------



## The Bread Guy

INTERPOL Red card Notices issued for Muammar et fil + former int boss (posters attached).....


> INTERPOL has issued Red Notices for Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, his son Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and former director of military intelligence Abdullah Al-Senussi after the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Luis Moreno-Ocampo, requested the world police body to issue internationally wanted persons notices against the Libyan nationals for alleged crimes against humanity, including murder and persecution.
> 
> The publication of INTERPOL Red Notices for the three men is part of INTERPOL’s collaboration with the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC to assist cooperating member countries in their efforts to enforce the arrest warrants issued by the ICC.
> 
> The Red Notices have been circulated to all of INTERPOL’s 188 member countries and include essential identifying and judicial information.
> 
> In addition to the publication of the Red Notices, INTERPOL is offering the full support of its Command and Coordination Centre and asking its member countries to take all measures consistent with their national laws to help the ICC locate and apprehend Gaddafi.
> 
> "Prosecutor Moreno-Ocampo’s request for INTERPOL Red Notices will significantly restrict the ability of all three men to cross international borders and is a powerful tool to help in their location and arrest,” said INTERPOL Secretary General Ronald K. Noble.
> 
> "As far as INTERPOL's General Secretariat headquarters is concerned, Muammar Gaddafi is a fugitive whose country of nationality and the International Criminal Court want arrested and held accountable for the serious criminal charges that have been brought against him.
> 
> "INTERPOL will cooperate with and assist the ICC and Libyan authorities represented by the Interim Transitional National Council of Libya to apprehend Muammar Gaddafi," added Secretary General Noble ....


Interpol news release, 9 Sept 11

Tick, tick, tick.....


----------



## sean m

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/08/22/this_week_at_war_the_libya_model


Interesting article since it refers to afghanistan and how this method worked well against the taliban.  
Do people here think this method should be used more often?


----------



## Kalatzi

Reproduced under the fair use clause of the copyright act

"Has The Libyan Insurgency Begun?
By Spencer Ackerman  September 13, 2011  |  8:33 am  |  Categories: Rogue States 
The world has declared victory over Moammar Gadhafi. Only no one told Gadhafi he was defeated. Stop me if you’ve heard this one before.

Fighters loyal to Gadhafi killed 17 guards at an oil refinery near Ras Lunuf on Monday. They drove to the refinery in a convoy of more than a dozen vehicles. Witnesses reported that the attackers used hand grenades to kill the guards. 

And the attack occurred less than two hours after Libya’s post-Gadhafi oil minister announced limited oil production had resumed. The refinery itself was undamaged, though it’s unclear if that’s by design or incompetence. Still, the message sent seems clear: Gadhafi loyalists will target the revolutionary government’s ability to exploit the sources of Libyan wealth, weakening its ability to stabilize the country. Then, presumably, comes the restoration.

That last part may be unrealistic, given how deeply Gadhafi is hated in Libya.
"

Link here http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/09/has-the-libyan-insurgency-begun/#more-56934

"Sound like Iraq yet? One difference, at least, is that neither NATO nor the revolutionary government appears to want foreign troops to help stabilize Libya. But if an insurgency develops, will the U.S. Congress — which demanded a No-Fly Zone before balking when President Obama actually enforced one — demand further U.S. involvement to secure a “victory” over Gadhafi? If this decade of war has two lessons, it’s that insurgencies escalate quickly — and so does cheap political rhetoric demanding a forceful U.S. response."


----------



## The Bread Guy

1) From CBC Twitter post:


> Parliament to vote on extension of Libyan mission: PM . Harper govt. wants Canada to extend its mission.



2)  From CP24:


> Prime Minister Stephen Harper says his government will ask Parliament to extend the country's military mission in Libya for three more months.
> 
> Harper confirmed that plan after telling the United Nations that Canada will stay the course in rebuilding a post-Gadhafi Libya.
> 
> Harper says the fact that ousted dictator Moammar Gadhafi is still at large means the mission isn't finished.
> 
> "We will participate in the mission until armed threats from Gadhafi forces are eliminated from the country," Harper told reporters.
> 
> "We will ask Parliament to extend the mission by three months, but I'm going to be frank with you in saying I'm pretty optimistic we'll achieve our objectives well before that timeline." ....



3)  From Postmedia News:


> Prime Minister Stephen Harper declared Tuesday that Canada will stand by war-torn Libya as it makes the transition toward stability.
> 
> Harper was speaking at a meeting of world leaders — members of the "Friends of Libya" group — who were gathered on the sidelines of the United Nations.
> 
> "Canada has been at the forefront of international efforts to protect civilians in Libya against the oppressive Gadhafi regime and provide them with humanitarian assistance," said Harper.
> 
> "Canada will continue to support the people of Libya, standing ready to promote effective governance and institutions, a secure environment founded on the rule of law, economic development and prosperity, and respect for human rights." ....



_- edited to add CP 24 material - _


----------



## The Bread Guy

Motion in House of Commons yesterday:


> That, in standing in solidarity with those seeking freedom in Libya, the House adopted government motions on March 21 and June 14, 2011 authorizing all necessary measures, including the use of the Canadian armed forces and military assets in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973; that given the current military situation and the success of National Transitional Council (NTC) and anti-Gaddafi forces to date, the House supports an extension of up to three months of the involvement of the Canadian armed forces operating with NATO in accordance with the legal mandate from the UNSC Resolution 1973; that the House continues to support Canada's engagement in all spheres in the rebuilding of a new Libya, including human rights, democratic development and the rule of law; that the House deplores the violence committed by the previous regime against the Libyan people, including the alleged use of rape as a weapon of war; that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development and the Standing Committee on National Defence shall remain seized of Canada's activities under UNSC Resolution 1973 and in the rebuilding of the new Libya; and that the House continues to offer its wholehearted and unconditional support to the brave men and women of the Canadian armed forces, who stand on guard for all of us, and continue to protect Libyan civilians from the risks still posed by the Gaddafi regime.



... and calling for the vote Monday:


> That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practices of the House, on Monday, September 26, 2011 the House shall consider the motion tabled earlier today by the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons relating to Canada's engagement in all spheres in the rebuilding of a new Libya and at 15 minutes before the expiry of time provided for government orders on that day, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the motion shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.


----------



## The Bread Guy

> Canada was there at the start of the NATO-led mission in Libya and intends to be there when it ends, Defence Minister Peter MacKay said Monday as the House of Commons deliberated an extension to Canada's participation in the mission.
> 
> With a Conservative majority, the debate was largely symbolic. The motion was passed easily by a vote of 189 to 98, with Liberals supporting the extension.
> 
> The New Democrats opposed the measure, saying Canada should remain in Libya but with a different mandate.
> 
> Canada's current contribution to the military effort in Libya was set to expire Tuesday and the Conservatives were seeking approval for a three-month extension in line with NATO's decision earlier this month that the mandate they received to protect Libyan civilians remains in place.
> 
> "Yes, there are significant hurdles to overcome but success is not an option — it's an imperative," MacKay told the Commons.
> 
> NDP defence critic Jack Harris questioned whether those hurdles still need the attention of international troops.
> 
> NATO is now in the end-game of a civil war, he said.
> 
> "Although it may be questioned as to what role can NATO play now in terms of the end game, when we're looking at an eroding defensive position by the Gadhafi forces it's clear that its role is much less, and lessening by the day," he said ....


The Canadian Press, 26 Sept 11


----------



## GAP

When does the UN Mandate run out? I thought the end of Sept..................


----------



## The Bread Guy

GAP said:
			
		

> When does the UN Mandate run out? I thought the end of Sept..................


Nothing in the 17 Mar 11 news release and resolution text shows a timeline (except for one year for the creation of a team to deal with Libya), and nothing about a deadline I can see in the 16 Sept 11 resolution creating the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL), either.

Meanwhile, links to last night's debate in the House of Commons on Libya here and here (91 page PDF of all of Libya debate, if you have trouble sleeping, here).

In between the debate bits, a softball question for the Defence Minister on Libya:


> _Mrs. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, CPC): _ Mr. Speaker, Canada has played an active role in the UN-mandated, NATO-led mission in Libya. In light of recent events showing the anti-Gadhafi forces gaining strength across the country, could the Minister of Defence tell us why the continued mission in Libya is necessary?
> 
> _Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence, CPC): _ Mr. Speaker, as the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke said, the Canadian Forces are playing a key role in the enforcement of the international community's mission to support the people of Libya and protect them from the brutal Gadhafi forces. In fact, today parts of Libya still remain under the iron fist of Gadhafi. On the weekend, his daughter gave a broadcast that indicated such.  Our government is very proud of the brave men and women in uniform, and their families, whose leadership and efforts have been instrumental in this mission's success to date.  We will continue to work with our NATO allies and partners who enforce the terms of UN Security Council resolutions, and I urge all parliamentarians taking part in today's debate to support Canada's continuation with this important work in helping the--
> 
> _The Speaker:_  Order, please ....



Edited to add Canada's news release on this (attached).


----------



## a_majoor

More incompetence:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/nightmare-libya-20000-surface-air-missiles-missing/story?id=14610199&singlePage=true



> *Nightmare in Libya: Thousands of Surface-to-Air Missiles Unaccounted For*
> 
> By BRIAN ROSS (@brianross) and MATTHEW COLE
> Sept. 27, 2011
> 
> The White House announced today it planned to expand a program to secure and destroy Libya's huge stockpile of dangerous surface-to-air missiles, following an ABC News report that large numbers of them continue to be stolen from unguarded military warehouses.
> 
> Currently the U.S. State Department has one official on the ground in Libya, as well as five contractors who specialize in "explosive ordinance disposal", all working with the rebel Transitional National Council to find the looted missiles, White House spokesperson Jay Carney told reporters.
> 
> "We expect to deploy additional personnel to assist the TNC as they expand efforts to secure conventional arms storage sites," Carney said. "We're obviously at a governmental level -- both State Department and at the U.N. and elsewhere -- working with the TNC on this."
> 
> ABC News reported today U.S. officials and security experts were concerned some of the thousands of heat-seeking missiles could easily end up in the hands of al Qaeda or other terrorists groups, creating a threat to commercial airliners.
> 
> "Matching up a terrorist with a shoulder-fired missile, that's our worst nightmare," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D.-California, a member of the Senate's Commerce, Energy and Transportation Committee.
> 
> Though Libya had an estimated 20,000 man-portable surface-to-air missiles before the popular uprising began in February, Assistant Secretary of State Andrew Shapiro told ABC News today the government does not have a clear picture of how many missiles they're trying to track down.
> 
> "We're making great progress and we expect in the coming days and weeks we will have a much greater picture of how many are missing," Shapiro said.
> 
> The missiles, four to six-feet long and Russian-made, can weigh just 55 pounds with launcher. They lock on to the heat generated by the engines of aircraft, can be fired from a vehicle or from a combatant's shoulder, and are accurate and deadly at a range of more than two miles.
> 
> Peter Bouckaert of Human Rights Watch first warned about the problem after a trip to Libya six months ago. He took pictures of pickup truckloads of the missiles being carted off during another trip just a few weeks ago.
> 
> "I myself could have removed several hundred if I wanted to, and people can literally drive up with pickup trucks or even 18 wheelers and take away whatever they want," said Bouckaert, HRW's emergencies director. "Every time I arrive at one of these weapons facilities, the first thing we notice going missing is the surface-to-air missiles."
> 
> The ease with which rebels and other unknown parties have snatched thousands of the missiles has raised alarms that the weapons could end up in the hands of al Qaeda, which is active in Libya.
> 
> "There certainly are dangerous groups operating in the region, and we're very concerned that some of these weapons could end up in the wrong hands," said Bouckaert.
> 
> "I think the probability of al Qaeda being able to smuggle some of the stinger-like missiles out of Libya is probably pretty high," said Richard Clarke, former White House counterterrorism advisor and now a consultant to ABC News.
> 
> Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the National Security Council, told ABC News in a statement similar to Carney's remarks that, "Since the beginning of the crisis, we have been actively engaged with our allies and partners to support Libya's efforts to secure all conventional weapons stockpiles, including recover, control, and disposal of shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles."
> 
> Boxer: U.S. Passenger Jets at Risk
> 
> Adding to the urgency is the fact that America's passenger jets, like those of most countries, are sitting ducks, despite years of warning about the missile threat. Since the 1970s, according to the U.S. State Department, more than 40 civilian planes around the world have been hit by surface-to-air missiles. In 2003, Iraqi insurgents hit a DHL cargo plane with a missile in Baghdad. Though on fire, the plane was able to land safely. Four years later, militants knocked a Russian-built cargo plane out of the sky over Somalia, killing all 11 crew members.
> 
> Now there are calls in Congress to give jets that fly overseas the same protection military aircraft have.
> 
> "I think we should ensure that the wide-bodied planes all have this protection," said Sen. Boxer, who first spoke to ABC News about the surface-to-air security threat in 2006. "And that's a little more than 500 of these planes."
> 
> Boxer sent a letter today to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano urging the two to establish a joint program "to protect commercial aircraft from the threat of shoulder-fired missiles."
> 
> According to Boxer, it would cost about a million dollars a plane for a system that has been installed and successfully tested over the last few years, directing a laser beam into the incoming missile.
> 
> "For us to sit idly by and not do anything when we could protect 2 billion passengers over the next 20 years [with] a relatively small amount of money [from] the Department of Defense, I think that's malfeasance," said Boxer. "I think that's wrong." And it could be more practical than trying to round up all the missing Libyan missiles.
> 
> "Once these missiles walk away from these facilities, they're very difficult to get back, as the CIA realized in Afghanistan," said Bouckaert.
> 
> When the Afghan mujahideen were fighting the Soviets more than two decades ago, the CIA supplied the Afghans with 1,000 Stinger surface-to-air missiles, which had a devastating effect on Soviet military aircraft. After the Soviets had retreated, however, the CIA spent millions of dollars trying to buy back the remaining missiles from the Afghan fighters.
> 
> According to Bouckaert, the CIA spent up to $100,000 a piece to reacquire the Stingers.
> 
> "In Libya we're talking about something on the order of 20,000 surface-to-air missiles," said Bouckaert. "This is one of the greatest stockpiles of these weapons that has ever gone on the loose."


----------



## The Bread Guy

Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the _Copyright Act_:


> The military mission in Libya is largely complete and NATO's involvement could begin to wrap up as soon as this coming week after allied leaders meet in Brussels, according to the top U.S. commander for Africa.
> 
> Army Gen. Carter Ham, head of U.S. Africa Command, told The Associated Press that American military leaders are expected to give NATO ministers their assessment of the situation during meetings late in the week.
> 
> NATO could decide to end the mission even though ousted leader Moammar Gadhafi is still at large and his forces are still entrenched in strongholds such as Sirte and Bani Walid.
> 
> NATO's decision-making body, the North Atlantic Council, agreed on Sept. 21 to extend the mission over the oil-rich North African nation for another 90 days, but officials have said the decision would be reviewed periodically.
> 
> Ham said that the National Transitional Council and its forces should be in "reasonable control" of population centers before the end of the NATO mission, dubbed Unified Protector. And he said they are close to that now ....


Associated Press, 1 Oct 11


----------



## The Bread Guy

> The fall of Moammar Gadhafi's hometown of Sirte will mark an "iconic" moment in Libya, but it will not spell the end of NATO's air campaign, the alliance's top military officer told AFP on Oct. 11.
> 
> Adm. Giampaolo Di Paola, head of the NATO military committee, said Gadhafi loyalists were like a "cornered beast" as the new regime forces took control of key positions in the coastal town.
> 
> "When the ferocious beast is cornered, she will fight until the end," Di Paola said in an interview at NATO headquarters. "On the one hand, yes, I am surprised by their capacity to resist but, on the other hand, they have no other choice."
> 
> The National Transitional Council (NTC) force seized the police headquarters of Sirte on Oct. 11, two days after taking control of the town's showpiece conference center, university campus and main hospital.
> 
> Gadhafi forces are holding on to only one other bastion, the southern desert town of Bani Walid, where the fighting has caused civilians to flee.
> 
> ( .... )
> 
> The Italian admiral said NTC victory in Sirte "will be an iconic moment" but that NATO will only end the mission once civilians are definitely out of harm's way and the NTC is capable of keeping the whole country safe.
> 
> "The fall of Sirte is an important element, but like any decision, it will not be the only factor," he said.
> 
> A NATO diplomat said some allies will want the six-month-old mission to end once Sirte falls, but others will argue that the alliance should make sure that all of Libya is secure before terminating the operations ....


Agence France-Presse, 11 Oct 11


----------



## a_majoor

First AAR:

http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/96531



> *Lessons of the Libya War*
> by Kori Schake (Research Fellow)
> This military adventure has set a precedent we may not want to repeat.
> 
> The leaders of the Free World must have heaved sighs of relief when Tripoli fell to rebel forces. Despite the involvement of the world’s premier military alliance and the three most formidable militaries in the world, it took more than five months of NATO air strikes to assist the rebels to victory over a third-rate despot. Their success in overthrowing the Ghadafi regime is good for the people of Libya, but what might it portend for other rebellions and for the United States?
> 
> Ghadafi Didn’t Do Half Badly
> 
> The countries that intervened in Libya to assist the rebels hoped that their involvement would signal the resolve of the West to protect vulnerable populations, advance the West’s values, and prevent dictators from preying violently on their own people. Those may not be the lessons other dictators take from the war.
> Lessons of Libya War
> Illustration by Barbara Kelley
> 
> To give a quantitative tale of the tape: the United States spent roughly $687 billion on its military last year, France spent $61 billion, and Britain spent $57 billion. How much did Libya spend? $1.1 billion. Holding off the world’s most powerful military alliance for five months with  one eight hundredth of its spending is a pretty good return on investment.
> 
> Qualitatively, the Western powers were clearly unwilling to put ground troops into the fight. If Ghadafi had been able to force a stalemate—and he nearly did—the Western powers would have been faced with the same unpleasant choice Serbia tried for during the 1999 Kosovo war: relinquish your war aims or up the ante beyond what your interests and your public’s will tolerate.
> 
> Ghadafi may yet be able to spoil the party by instigating continued violence or an insurgency that discredits the new political order.  There is an emerging playbook for those who would retain their hold on power by force, and it entails: (1) forestalling international organizations from issuing mandates; (2) speaking softly while acting brutally; (3) giving Western militaries little of value to attack; (4) holding on long enough that support erodes in Western countries; (5) discrediting the new government.
> 
> Give the Rebels Their Due
> 
> While NATO provided important military assistance, preventing the Ghadafi regime from utilizing its military advantages, the rebels won this war. And they did so without—so far—touching off the secondary explosion of civil war, which is a major concern in a society as fractured as Libya has been. Despite their inexperience on the battlefield and in governance, the rebel leaders who have emerged in Libya have made superb choices.  They fought a superior adversary; built alliances across communities; quickly restored civil order in cities as they pushed the government out; resisted looting and reprisals; emphasized the reliability of the country’s justice system to adjudicate wrongs of the regime; put their best faces forward to gain international support; and they did not antagonize the international coalition by blaming it for their failures.
> 
> Yes, NATO provided important military assistance, but the rebels won this war.
> 
> This is nothing short of amazing. The rebels have done almost everything right. Let us hope the choices of Libya’s new leaders become a model replicated by freedom fighters throughout the world; but let us not plan a strategy (as the Obama administration seems to be doing) assuming these fortuitous circumstances will be the norm.
> 
> There is no “European Security and Defense Identity”
> 
> Since at least 1990, advocates of the European Union have championed the emergence of a “common European perspective” on defense. They claimed European publics that were stingy with funding for NATO militaries would be more generous when those same militaries were part of the European project. Even before the travails of Greece and other countries endangered the common market, it was clear there was no greater willingness to spend on an EU military than there had been to spend on NATO. Moreover, there was no convergence of views on defense issues: Britain and France retained the reflexes of great powers; Germany looked to avoid responsibility; Italy grandstanded ineffectually; and new NATO members focused on territorial defense while NATO’s traditional front line states gained a territorial buffer that made them less concerned.
> 
> The United States initially worried that a unified Europe would marginalize our country. Yet it has been clear for some years that we ought to be more concerned about a Europe unwilling or incapable of sharing the burden of common military ventures. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan reinforced the lack of both a common political perspective and military strength among our allies.
> 
> The Libya experience has resuscitated the belief that Britain and France are willing to lead military operations, but it has also shown the real limits of their capacity to fight without American assistance. Or, to be more precise: it demonstrated the gap between what Europeans aspire to and the risks they are willing to run to achieve it.
> 
> This is the NATO of the Future
> 
> The allies doing the work in Libya are frustrated that less than half of NATO’s twenty-eight member countries are participating in the operation, and less than a third are participating in actual attacks. But this a la carte approach to war is the wave of NATO’s future, and it’s not a bad outcome—because the alternative is for NATO to shrink back into solely caring about the territorial defense of its member states, and that is a NATO of little value to the United States. We need partners that are willing to step forward and help solve problems where those problems are occurring.
> 
> Should Syrian demonstrators take to heart our willingness to help those in Libya?
> 
> If NATO were to require every member to take a substantial role in every military operation, that would prevent those governments from giving their sanction to NATO undertaking operations. The unanimous agreement required in NATO provides a non-trivial legitimating factor by demonstrating that the world’s most powerful democracies approve of using military force. This is the closest thing to having a concert of democracies, and is internationally useful, especially if a UN Security Council resolution cannot be secured.
> 
> NATO allies certainly have differing interests, as well as differing levels of public support for the use of military force.  They also have differing balance sheets that can make financing their participation difficult. To argue, for example, that Greece should be contributing to the Libya war is a tough case to make given the magnitude of its economic problems. But that constraint did not prevent Greece from enabling its allies to act, and that’s valuable.
> 
> Where NATO allies might want to consider a change is common funding for operations. Changing that would facilitate participation by more NATO nations, especially the less wealthy ones, and accelerate the modernization of their forces. But it would also make it more difficult to agree on operations, whereas now the countries most concerned bear the greatest expense and risk.
> 
> UN Resolutions Become More Difficult
> 
> The Chinese and Russians were skeptical about giving the Western powers the running room to intervene in Libya, and seem now to regret having done so. We promised we would prevent genocide, and we went on to arm the rebels in violation of the embargo, to recognize the rebel council as the legitimate government of the country, to bilaterally release to it funds of the Ghadafi government, to advocate the violent overthrow of the Ghadafi government, and to attack military force and leadership targets.
> 
> The UN mandate not only set a precedent the Chinese and Russian governments may live to regret, it also showed both to be ineffectual bulwarks against the advance of Western values. An international “right to protect” people against their governments has now been given more support and China’s stock declined as an ally for despots (on which much of its mercantilist policy in Africa and elsewhere is based).
> 
> But the Russians and Chinese have both complained bitterly about Western nations exceeding the mandate granted by the UN. They are sure to be more exacting in their restrictions on future resolutions, and exact a higher price from the West for agreeing to any mandates. Our transparent exceeding of the mandate in this instance will serve as a warning to China and Russia not to give a mandate for future cases—like Syria—where the outcome is much more important to our interests.
> 
> Leading From Behind = Back Seat Driving
> 
> The Obama administration is quite right that it’s in America’s interest to strengthen and embolden allies to share the burden of shaping the international order. But the specific choices the administration made with regards to Libya will diminish rather than increase the likelihood of other states stepping forward to undertake the work of future problems.
> 
> President Obama didn’t give the allies anywhere near enough credit on the war. He and his UN Ambassador repeatedly claimed that America was the deciding force on the Security Council resolution that the British and French crafted and negotiated. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went to NATO meetings without a U.S. position, infuriating our allies and delaying the action they wanted to take to intervene in Libya. The administration released figures on U.S. participation in the war that made clear the operation depended fundamentally on American forces. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced how quickly the Europeans were forced to come begging for weapons they lacked and he issued a chill warning that the U.S. would not continue to carry such a disproportionate load of the NATO alliance.
> 
> President Obama did not give our allies enough credit for the war's success.
> 
> These are not the actions of an administration that is setting its allies up for success. The administration should go back and study the disciplined behavior of the Clinton administration during the UN operation in East Timor, where the United States underwrote Australia’s leadership. We have benefitted for fifteen years from that diplomacy, with Australia’s greater participation in our other wars.
> 
> The Easiest Wars to Win Might Not Be the Most Important Ones
> 
> Allies—the U.S. included—undertook to help the Libyan rebels because it looked “do-able.” That’s not an unimportant criterion, but it should not be the only one. Every administration calculates whether the objectives of a foreign operation are achievable at a reasonable risk and cost in lives, in money, and in attention diverted from other issues. But the Obama administration’s tortured debates about whether intervening in Libya was in our interests shouted just how limited our interests in that country were. Recall that Gates and the military leadership flatly said no to that question; Clinton said yes, then recalibrated to yes because it matters to our allies; and other administration officials argued for upholding the UN’s right to protect, upholding our values, and upholding multilateralism.
> 
> Where marginal interests can be achieved at acceptably low costs, pursuing them can lead to valuable progress toward a better international order. But they are no substitute for fighting the wars that are at the center of our interests. And to the extent that the president, any president, uses his capital on the marginal wars, he has less to direct toward the central ones.
> 
> The case of Syria is illustrative, where overthrowing the Assad government would not only benefit the long-suffering people of Syria, but would also remove a government invidious to American interests. Additionally, it would impede Iranian influence in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine.
> 
> Moreover, fighting marginal wars confuses allies and enemies alike. Should Syrian demonstrators take to heart (as the president suggests) our willingness to help Libyan demonstrators, or are we encouraging them to run risks when we are only bluffing a willingness to help?
> 
> The Return of Stand-Off War
> 
> During the 1990s, with the breakup of the Soviet empire, the United States became vastly more secure. The risks of thermonuclear war reduced dramatically and former enemies became potential partners. Navigating the transition was, of course, often dicey, and there emerged new threats where states proved incapable of performing their functions without external assistance. Although the biggest threats were reduced, the less structured international order gave the sense of a proliferation of smaller but still deadly threats: nuclear proliferation, terrorism, and pandemics.
> 
> Across four administrations, the U.S. government has sought to manage these new risks by alternating between intense involvement in nation building and remaining aloof to the struggles of people in societies burdened with repressive or incapable governments. Intellectually, we have not yet come to terms with the extent to which we are threatened by what is occurring internally to other states. As a result, we swing between counterinsurgency and stand-off strikes as our military strategy.
> 
> If you believe that other societies’ problems are not a danger to us, or that they can be managed by containing threats that may emanate from those societies, then the United States does not need to fight counterinsurgencies of the kind we have in Iraq and Afghanistan. We can remain at stand-off range and strike inside countries with our military forces, punishing our enemies and those states that harbor them. And we can assist the overthrow of governments by insurgents, as we did in Libya, at very little risk or cost to ourselves (Libya has clocked in under a billion dollars for us, which is one ninth of what we are spending every single month in Afghanistan).
> 
> This strategy does not, however, provide much influence in the development of those societies. It is in states without the capacity or willingness to govern their territory where problems like terrorism and criminal activity thrive. It is in states that are unsuccessful in navigating the changes of globalization and the demands of their citizens that extremism takes root.
> 
> The optimistic argument is that with all we have learned, and all the intelligence systems and alliance relationships we have put in place in the past fifteen years, we will be able to attack these threats with more knowledge and less military force. But it is equally possible that the unwillingness of the United States and other leading powers to fight those wars, or to fight them in ways that shape a society internally, will make us much less effective against these kinds of threats.
> 
> Kori Schake is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution. She is also the Bradley Professor of International Security Studies at the United States Military Academy at West Point, N.Y. Her areas of research interest are national security strategy, the effective use of military force, and European politics.
> Letters to the editor may be sent to definingideas@stanford.edu. Editors reserve the right to reject or publish (and edit) letters.


----------



## Retired AF Guy

Happened to be looking through the Global Security website when I found this collection of imagery and video's of NATO aircraft carrying out air strikes against pro-Qaddafi forces. Includes videos of CF-18 air strikes.

 Operation Odyssey Dawn / Unified Protector - IMINT Imagery


----------



## Scott

CBC Radio in Halifax reports that reuters is saying Gaddafi has been captured.

http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCATRE79F1FK20111020


----------



## ModlrMike

This is one to watch:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/10/20/libya-gadhafi-capture.html


----------



## Scott

CBC's The Current now reporting that he's died of his wounds.


----------



## observor 69

Gaddafi dies of wounds: NTC official
Reuters) - Former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi died of wounds suffered in his capture near his hometown of Sirte on Thursday, a senior NTC military official said.

National Transitional Council official Abdel Majid Mlegta told Reuters earlier that Gaddafi was captured and wounded in both legs at dawn on Thursday as he tried to flee in a convoy which NATO warplanes attacked.

"He was also hit in his head," the official said. "There was a lot of firing against his group and he died."

There was no independent confirmation of his remarks.

(reporting by Samia Nakhoul; editing by David Stamp)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/20/us-libya-idUSTRE79F1FK20111020


----------



## GAP

well..........that's solves that......it avoids the whole "hang Saddam" scenario.....


----------



## OldSolduer

Shot while trying to escape?  Nudge nudge wink wink say no more!!- a nod is as good as a wink to a blind bat!


----------



## tomahawk6

Here the image thats been released.Just in time for Halloween.Graphic image warning.


----------



## OldSolduer

OK what tin pot dictator shall we go after now?


----------



## jollyjacktar

Looks like that hurt straight away.  Long time coming.  Sic semper tyrannis.


----------



## Scott

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> OK what tin pot dictator shall we go after now?



Mike Bobbitt...?


----------



## GAP

uh.....we're on the benefit side of that.....let's pick someone else...... ;D


----------



## Scott

But I am not supposed to say _that_ name...and he doesn't have much of an empire...outside of his own mind.

Anyhoo, back to talking about another body bag


----------



## uptheglens

I hope that they got the Colonel's recipe of 11 secret herbs and spices beforehand!


----------



## Xcalibar

Good bye Wacky Gadaffi.  You will not be missed.  Now, let us see how the new goverment runs things.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Xcalibar said:
			
		

> Good bye Wacky Gadaffi.  You will not be missed.  Now, let us see how the new goverment runs things.




Most likely: poorly, ineptly, corruptly, unfairly, dictatorially, etc, etc, etc ...


----------



## old medic

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/20/us-libya-idUSTRE79F1FK20111020




> ......................   FINAL HOURS
> 
> One possible description, pieced together from various sources, suggests that Gaddafi may have tried to break out of his final redoubt at dawn in a convoy of vehicles after weeks of dogged resistance. However, he was stopped by a NATO airstrike and captured, possibly three or four hours later, after gunbattles with NTC fighters who found him hiding in a drainage culvert.
> 
> NATO said its warplanes fired on a convoy near Sirte about 8:30 a.m. (2:30 a.m. EDT), striking two military vehicles in the group, but could not confirm that Gaddafi had been a passenger.
> 
> Accounts from his enemies suggested his capture, and death soon after from wounds, may have taken place around noon.
> 
> One of Gaddafi's sons, heir-apparent Saif al-Islam, was at large, they believed.
> 
> NTC official Mlegta told Reuters that Gaddafi had been wounded in both legs early in the morning as he tried to flee in the convoy which NATO warplanes attacked
> 
> "He was also hit in his head," he said. "There was a lot of firing against his group and he died."
> 
> There was no shortage of NTC fighters in Sirte claiming to have seen him die, though many accounts were conflicting. Libyan television carried video of two drainage pipes, about a meter across, where it said fighters had cornered a man who long inspired both fear and admiration around the world.................








Hiding place after attack stopped convoy






Gold pistol taken from Gaddafi


----------



## The Bread Guy

Damn - just when I was getting one of the spellings of his name straight.....

Meanwhile, this from Spencer Ackerman via his blog:


> The Post-Gadhafi Journalism You Will Read In The Next 72 Hours
> 
> 1. Why Gadhafi's Death Vindicates "Leading From Behind" (Tom Friedman)
> 
> 2. Gadhafi's Death Shows The U.S. Was Never Really "Leading From Behind" (Anne-Marie Slaughter)
> 
> 3. There Is Still More To Do In Libya (Any Washington Post op-ed)
> 
> 4. On To Damascus, Then Teheran (Weekly Standard)
> 
> 5. Gadhafi's Death Shows The Post-Iraq Syndrome Is Over (TNR)
> 
> 6. Whither The Obama Doctrine? (David Ignatius)
> 
> 7. Saving The Responsibility To Protect From Future Libya Wars (Democracy Arsenal)
> 
> 8. Slideshow: Bye, Bye Moammar (Foreign Policy)
> 
> 9. Gadhafi's Death May Not Lead To Bump For Obama (Politico)
> 
> 10. The Warplanes And Warships of Libya  (WIRED's Danger Room)


----------



## OldSolduer

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Most likely: poorly, ineptly, corruptly, unfairly, dictatorially, etc, etc, etc ...



Or as the French? would say:

The more things change, the more they remain the same.


----------



## PuckChaser

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> OK what tin pot dictator shall we go after now?



I hear Syria is nice this time of year.


----------



## Journeyman

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I hear Syria is nice this time of year.



And some news services have the maps handy already    :facepalm:


----------



## Journeyman

Xcalibar said:
			
		

> Now, let us see how the new goverment runs things.


I suspect in the short- to mid-term, things will get worse.

There are multiple conflicts and competing issues that have been kept in check simply because Gaddafi was a common enemy. With him gone.....

The NTC was Benghazi-based, and only moved to the capital once it fell to anti-Gaddafi forces. Tripoli has been the home, and power base, of another government contender, the Tripoli Military Council. As such, the NTC is not particularly strong in that part of the country. Add the ethnic differences between Arabs and Berbers, and the Islamist/non-Islamist ideological conflicts.

What happens now is still shaky. Mahmoud Jubril, the interim Prime Minister, had promised to step down once Sirte fell. As somewhat of a moderate, it would be best if he stuck around, but who knows. 

Another thing that the NTC has claimed would happen upon the "liberation," (if one believes their interim constitution -- which they've not yet subjected to discussion or an approval vote) is open elections within eight months. I can see on-going fighting between factions making that election "not possible at this time" for the foreseeable future.


All that negativity just means I won't be looking there for beachfront property just yet.


----------



## GAP

We all suspected this Arab Spring was going to be messy.....we just didn't realize how messy.....one of the biggest problems is that the previous dictators effectively killed/banished/imprisoned any competition. 

Right now there really isn't any effective leaders in the countries that have toppled their dictators


----------



## The Bread Guy

> Canada expects its military mission in Libya to be complete within two weeks, following Thursday's news that former dictator Moammar Gadhafi had been killed.
> 
> "Our government shall be speaking with our allies to prepare for the end of our military mission in the next few days," Prime Minister Stephen Harper told reporters outside the House of Commons.
> 
> "With the shadow of Gadhafi now lifted from their land, it is our hope that the Libyan people will find peace and reconciliation after this dark period in the life of their nation."
> 
> Harper congratulated the Canadian military and Lt.-Gen. Charles Bouchard, the Canadian air force officer who has been overseeing NATO's Libya mission, for their success.
> 
> "Gadhafi's days are over," Harper said. "Never again will he be in a position to support terrorism or to turn guns on his own citizens. The Libyan people can finally turn the page on 42 years of vicious oppression and continue their journey toward a better future."
> 
> Canadian forces played a major role in the seven-month, NATO-led air-and-sea campaign that helped lead to Gadhafi's ouster and eventual death at the hands of rebel forces.
> 
> Ambassadors from the 28 NATO members will meet Friday in Brussels to discuss the mission, which began in March and ended up being a critical factor in ousting Gadhafi from power ....


Postmedia News, 20 Oct 11

Meanwhile, PM Harper's statement:


> “The Libyan National Transitional Council has confirmed the death of Muammar Gaddafi.
> 
> “Gaddafi’s days are over.
> 
> “Never again will he be in a position to support terrorism or to turn guns on his own citizens.
> 
> “The Libyan people can finally turn the page on 42 years of vicious oppression, and continue their journey toward a better future.
> 
> “At this time, I should like to say how proud we all are of the prominent role played by Canada’s Armed Forces.
> 
> “In cooperation with our NATO and Striker Group allies, they upheld the UN mandate to defend innocent Libyans against the regime’s violence.
> 
> “I should also like to commend Lieut. General Charles Bouchard of the Royal Canadian Air Force, who led the combined NATO military mission in Libya.
> 
> “General Bouchard has served our country with great distinction.
> 
> “I have recently spoken with General Bouchard, and our Government shall be speaking with our allies to prepare for the end of our military engagement in the next few days.
> 
> “With the shadow of Gaddafi now lifted from their land, it is our hope that the Libyan people will find peace and reconciliation after this dark period in the life of their nation and we look forward to working with them.”


----------



## GAP

There is one thing Gadafi did do.....supply water...............

Libya's Qaddafi taps 'fossil water' to irrigate desert farms
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2010/0823/Libya-s-Qaddafi-taps-fossil-water-to-irrigate-desert-farms
While many countries in the Middle East and North Africa bicker over water rights, Libya has tapped into an aquifer of 'fossil water' to change its topography – turning sand into soil. The 26-year, $20 billion project is nearly finished.

By Sarah A. Topol, Correspondent / August 23, 2010 

In the middle of the Libyan Desert’s scorched yellow sands, rows of green grapes dangle off vines; almond trees blossom in neat lines, and pear tree orchards stretch into the distance

Libya is one of the driest countries on Earth, bereft of rivers, lakes, and rain. But here the desert is blooming.

In the Middle East and North Africa, the quest to turn thousands of miles of desert into arable land has taken a backseat to containing an impending water shortage. While many countries in the region bicker over water rights, Libya has taken it upon itself to change its topography – turning sand into soil.

The Great Man-Made River, which is leader Muammar Qaddafi's ambitious answer to the country’s water problems, irrigates Libya’s large desert farms. The 2,333-mile network of pipes ferry water from four major underground aquifers in southern Libya to the northern population centers. Wells punctuate the water’s path, allowing farmers to utilize the water network in their fields.

The Libyan government says the 26-year project has cost $19.58 billion. Nearing completion, the Great Man-Made River is the largest irrigation project in the world and the government says it intends to use it to develop 160,000 hectares (395,000 acres) of farmland. It is also the cheapest available option to irrigate fields in the water-scarce country, which has an average annual rainfall of about one inch.

“Rainfall is just concentrated in 5 percent of the [country’s] area, so more or less, 95 percent or 90 percent of our land is desert,” says Abdul Magid al-Kaot, minister of agriculture, during a PowerPoint presentation that accompanied a recent several-hour government tour of the project and farms outside the capital of Tripoli. “Water is more precious for us than oil. ... Water here in Libya, it’s life.”
Taping into 'fossil water'

Just as Libya mines the desert for crude; they are doing the same for ‘fossil water’ – ice age water preserved in the porous holes of the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer.

The massive aquifer stretches under Libya, Egypt, Chad, and Sudan. It includes four freshwater basins inside Libya that contain approximately 10,000 to 12,000 cubic kilometers (480 cubic miles) of ancient water buried as deep as 600 meters (2,000 feet) below the surface of the desert, reporters were told during the government presentation. 
there's more on page 2 of article


----------



## GAP

May be more realistic than we thought............


----------



## OldSolduer

And now the lawyers are asking if he was killed in the fighting or was he executed?

My answer to them - who cares. He got what was deserved, as did Mussolini.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> And now the lawyers are asking if he was killed in the fighting or was he executed?



IMHO, the point of the question is moot. Who do they think they're going to hold responsible?

He was reported as still alive after the air attack, that get's us off the hook. Now they have to try and find out which freedom fighter actually put the signifigant bullet in him to end his life. Yeah, good luck with that. Even if they did, who's going to take him into custody and what court will he be tried in?

Friggin' bottom feeding ambulance chasers :facepalm:


----------



## Kirkhill

recceguy said:
			
		

> IMHO, the point of the question is moot. Who do they think they're going to hold responsible?
> 
> He was reported as still alive after the air attack, that get's us off the hook. Now they have to try and find out which freedom fighter actually put the signifigant bullet in him to end his life. Yeah, good luck with that. Even if they did, who's going to take him into custody and what court will he be tried in?
> 
> Friggin' bottom feeding ambulance chasers :facepalm:



The lawyers can't let this sort of thing catch on.  It's very bad for business.  Consider the lost opportunity hours in the Hague.


----------



## SupersonicMax

recceguy said:
			
		

> IMHO, the point of the question is moot. Who do they think they're going to hold responsible?
> 
> He was reported as still alive after the air attack, that get's us off the hook. Now they have to try and find out which freedom fighter actually put the signifigant bullet in him to end his life. Yeah, good luck with that. Even if they did, who's going to take him into custody and what court will he be tried in?
> 
> Friggin' bottom feeding ambulance chasers :facepalm:



It's not a question of who is responsible.  It's not because "we are off the hook" that it makes it okay.  This is what differentiate "us" from "them".  We have a respect for life and for basic human rights (this is, in fact, the primary reason why the international community decided to intervene in Libya).  And the right to a fair trial, not a field execution.   Questioning the NTC's actions only makes them accountable and makes clear what the international community expects from them.


----------



## 57Chevy

Shared with provisions of The Copyright Act

From the Telegraph

Rebels accused of executing former Libyan leader and son Mutassim
 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8841812/Rebels-accused-of-executing-former-Libyan-leader-and-son-Mutassim.html

Libya's rebel army has been accused of executing both Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and his son Mutassim in cold blood as the United Nations suggested their deaths amounted to war crimes.


Human rights groups and Gaddafi's wife Safia called for an independent investigation into the deaths, which robbed victims' families of the chance to see Gaddafi put on trial for his murderous acts.

Both Gaddafi and his son were filmed or photographed alive and relatively uninjured after their capture on Thursday, before both died of multiple gunshot wounds.

On Friday, at the refrigeration units in Misrata where the two bodies are being kept before their burial, young men queued for the chance to see the corpses and take pictures of them on their mobile phones.

Libya's interim president, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, is expected to declare the country officially liberated today, though the fate of Saif al-Islam, Gaddafi's chosen heir and the only man who could continue the fight, remains unclear.

Within Libya, Gaddafi's death has been a cause for celebration, but its new leaders have been warned that summary executions will not be tolerated by the international community.

article continues at link...


----------



## Brad Sallows

Well.  Finished with that one.


----------



## FlyingDutchman

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Well.  Finished with that one.


As long as no loyalists have one hell of a 'in the event of my death' plan.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here is the _Globe and Mail's_ assessment, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from that newspaper:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-turns-commitment-into-clout-in-libya/article2210169/


> Canada turns commitment into clout in Libya
> 
> JOHN IBBITSON AND DANIEL LEBLANC
> OTTAWA— From Saturday's Globe and Mail
> 
> Published Friday, Oct. 21, 2011
> 
> In their Parliaments, European political leaders continued to voice support for the NATO mission in Libya last summer even as the rebellion bogged down and protests grew.
> 
> But when it came time to assign planes to a strike, their militaries frequently would “red card” the sorties, which meant they were declaring that they were unable to contribute, according to a government official who spoke on condition of anonymity.
> 
> With a Canadian general in charge, Canada couldn’t have red-carded missions even if it wanted to, which is why Canadian CF-18 pilots often found themselves in the most dangerous skies.
> 
> As NATO announced on Friday that its effort to support the rebellion in Libya would end on Oct. 31 – now that the rebels are in charge and Col. Moammar Gadhafi is dead – the Conservative government congratulated itself on a job well done.
> 
> Throughout the mission, Canada was able to use its status as a middle power pulling its weight and punching above it to leverage influence within NATO and among Libyan rebel leaders.
> 
> And Prime Minister Stephen Harper demonstrated his willingness to put military forces on the front line in support of collective action against governments that become a menace to their own people.
> 
> The Liberals called the idea Responsibility to Protect. The Conservatives gave it teeth.
> 
> The uprisings of the Arab Spring caught Western leaders, including Mr. Harper, by surprise. But when people took to the streets of Libya, he decided he had to act.
> 
> The Prime Minister demanded to know what force Canada could get into the region and how quickly.
> 
> Word came back from National Defence that a frigate could be at sea in a matter of days. Do it, he ordered. On March 2, more than two weeks before the United Nations Security Council authorized a no-fly zone over Libya, HMCS Charlottetown left Halifax for the Mediterranean Sea.
> 
> But it was unclear what would happen, as Great Britain and France pushed NATO to act and a reluctant United States, which was still extricating itself from Iraq and mired in Afghanistan, pushed back.
> 
> “[President Barack] Obama had been elected to end two wars, not to start a third one,” a Canadian official stated.
> 
> The alliance gelled only when it became clear that Col. Gadhafi was determined to crush the rebellion and to wreak vengeance on civilians who supported it. But Mr. Obama made it clear that, after the initial sorties, the United States intended to lead from behind. The other NATO nations would have to do the heavy lifting
> 
> Canada decided on a strong commitment. CF-18s at Bagotville, Que., were readied for deployment. On March 20, the opposition parties endorsed a three-month mission.
> 
> On March 25, Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard of the Canadian Forces was chosen to command the operation.
> 
> “I’m sure that putting the CF-18s in there helped Bouchard get it,” said the government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
> 
> Another official said that a Canadian commander was probably chosen to bypass French and British rivalries and to reassure the Americans.
> 
> Not everyone in NATO was on board all the time, as the rebellion appeared to bog down. Spring dragged into summer. Cities changed hands and changed back. People appeared to be on the regime’s side one day, the rebels’ side the next.
> 
> “Europe wobbled. Throughout the entire process, Europe was touch and go,” said one Canadian official.
> 
> The wobbling got worse as it became clear that a mission that had initially been intended to protect civilians had crept toward regime change. The Canadians were fine with that.
> 
> “A few months into the mission, it was realized that something had to change,” the official said. “Gadhafi was just entrenching himself.”
> 
> On June 14, Canada recognized Libya’s rebel council as the legitimate voice of the country’s people, even as the House of Commons voted to extend the mission by another three months.
> 
> In late June, Foreign Minister John Baird flew to Benghazi, offering Canada’s unqualified support to the National Transition Council. (In October, he would become the first foreign minister to visit the Tripoli compound of the toppled dictator.)
> 
> On Sept. 26, the House once again approved the extension of the mission, this time over the opposition of the NDP. But by then, Tripoli had fallen and Col. Gadhafi’s end was in sight. Canada was one of the first countries to re-open its embassy in Tripoli.
> 
> By the end of the campaign, Canadian jets had flown 446 missions over Libya, 10 per cent of the NATO total, and used up 14.5-million pounds of fuel.
> 
> The Conservative government and NATO leaders believe they have drawn valuable lessons from Libya. The first is that regimes change only when the people are willing to change them. By limiting its mandate to air strikes, a sea blockade, intelligence and selective use of special forces, the alliance helped make possible a revolution that the Libyan people fought themselves.
> 
> Second, NATO can work, and may even work best, when the United States stays in the background.
> 
> Third, when asked, Canada can deliver.




Of the three lessons, Ibbitson and LeBlanc suggests were learned:

1. _"Regimes change only when the people are willing to change them. By limiting its mandate to air strikes, a sea blockade, intelligence and selective use of special forces, the alliance helped make possible a revolution that the Libyan people fought themselves._

     This is a good one; the first part is undeniably true - as Iraq _may_ demonstrate when America leaves and the regime it helped impose becomes an ally of Iran and Syria;

2. _"NATO can work, and may even work best, when the United States stays in the background."_

     Again the first part is true; the second - that NATO might work better with less American 'presence' is doubtful; and

3. _When asked, Canada can deliver."_

     This is true ONLY when we are asked tom play a limited role. Without, for even a μsecond, denying the sterling roles played by the RCN and the RCAF, we do not have enough to anything to play more than a minor role. We are not, yet, a "middle power" and we are, certainly, not a _leading_ middle power.

The _Canada First Defence Strategy_ will, by 2030, have rendered us even less capable because it will, steadily, lower the % of GPD we spend on our national defence. We will, because resources will be very limited,  go, for example, from 16 major combatant vessels (which we cannot crew) to a planned figure of 15 - each of which _might_ require a smaller crew; we will go from 80+ CF-18 fighter/bombers to 65 F-35 aircraft. Even though the new ships and new aircraft will be more capable - perhaps 12 F-35 can do as much (range, weapon loads, turn around time) as 16 CF-18s, perhaps three new warships can replace four of the current ones - we will have less to contribute to allied operations.



Edit: formatting


----------



## Edward Campbell

And here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_ are Michael Ignatieff's thoughts on the Libyan operations:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/libyas-revolutionary-moment-has-arrived/article2210105/


> Libya’s revolutionary moment has arrived
> 
> MICHAEL IGNATIEFF
> From Saturday's Globe and Mail
> 
> Published Saturday, Oct. 22, 2011
> 
> We like to think we made it happen. First in Kosovo, now in Libya, we believe our air power made it happen. The truth is we didn't make it happen any more than we made the Arab Spring happen. The air operation itself would never have been approved at the United Nations without the green light from the Arab League. The people of Libya, the peoples of the Middle East made it happen. We all need to understand how little this is about us. Otherwise we risk succumbing to the illusion that we can shape the future in the Middle East.
> 
> The power we exercised in the sky gives us little control over what happens next. This is not just because we don't have boots on the ground. Even when we had boots in the Balkans, we never controlled the way events rolled out after the air campaign was over. The people of the Balkans wrote their own history after the intervention there and the peoples of the Middle East will do the same.
> 
> We called Libya a civil war and intervened to help one side win, as we did in Kosovo. But Libya was not a civil war. The dictator didn't have deep enough support to turn it into one. It was a revolution, a people against a regime, rising up without any instigation from us, with nothing but rage, humiliation and hope to guide them. We gave them air cover and they made a revolution.
> 
> Let us not be romantic about revolutions, but let us also remember the hope they carry. The revolutionary moment – the discovery that “we the people” brought the dictator down – gives the Libyans a chance to come together and build something out of the ruins.
> 
> The people have discovered themselves. They have discovered their sovereignty and they will not willingly surrender it to gunmen or extremist Islamists, in Libya or in Tunisia or Egypt. In Syria, in Yemen, in Algeria too, the people will see what the sovereignty of the street looks like and long for it, too.
> 
> All revolutionary situations are poised between exhilaration and terror, and Libya is no exception. There are too many guns in the street, too many militias, too little authority and order.
> 
> Revenge will be taken. Scores will be settled. Theft and vandalism will be legitimized as justice. Revolution could topple into civil war unless an army and a monopoly over the means of force are re-established. But those crowds, men and women all waving the same flag, the kids with their hands on their hearts, singing the anthem perched on their parents' shoulders, are actually stronger than the men with guns, if they only could find the politics to express their power.
> 
> The future of Libya and the entire Middle East depends not on us, but on something momentous and unpredictable: whether people who have never had the chance to do politics before can learn to do it now.
> 
> Libyans have never been citizens, only subjects. They have never been allowed to develop the trust among strangers that makes politics possible. They are a people divided by city, region, tribe and education and by collusion with or opposition to the regime. They are divided as to whether their political future should be secular or religious.
> 
> Now all of these divisions spill out into the open. Those who did well under the dictator will have to turn chameleon and change colour to avoid revenge. Others went into exile and now rush home, hopefully not too late, to earn what they feel is their rightful place. Most just want the revolution to end and give them stability, order and a job.
> 
> The dictator would not have lasted 42 years if he had not understood these divisions and exploited them ruthlessly. He came from one of the weaker tribes and built tyranny on the politics of divide and rule. The tents, camels and robes were all a bravura show to manipulate and intimidate tribes into subjection.
> 
> But if this is all it took to divide a people, it can't be impossible to unite them. The hatred of the old order – across the Middle East – brought the people together for a time, so politicians will have to find a constitutional project to keep them together: building the alliances and institutions that give strangers rewards to co-operate in building a new state.
> 
> Some Libyans know exactly where they should be headed. Already in Benghazi this summer, one visitor noticed green Arabic graffiti on a wall that read: “We want institutions.” And then, in case there was any doubt about what that might mean, the graffitist added: “Constitutional rule, elected President, 4 year non-renewable term limits.”
> 
> We can't improve on this advice. Of course, we can help with governance: We discharged a responsibility to protect, and with that goes a responsibility to rebuild.
> 
> But let's remember that Libyans know what we will never know: their own history. They made their revolution happen. Now, they have to make the revolution into a government. They will have to learn to trust each other. No one can predict whether they will succeed, but no one should doubt the magnificence of what they are attempting.
> 
> The people with guns will have to sit down with people who have none. Force of argument will have to replace force of arms.
> 
> The transitional council has to hold together and then its leaders have to keep their word and bow out of presidential politics. A route to elections has to be mapped out. A constitution has to be written, laying out what the place of sharia law will be, how a structure of institutions – courts, free press and public administration – can be created in place of the void that the dictator left behind.
> 
> All of it will be difficult, but none of it is impossible. Libya has certain advantages. No one is trying to invade it. It has oil. Oil can be a curse if it fuels regional and tribal battles over the spoils, a blessing if its revenues are used to build schools and roads and hospitals for all, and give the Libyan state the resources to create enduring institutions. It will be easy to get the oil flowing, much less easy to diversify an economy so that young people with educations find the jobs and economic security that anchor democracy in a diversified economy.
> 
> All across the Middle East, people face the same challenge of building institutions where dictators have left a desert behind them. If Libya succeeds, it can become a fulcrum of change for the whole region. If it fails, it could become a source of instability, spreading chaos and extremism south through the weak states of Niger, Mali and Chad.
> 
> Certainly, American drones will soon be flying, if they are not already doing so, over al-Qaeda hideouts in the Maghreb.
> 
> The peoples of North Africa are living their most dramatic hours since national independence in the 1950s, Next door to Libya, Tunisia goes to the polls on Sunday. A whole people will vote as free citizens for the first time. Yes, Islamists may carry the day there, and in Egypt too. The risk is obvious: one vote, for one time only. But what, exactly, is the alternative? Why are we so afraid to trust Islam with democracy? What other choice is there?
> 
> Just like the Europeans, the peoples of the Middle East have seen all the political gods fail, one after another, from Gamal Abdel Nasser, through pan-Arabism, through Arab socialism and Baathism, through military dictatorship and finally the family kleptocracies of Gadhafi, Saleh and Assad. Only the monarchies cling on and their future will depend on making a deal with a people who are tired of promises.
> 
> The people of the Middle East, like people anywhere, learn from experience and they know they are not at the beginning of a new dawn, where anything is possible, but at the end of 60 years of failure that has blighted the hopes of each succeeding generation.
> 
> The peoples of the Middle East know this, and this may be the single most important reason why they will try to make democracy work. Everything else has failed them and this year, from Tripoli in Libya to Daraa in Syria, they have felt, for the first time, their own terrifying power.
> 
> _Michael Ignatieff is a Senior Resident at Massey College, University of Toronto._




Michael Ignatieff makes a good point in the opening paragraph: _"... we risk succumbing to the illusion that we can shape the future in the Middle East."_ It is, indeed, an illusion to suppose, as at least some world leaders do, that "we," whoever "we" are, can shape the Middle East to suit our ends.

Ignatieef is off the rails in the final paragraph when he says, _"The peoples of the Middle East ... will try to make democracy work."_ No they will not; a few might, a minority of that few proably will *try* but most of "the peoples of the Middle East" will quietly and even happily acquiesce to whatever the next dictator tells them.

The stuff in the middle?  :boring:


----------



## Journeyman

> ...as the United Nations suggested their deaths amounted to war crimes.


So who sees the UN now lifting Libya's "temporary suspension" from the Human Rights Council, thus allowing Libya to investigate itself?
     op:


----------



## tomahawk6

In time the revolution will turn on itself. The various brigades each represent a faction and in the end the side with the most trigger pullers will run Libya. My bet is on the Muslim Brotherhood.


----------



## The Bread Guy

> The North Atlantic Council met today with Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR partners to assess the situation in Libya.
> 
> *The Council agreed that the operations are very close to completion and has taken a preliminary decision to end the operation on 31 October 2011.  The Council will take a formal decision early next week.*  In the meantime, the Secretary General will consult closely with the United Nations and the National Transitional Council.
> 
> The Council agreed that NATO will wind down the operation, during which period NATO will monitor the situation and retain the capacity to respond to threats to civilians, if needed.
> 
> Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR partners have associated themselves with this statement.


NATO statement, 21 Oct 11


----------



## The Bread Guy

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Xcalibar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good bye Wacky Gadaffi.  You will not be missed.  Now, let us see how the new goverment runs things.
> 
> 
> 
> Most likely: poorly, ineptly, corruptly, unfairly, dictatorially, etc, etc, etc ...
Click to expand...

In that vein (highlights mine)....


> LIBYA’S INTERIM GOVERNMENT has announced the official liberation of the country, Reuters reports.
> 
> An official who opened the ceremony at Freedom Square in Benghazi said, “We declare to the whole world that we have liberated our beloved country, with its cities, villages, hill-tops, mountains, deserts and skies.”
> 
> Hundreds of thousands of people have taken to the streets of Benghazi and it seems that almost all those who have turned out has a red, black and green flag – the symbol of the new country.
> 
> The city was the birthplace of the revolution which led to the ousting of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. His death and the fall of his hometown of Sirte on Thursday marked an end to the 42-year-old Gaddafi regime.
> 
> Another formal declaration was made by NTC chairman Mustafa Abdul Jalil, who saluted all the martyrs who died in search of this day. He also thanked the Arab League, the UN and the EU.
> 
> During his speech, delivered to tens of thousands in festival mood, *he said that Islamic law, including polygamy, would be upheld in Libya.
> 
> “We as a Muslim nation have taken Islamic sharia as the source of legislation, therefore any law that contradicts the principles of Islam is legally nullified,” he said, according to Reuters Africa.
> 
> He called on Libyans to follow the law and not to use force anymore. He asked for tolerance and patience from people as they enter a new era* ....


thejournal.ie, 23 Oct 11


----------



## Journeyman

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> He called on Libyans to follow the law and not to use force anymore. He asked for  tolerance and patience  from people as they enter a new era.


Good luck. Those tend to be pretty scarce commodities in _all_ fundamentalist societies.


----------



## The Bread Guy

We'll have to see about that bit I highlighted in orange.....


> “Today, Canadians join with the Libyan people in celebrating the liberation of their country.
> 
> “The Libyan people have courageously risen up against decades of tyranny. Canada’s involvement, as sanctioned by the United Nations and led by NATO, has supported their aspirations for the future.
> 
> “We join Libyans in welcoming the post-Gaddafi era and *the transition of the country to a democratic society – one that respects human rights and the rule of law*.
> 
> “We again commend the work of members of the Royal Canadian Navy and the Royal Canadian Air Force and the leadership of Canadian Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard. Their efforts have led to the success of NATO’s mission in Libya. NATO has taken a preliminary decision to conclude the mission at the end of October.
> 
> “Canada will continue to work with transitional leaders as the new Libya takes shape.”


PM statement, 23 Oct 11


----------



## Old Sweat

The following piece from the Daily Telegraph, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provision of the Copyright Act, makes a good case for Western governments to stand aside and let the locals run their own affairs. The results may not be what we would have desired, but to impose a solution will just make matters worse.

Libya: The Arab Spring may yet turn to chilly winter

We may not like the consequences of elections in North Africa - but we must not repeat the mistakes of the past.

By Peter Oborne

9:00PM BST 22 Oct 2011

The extra-judicial execution of Colonel Gaddafi has been greeted with international elation, and understandably so. There was very little to be said in favour of that gnarled torturer and war criminal. Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron, who masterminded the campaign against him, have some excuse to take the view that with the killing of Gaddafi, and today’s elections in Tunisia, the Arab Spring appears to be entering a hopeful stage.


But in truth, they have more reason to be fearful. Last week, I accompanied the Foreign Secretary, William Hague, on a tour of North Africa. The mood in Libya was understandably buoyant – yet it was another destination on our itinerary that provided a hideous warning about what might happen next.


This coming December marks the 20th anniversary of the Algerian Spring, when free elections seemed to bring an end to a long period of ugly dictatorship. Yet those elections did not lead to the liberal democratic nirvana envisaged by Cameron and Sarkozy today. On the contrary, they were followed by a decade of hideously barbaric civil war, in which more than 160,000 Algerians died and the most unspeakable atrocities were perpetrated by all sides in the conflict.


Even today, Algeria has not recovered. As a society, it is suffering from a kind of post-traumatic stress syndrome. The streets are empty at night – a legacy of the curfew imposed during the civil war years – the country is a police state and al-Qaeda has established its North African headquarters in the ungovernable south.


As the Arab Spring embarks on its next stage, it is essential to ask: what went wrong in Algeria? This question is all the more urgent because the similarities between what happened then and what is happening in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya today are alarmingly close.

Back in 1991, Algeria was suffering from mass unemployment, social discontent and riots in the streets. Eventually, the president, Chadli Bendjedid, felt obliged to call an election. What followed was a fantastically hopeful period for the country. Opposition parties mobilised and, after a lively and what is widely accepted to have been a free and fair election, the Islamic Salvation Front emerged victorious.

It was at this stage that the army intervened, strongly backed by France, the former colonial power, and the CIA. The generals declared a state of emergency, cancelled future elections, and curtailed free speech and the right to public assembly. The effects were utterly catastrophic.

We now face a wave of elections all across North Africa – today in Tunisia, next month in Egypt, and in eight months’ time in Libya. It is, of course, possible that these will be won by the secular liberal parties beloved of the West. But that is unlikely. In today’s vote in Tunisia, for example, the Islamic group Ennahda is set to emerge as the largest party. That outcome will be especially unwelcome for France, which continues to regard Tunisia as part of its sphere of influence more than 50 years after the country gained its theoretical independence.

In Egypt, meanwhile, a quiet military coup, tacitly supported by the United States, has put the brakes on the move to democracy. Elections that were originally meant to be held last month have been delayed: they are now planned for next month. At some point, however, they must happen – and when they do, there is no question that the Muslim Brotherhood will emerge as a dominant force. My guess is that, at some stage, a version of Islamic law is likely to be imposed across Egypt.

Let us now consider the case of Libya. It is impossible to predict the course of events now that Gaddafi has fallen, and there will be many powerful voices in the new transitional government that indeed reflect the secular, liberal views of Western democracy. But it is perfectly possible that Abdel Hakim Belhaj, the rebel commander who claims to have been tortured by the CIA in secret jails (allegedly with British complicity), will emerge as a powerful force. His and his supporters’ presence within the rebel movement is almost certainly the reason that al-Qaeda has failed to establish a presence in Tripoli over recent weeks – but his Islamist backers, or other, similar factions, may well form alliances that take Libya in a direction that is profoundly distasteful to Britain, France and the United States of America.

What should we do? The answer, I believe, is that we must leave well alone. At this delicate stage, it is essential to bear in mind that several competing narratives are available to explain the trajectory of the Arab Spring. The narrative most favoured in the West explains events in terms of the victory of freedom and democracy over a series of ugly autocratic regimes. This narrative is true as far as it goes – but it is sadly incomplete. Those autocratic regimes were, without exception, created or sponsored by the West. President Ben Ali in Tunisia, President Mubarak in Egypt, and even Colonel Gaddafi in Libya all had their connections to Western democracies. Their security forces were often trained by us; their torturers collaborated with us; and our corporations did very profitable business with them.

This is why there is a terrifying paradox at work this weekend. The Arab Spring has certainly been a victory of freedom and decency against barbarity and repression. But it has also been, in a very fundamental way, something completely different: a revolt against Western post-colonial domination. We have consistently preferred to ignore or forget this central point, but the revolutionary leaders in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya are extremely conscious of this uncomfortable truth.

That is why it is so very important that this weekend, we reflect very carefully on the Algerian calamity. If we move once again to suppress national movements across North Africa, we will not simply risk plunging the region into chaos and brutal civil war, we may even achieve something even more dangerous and self-destructive: we may enfranchise and justify al-Qaeda.

Thus far, the Arab Spring has represented a total defeat for the ugly ideology of violent nihilism preached by bin Laden and his successors. That is because this year’s events have shown that change for the better can be achieved peacefully, through democratic means. If we step in now to block that democratic change – however unpalatable its consequences may be for us – the Arab Spring may turn almost overnight into a long and dark Arab winter.


----------



## Edward Campbell

In my (probably too oft repeated) view it is time, indeed past time, for "us," the American led West, to _disengage_, militarily and, in the largest possible measure, economically, from most of the Muslim world, at least from the North African, Middle Eastern and West Asian Muslim world. We should endeavour to _provoke_ internal questions about how and why the North Africans, Arabs, Persians and Asian Muslims live and are governed as they do and are.

Some _possible_ basic steps:

1. Stop allowing young people from most of the _Islamic Crescent_ to study in the West. China can and will take up part, but not very much of the slack - Chinese universities are, I think, already overcrowded and understaffed, in fact, if we took fewer students from e.g. the Middle East then China and India would happily fill the empty seats in our universities, making the move revenue neutral.

2. Stop all state-to-state aid. Nothing should be done about non-state aid, much (most?) of which is humanitarian in nature; and

3. Monitor, _intrusively_, direct investment in North African, Middle Eastern and West Asian countries and _try_ to tax revenues from those investments as though they were domestic. (This is a serious double-edged sword which I admit may have too many unforeseen consequences.)

Will that make Muslims crave Western style democracy? No. My guess is that most practicing Muslims would rather have an _Islamic_ government, with _Sharia_ and all that, than a _secular_ one; that doesn't mean they don't want "democracy," most people want to decide their fates for themselves, but they generally, I suspect want to choose between two or three Islamic alternatives, not two or three secular ones.

Will that collapse the Muslim economies? No, but it will make growth and the provisions of services more difficult.

Will it ferment internal dissent? Yes, probably, if we maintain a _propaganda_ barrage by allowing Muslims to travel here and see what we have and how we live. Young Muslim men, especially, will want what they do not have - even if it is not especially good for them. 

Will it _provoke_ intra-Islamic wars? No, but it will allow them.


----------



## GAP

Good article....and he's mostly correct.


----------



## Old Sweat

This soft ball piece from the Toronto Star by columnist Rose DiManno is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provision of the Copyright Act. I wonder when someone is going to ask how many other Canadians ran a war, or even a theatre. I can only think of two, and one was a RMC graduate serving in the British army who commanded the campaign in the Cameroons in the First World War. The other was a very capable admiral in the RCN in the Battle of the Atlantic. This is a first for the RCAF.

DiManno: NATO had a good plan and Canadian commander stuck to it

Published On Sun Oct 23 2011

The day of reckoning for Moammar Gadhafi — what would be the last day of his life — was in the mission commander’s crosshairs.

Lt.-Gen. Charles Bouchard could have watched, in real time, as the deposed dictator was run to ground in a sewer, yanked bloody but alive from his hidey-hole, and set upon by revolutionary fighters. It was the bloody climax to a long, often second-guessed, campaign.

Yet the Operation Unified Protector boss from Chicoutimi took his eyes off the drama, visible to him by sophisticated surveillance technology. Instead, he cast anxious glances across what was happening elsewhere in a once-vast Libyan battlefield that had shrunk to the loyalist territory around Sirte, whence Gadhafi had risen from nobody to self-described “King of all Kings.”

From the very beginning of the NATO intervention, Bouchard had insisted, if less than convincingly, that Gadhafi was not a specific military target. His marching orders, however broadly expanded by politicians to regime change, had been the protection of civilians, enforcement of a no-fly zone and arms embargo, as mandated by UN Security Council Resolution 1973.

“Was I watching? No, I wasn’t. If I had, then I’m not looking at the whole country,’’ Bouchard told the Star by telephone Sunday from his NATO headquarters in Naples.

“The death of Gadhafi was not something that I had included in my strategic planning. To be honest, I was surprised that he was still in Sirte. I thought he was probably somewhere in the southern Libyan desert.’’

For weeks, fighting had been intense around 69-year-old Gadhafi’s hometown as antiregime forces — the ragtag but battle-hardened army of rebels — encircled the ancient fishing town, taking fierce fire from the dictator’s devoted personal guards. Last Thursday, just after dawn, reconnaissance NATO aircraft spotted about 80 vehicles slipping out of a compound and speeding away from Sirte.

“What we saw was a major convoy on the move,” recalled Bouchard. A U.S. Predator drone and French jet zeroed in for the strike at 8.30 a.m.

“The lead vehicle was destroyed. But it was evident they were attempting to reassemble. My conclusion was they were trying to marry up with other regime forces in Bani Walid.”

A second strike — likely by attack helicopters rather than a missile (there was no bomb crater left behind) — was authorized, leaving scores dead. Gadhafi was not among the victims. He had scurried into a culvert as rebels streamed to the location. And they would have, it appears, their pound of flesh.

Gadhafi was breathing when pulled from the culvert. He wasn’t upon delivery at Misurata, where his body was laid out on a mattress for public viewing inside a meat locker at a mall, men and women and children filing by to confirm that the big bad tyrant was indeed no more.

“The victory is theirs,’’ said Bouchard, of the revolutionaries who waged combat through eight months of advances and retreats. Tripoli fell in late August and so did the regime, but its remnants fought on in Sirte and Bani Walid.

There were no coalition forces on the ground, beyond “advisers.” But mission accomplished — a premature phrase when applied to Iraq in 2003 — will likely be declared, if not in those exact words, this week. NATO has said it will withdraw from Libya by Oct. 31.

A successful mission was absolutely vital for the alliance, given its muddled acquittal in Afghanistan, even if some inside observers remain skeptical about NATO’s capacity to conduct such assignments as the lead interventionists.

“Goodness, it’s always important for NATO to have success,” said Bouchard. “I think this mission bodes well for NATO’s future. It proved the concept of rapid response in a limited engagement. It tells me that we were hitting the right targets, bona fide targets, and not anybody else. The regime leaders were hit wherever they went.”

Bouchard did not know Gadhafi was part of that fleeing convoy. He was leery of initial reports the colonel had been captured. “There has been so much inaccurate reporting, rumours that proved to be untrue. … It could have all been a diversion to sneak away. I didn’t want him still out there, floating around, trying to get back into power.”

As tempting a target as Gadhafi may have been, Bouchard was adamant about sticking to the plot: methodically degrade all command-and-control nodes, sever supply lines and eliminate, from that point, the secondary echelon of organizational threat. “We had a good plan and we stuck to it. I was not going to be distracted by chasing bright shiny objects.’’

Now, like the rest of the world, Bouchard has seen the proof.

On Sunday, Libya’s chief pathologist confirmed Gadhafi died of gunshots to the abdomen and head. How that occurred is a matter of intense speculation. Human rights agencies and the UN are demanding a full investigation.

The cellphone images that went viral, of a dazed and apparently wounded Gadhafi confronting his antagonists, don’t sit well with Bouchard. “I had no respect for this individual. But no matter how despicable he was, human dignity should prevail. Justice would have been served if he’d been tried at the International Criminal Court.

“On the other hand, I do understand it. I don’t wish to comment on what happened after. From my perspective, there has been closure. Libya can move on now.’’

The flamboyant Gadhafi had vowed to fight on “until martyrdom or victory” and to “burn Libya under the feet’’ of his enemies — the “rats” and NATO stooges. For all his oratorical defiance, however, it seems he trembled under the incessant NATO onslaught.

“He was very afraid of NATO,” Mansour Dhao Ibrahim, leader of the feared People’s Guard, told the New York Times on the weekend.

Bouchard isn’t taking any bows, though clearly relieved at the outcome of a mission for which he was given command in March. . 

Himself trained to fly tactical helicopters, Bouchard assumed military leadership of a coalition in which only eight of NATO’s 28 members — including Canadian fighter pilots — abetted by some Arab states, did all the heavy lifting from two bases in Sicily.

What they left behind, Bouchard emphasizes, is a country with its infrastructure still largely intact (because the missile strikes were precision-guided) and with remarkably few civilians killed, at least by NATO.

“Libya’s in a good position. The infrastructure is all there — gas, oil, electricity, water. The hospitals are open. The ports are open. The airfields are operational. It’s an urbanized country. They still have a civil service. All the ingredients for a future are in place. The challenge will be political because a new nation is being born. But they won’t be the first to do so with regional differences. Our own country is like that.”

Those sortie strikes — 9,646 since March 31 — were launched using fewer aircraft than were available during the Kosovo campaign. They relied on surprise attacks, adept intelligence gathering and relentless pursuit, never allowing regime commanders time to recalibrate.

Some rogue states can be overthrown from a distance, in coordination with ground troops. But whether this strategy can or should be replicated in future missions is a matter of disagreement. There were, it’s been reported, shortages of proper equipment and skilled targeting officers, with the U.S. — “leading from behind” — providing many of the required assets and the critical drones. 

“Most of the time, I never asked, what country did what?’’ said Bouchard. “We operate under one flag: NATO.’’

Bouchard will be writing his summary for NATO on “lessons learned’’ in the coming months.

“The biggest danger is thinking that what worked here can work somewhere else at another time. We couldn’t apply Afghan tactics here and we can’t apply Libyan tactics elsewhere. I would caution against that; otherwise you’ll be planning for the last war rather than the next one.’’

When Bouchard heads back to Canada, it will be to retirement. He’s done and, frankly, mentally exhausted.

“It’ll be nice to go home and stop thinking about it. I’ve been in the military for 37½ years, a career that has gone way beyond anything I could have imagined.

“I’ve had a very good run.”


----------



## Sythen

> OTTAWA - Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird can't guarantee Libya won't return to Stone Age laws and treat women as second-class citizens.
> 
> After an eight-month war to liberate the people, the leader of a rag-tag coalition says Shariah law would guide the country in a post-Gadhafi era.
> 
> It was unclear how much of the law Mustafa Jalil - a former Gadhafi justice minister - wants to adopt to appease followers of Islam.
> 
> But his comments have sparked concerns.
> 
> "We didn't send our troops, our pilots to help in the liberation of Libya in order to see any one group in Libyan society oppressed," interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae said. "The liberation of Libya means the liberation of Libyan women as well as Libyan men."



http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/world/archives/2011/10/20111024-170825.html

More on link


----------



## OldSolduer

Sythen said:
			
		

> http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/world/archives/2011/10/20111024-170825.html
> 
> More on link



Have we got another Tar Baby on our hands?


----------



## jollyjacktar

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Have we got another Tar Baby on our hands?



Hands, hair, shirt and face I'll wager.


----------



## OldSolduer

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Hands, hair, shirt and face I'll wager.



Incredible. Should we be dusting off our Arid Boots?


----------



## jollyjacktar

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Incredible. Should we be dusting off our Arid Boots?



I hope we won't be that stunned to get mired further in the morass this will turn in to.  I like ER's suggestions in another thread on what we should do with our involvement in that area of the world.


----------



## The Bread Guy

> The Security Council today ordered the end to authorized international military action in Libya, more than seven months after allowing United Nations Member States to take “all necessary measures” to protect civilians during a popular uprising against the country’s former regime.
> 
> The 15-member UN body unanimously passed a resolution ending the UN mandate allowing military intervention and terminating a no-fly zone over Libya that had also been imposed in March.
> 
> After those measures were introduced, members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and other countries carried out air strikes to protect civilians caught up in the fighting between then rebels and forces supporting former leader Muammar al-Qadhafi.
> 
> According to today’s resolution, the authorization will end at 11:59 p.m. local time (1859 Eastern) in Libya on 31 October. Authorization for the no-fly zone will lapse at the same time ....


U.N. News Centre, 27 Oct 11

Text of today's resolution, via U.N. news release:


> “The Security Council,
> 
> “Recalling its resolutions 1970 (2011) of 26 February 2011, 1973 (2011) of 17 March 2011, and 2009 (2011) of 16 September 2011,
> 
> “Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of Libya,
> 
> “Taking note of the National Transitional Council’s “Declaration of Liberation” of 23 October 2011 in Libya,
> 
> “Looking forward to a future for Libya based on national reconciliation, justice, respect for human rights and the rule of law,
> 
> “Reiterating the importance of promoting the full and effective participation of members of all social and ethnic groups, including the equal participation of women and minority communities in the discussions related to the post-conflict phase,
> 
> “Recalling its decision to refer the situation in Libya to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, and the importance of cooperation for ensuring that those responsible for violations of human rights and international humanitarian law or complicit in attacks targeting the civilian population are held accountable,
> 
> “Reiterating that the voluntary and sustainable return of refugees and internally displaced persons will be an important factor for the consolidation of peace in Libya,
> 
> “Expressing concern at the proliferation of arms in Libya and its potential impact on regional peace and security, and also expressing its intention expeditiously to address that issue further,
> 
> “Expressing grave concern about continuing reports of reprisals, arbitrary detentions, wrongful imprisonment and extrajudicial executions in Libya,
> 
> “Reiterating its call to the Libyan authorities to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms, including those of people belonging to vulnerable groups, to comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law, and urging respect for the human rights of all people in Libya, including former officials and detainees, during and after the transitional period,
> 
> “Recalling its decisions in resolution 2009 (2011) to:
> 
> (a)   Modify the provisions of the arms embargo imposed by paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 to provide for additional exemptions,
> 
> (b)   Terminate the asset freeze imposed by paragraphs 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011) and paragraph 19 of resolution 1973 (2011) with respect to the Libyan National Oil Corporation and Zueitina Oil Company, and to modify the asset freeze imposed by paragraphs 17, 19, 20 and 21 of resolution 1970 (2011) and paragraph 19 of resolution 1973 (2011) with respect to the Central Bank of Libya, the Libyan Arab Foreign Bank, the Libyan Investment Authority, and the Libyan Africa Investment Portfolio, and
> 
> (c)   Cease the measures imposed by paragraph 17 of resolution 1973 (2011),
> 
> “Recalling also its intention to keep the measures imposed by paragraphs 6 to 12 of resolution 1973 (2011) under continuous review and to lift, as appropriate and when circumstances permit, those measures and to terminate authorization given to Member States in paragraph 4 of resolution 1973 (2011), in consultation with the Libyan authorities,
> 
> “Mindful of its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security under the Charter of the United Nations,
> 
> “Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
> 
> “1.   Welcomes the positive developments in Libya which will improve the prospects for a democratic, peaceful and prosperous future there;
> 
> “2.   Looks forward to the swift establishment of an inclusive, representative transitional Government of Libya, and reiterates the need for the transitional period to be underpinned by a commitment to democracy, good governance, rule of law, national reconciliation and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms of all people in Libya;
> 
> “3.   Strongly urges the Libyan authorities to refrain from reprisals, including arbitrary detentions, calls upon the Libyan authorities to take all steps necessary to prevent reprisals, wrongful imprisonment and extrajudicial executions, and underscores the Libyan authorities’ responsibility for the protection of its population, including foreign nationals and African migrants;
> 
> “4.   Urges all Member States to cooperate closely with the Libyan authorities in their efforts to end impunity for violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law;
> 
> “Protection of Civilians
> 
> “5.   Decides that the provisions of paragraphs 4 and 5 of resolution 1973 (2011) shall be terminated from 23.59 Libyan local time on 31 October 2011;
> 
> “No-Fly Zone
> 
> “6.   Decides also that the provisions of paragraphs 6 to 12 of resolution 1973 (2011) shall be terminated from 23.59 Libyan local time on 31 October 2011;
> 
> “7.   Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.”


----------



## The Bread Guy

..... on the end of Canada's mission in Libya (e-mailed statement attached - link here for online version):


> “With the Libyan people having freed themselves from the Gaddafi regime, Canada’s military mission in Libya is complete and Canadians can be proud of the job well done by our troops.
> 
> “Since the onset of the crisis in Libya, Canada has played a critical role both politically and militarily to protect innocent civilians against a cruel and oppressive regime.
> 
> “Working alongside our NATO allies, the Canadian Armed Forces established and maintained a no-fly zone under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973. The Canadian Armed Forces were instrumental in mission success, flying over some 1500 military missions. Their performance is a tribute to their training and leadership and a result of having the right equipment to get the job done.
> 
> “I also want to reiterate my congratulations to Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard and commend him for his pivotal role in leading the combined NATO military mission. He has represented our country with distinction.
> 
> “We saw a blatant wrong being perpetrated by a brutal regime and took a leadership role with our allies to help set it right. As a result, *Colonel Gaddafi’s 42 years of oppression have come to an end and Libyans now have every opportunity to create a more secure, just and peaceful country.*
> 
> "While our military mission in Libya has come to an end, Canada will continue helping Libyans by supporting their efforts to build a brighter and better future for themselves.  Canada recently announced it would be contributing $10 million to help secure weapons of mass destruction and
> remove and dispose of explosive remnants of war."


We'll have to see how the Libyans take advantage of the opportunity mentioned in the bit in orange above to "create a more securt, just and peaceful country".

_- edited to add link to statement -_


----------



## Kirkhill

Is this the new foreign policy?

We didn't think much of the last guy you picked as your agent.  Pick another one.

Repeat as often as necessary.  >


----------



## GAP

Lawrence Solomon: Divide Libya into its tribal parts
Article Link

Libyans are ill-prepared to govern themselves

Who should get Libya’s fabulous oil and gas wealth, an amount that could be equivalent to several million dollars per Libyan? With NATO leaving Libya Monday, the West should prepare for the aftermath. The coming chaotic months will see infighting, and perhaps a renewal of civil war, among the many rival tribal and ideological groups. The West should now consider whether to influence — or impose — a just resolution.

If the West takes a hands-off approach, Libya is likely to fall into the hands of another strongman, as all Arab countries have in the Middle East. Does the West want another Gaddafi to control these riches? Or should the riches be divvied up among Libya’s many tribes? Should Libya — a new country conjured up by Western powers 60 years ago — even exist in its present form? Or should some other borders be created, to better reflect the traditional lands and cultural differences of its indigenous populations?

This immense country — the fourth largest in Africa, in area equivalent to 25 Irelands — had but one million people on its independence day in 1951, when the United Nations merged together one French and two British-administered territories to create Libya. Few among those one million had any notion of nationhood — they largely hailed from nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes, some 20 tribes among them of various racial stock, typically with fierce allegiances to their own clans and little else.

The three territories that became Libya had few economic prospects at the time — they were believed to have no commercial supplies of oil or water — making them a cost to their British and French masters. To rid themselves of these costs, these Western powers, with UN approval, installed a local dignitary as king and walked away.

Prior to the Second World War, the territories had been colonized by Italy’s Fascists. Prior to the First World War, they had been colonies of the Ottoman Turks, who had taken them from the Arabs, who had taken them from the Romans, who had taken them from the Greeks. “Libyans” had never ruled themselves.

Today, Libyans still have little notion of nationhood. Shortly after Libya’s creation, Esso (now known as Exxon) discovered oil, making Libya a prize worth seizing. Gaddafi then overthrew the monarchy that the UN had created and dismantled parliament, political parties and all other institutions that might challenge him. Over his 42-year rule, he used Libya’s wealth, as Arab dictators often do, to buy off some tribes and oppress the rest. Today no tradition of democracy exists in Libya, except as vestiges of tribal governance, which Gaddafi also attempted to destroy.

Libyans, by any credible measure, are ill-prepared to govern themselves, and some minorities may prefer to live apart from the dominant Libyan tribes. The Tuareg in the country’s remote southwest, for example, call themselves “the free people” and live up to their name: These dark-skinned people from the Saharan interior are famed for having fought the French Foreign Legion and other colonizers in the past; today they oppose the interim leaders that NATO and the West have empowered in Libya.

Fortunately, the United Nations has a mechanism to deal with people such as the Tuareg, and immature states such as Libya —
More on link


----------



## tomahawk6

I suppose the UN could always declare Libya a UN protectorate. umpkin:


----------



## GAP

That almost might be better than the visions I sometimes see them going towards....I don't honestly think Libya's fate is what people imagine....


----------



## GAP

Canadian Forces set to begin return from Libya next week
 By Lee Berthiaume, Postmedia News October 28, 2011
Article Link

OTTAWA — After seven months spent bombing pro-Gadhafi forces and patrolling the coast of Libya as part of the NATO mission to protect civilians, the first Canadian units will begin returning home next week.

Seven CF-18 fighter jets, two Canadian military refuelling aircraft and approximately 270 crew members have been stationed at the dusty Trapani-Birgi airbase in western Sicily since March. Two surveillance aircraft and their crews have been operating out of a separate airfield in eastern Sicily for the same period.

Defence department spokesman Lt.-Col. Christian Lemay said Canadian pilots and crew will hold short ceremonies at both locations on Nov. 1 to thank their Italian hosts for their hospitality before preparations to withdraw begin in earnest.

While the dates are not set in stone, Lemay said the nine Canadian planes, which have conducted 1,539 missions since March, are expected to depart Italy and return to their respective bases in Canada around Nov. 2 or 3.

Military staff will take several more weeks to finish packing up what communications equipment and other items need to be brought back from Italy, Lemay said.

That will not take as long as the still-ongoing process to leave Kandahar, he said, because Canada's footprint was much smaller in Italy than Afghanistan.

Lemay said it could take up to a month for the naval frigate HMCS Vancouver and its crew of 250 to return to Canada as it must replenish supplies before the trip, and it may make several stops in foreign ports.

little more on link


----------



## Edward Campbell

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Just about the last thing Libya (or Tunisia or even Egypt and Bahrain, which "matter" much more) needs, right now, is foreign, especially US, intervention.
> 
> It is not clear who may end up running Libya, nor is it clear, to me anyway, why it matters a whole lot. We, the big, US led Western "we" and the even bigger Sino-Indo-American led "we" do care about Egypt and Bahrain and a few other places that are seething with discontent - Pakistan, too, maybe? - but not about Libya.
> 
> These populist _movements_ may well bring on fundamentalist _Islamist_ government - that was the result of the last really "free and fair" elections (1991) in relatively sophisticated Algeria. Libya has, for over 60 years, been behind its North African neighbours in most socio-economic measures; it depends upon Egypt and others for a steady supply of educated professional and technical people to "operate" the country. It is quite possible that a new military _junta_ of some sort will take over and it _may_ decide to reform and modernize the country - or it may decide that further decades of political repression and socio-economic stagnation are in Libya's best interests.
> 
> In any event, it is of little concern to us ... whoever "us" is.




Here is an interesting "post-mortem" on the Libyan operation, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/lysiane-gagnon/libyas-islamist-stripes-are-no-surprise/article2218022/


> Libya's Islamist stripes are no surprise
> 
> LYSIANE GAGNON
> From Monday's Globe and Mail
> 
> Published Monday, Oct. 31, 2011
> 
> As shop owners like to say, if you break it, you own it – or, rather, you’re stuck with it. So it is with Libya.
> 
> For at least six months, the country was bombed on a near-daily basis after the Western powers, under the impetuous guidance of France’s Nicolas Sarkozy, decided to side with a group of rebels from Benghazi who wanted to overthrow Moammar Gadhafi’s regime but couldn’t manage to do it themselves.
> 
> What began under a United Nations Security Council mandate as a series of air strikes exclusively aimed at protecting the rebels from Col. Gadhafi’s wrath soon evolved into a full-fledged regime-change operation marked by blatant attempts to assassinate the Gadhafi family. The Western coalition, including Canada, foolishly intervened in a civil war pitting the eastern part of the country against other regions without even considering, given Libya’s tribal and fractious nature, whether the majority wanted to be ruled by the Benghazi rebels.
> 
> So now Libya is broken. The Security Council voted last week to end its authorization on Monday of the foreign military intervention, although the transitional Libyan government is pleading for NATO to extend its operations through at least the end of the year, to stop the return of Gadhafi loyalists and prevent the country from descending into a spiral of tribal infighting. In Canada, there are already calls for the government to get involved in Libya’s reconstruction. Obviously, this can’t be done from the air and would usually require “boots on the ground” – huge contingents of armed peacekeepers.
> 
> The Harper government has already pledged $10-million to help Libya collect and secure the arms that have been wildly dispersed throughout the country after Col. Gadhafi’s military reserves were plundered. Another difficult task will be to disarm the bands of young, undisciplined rebels who learned to play war last spring and now cherish their lethal toys.
> 
> 
> Agence France-Presse says tonnes of munitions, including surface-to-air missiles, have been left unguarded in Libya’s devastated towns and in the desert, some of which have already ended up in the hands of al-Qaeda, which has a base in the Sahel region.
> 
> The Western “liberators” of Libya have other reasons to worry. In his first major speech as head of the interim government, Mustafa Abdel Jalil, who heads the National Transitional Council, declared that any law that doesn’t respect sharia will be deemed illegal, starting with marriage and divorce. His first move will be to strike down the Gadhafi law prohibiting polygamy. In another disturbing decision, the council appointed a former jihadist, Abdel Hakim Belhadj, as military governor of Tripoli.
> 
> The Islamization of Libya, a relatively secular country under Col. Gadhafi, should have been expected. It was known that Benghazi, where the rebellion originated, was a bastion of religious fundamentalism, and that there were al-Qaeda sympathizers among the rebels NATO supported with its air strikes.
> 
> Canada, along with other countries, was instrumental in handing Libya, its vulnerable population and its vast resources to a group of people who didn’t offer the slightest guarantee that they would turn the country into something vaguely resembling a democracy. In the process, Libyan women are being thrown under the bus. They will lose some of the rights they had under the previous regime.




First: I doubt LGen Bouchard ever received or initiated an order to kill Col. Gadhafi; I don't know if Sarkozy gave such an order to French forces who often, I think, operated with orders that superseded those of NATO.






LGen Charlie Bouchard, RCAF
Commander of NATO's Libyan military operation

Second: I am not sure this is part of an _Arab Spring_ because I am not sure there is or was an _Arab Spring_. "Spring" implies renewal. We may have witnessed and be witnessing an _Arab Autumn_, a time when things decay and die. Or, perhaps we are witnessing a period of great disruption and chaos - something akin to an Arab _Spring and Autumn period_ during which there will be both good and bad effects for the Arabs (and North Africans and Persians and West Asians, too).

Third: I remain convinced that this is not, generally, our business, even when strategically important places like Bahrain are threatened ... or perhaps offered an opportunity.

It may be that we are about to witness a long, bloody and chaotic "changing of the guard" in most of the _Islamic Crescent_ that stretches from the Western end of North Africa all the way to the North West boundary of Australia. I doubt that we, the American led West, have the military, economic or political resources to try to influence the course of events - even if our peoples had the will and patience for such and enterprise, which I am convinced they do not. I don't know which ways the "guards" might change - I'm sure some nations will, eventually, install moderately responsible, at least semi-democratic, fairly honest, modestly competent governments; others will replace one dictator (or that _interim_ moderately responsible ~ modestly competent government) with another; still others will replace the overthrown dictator will a fundamentalist Islamic theocracy.

The ancient Chinese _Spring and Autumn period_ lasted for a few centuries; I doubt the Arab (_et al_) equivalent, IF that's what is happening, will last as long - more than likely decades rather than centuries because it _may_, likely will, go nuclear at some times in some places.


----------



## Edward Campbell

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> ...
> First: I doubt LGen Bouchard ever received or initiated an order to kill Col. Gadhafi; I don't know if Sarkozy gave such an order to French forces who often, I think, operated with orders that superseded those of NATO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LGen Charlie Bouchard, RCAF
> Commander of NATO's Libyan military operation
> ...




A colleague, with good "insider' knowledge has corrected my guess; he says, _"... the French were not operating under NATO OUP_ [Operation Unified protector] _control. They were on French national taskings. They were doing their own things in, essentially, what is called "associated support" to OUP._

So, French orders didn't "supersede" NATO orders, the French operated under their own, national control, supporting NATO when it suited them. Thus we have no way of knowing if Sarkozy told them and/or his _clients_ in Libya to murder (execute, if you insist) Col. Gadhafi.


----------



## OldSolduer

I understand that after a conflict, there are reprisals against the ones that lost.

The French did it to the collaborators to the Nazis, and the Italians (as I understand it) did the same to the Fascists. 

How long before we hear of reprisals against the Libyans who supported Whacky Gadaffi?

Or will there be.....


----------



## GAP

Libya elects little-known scientist new PM
By REUTERS 
Article Link

TRIPOLI - Libya’s ruling National Transitional Council has elected little-known academic Abdul Raheem al-Keeb as the new interim prime minister to guide the country as it emerges from a bitter civil war towards a new constitution and democratic elections.

With vast oil and gas reserves and a relatively small population, Libya has the potential to become a prosperous nation, but regional rivalries pent up during Muammar Gaddafi’s 42 years of one-man rule could descend into a cycle of revenge.

Keeb, a professor of electrical engineering, will have to rein in the armed militias that sprang up in each town to overthrow Gaddafi and reconcile those remaining loyal to the old rule while brokering a new system to govern the country.

“We salute and remember the revolutionaries who we will never forget. We will not forget their families,” he said. “I say to them that the NTC did not and will not forget them and also the coming government will do the same.”

The NTC has promised to hold elections for a national assembly after eight months. The assembly will then spend a year drawing up a constitution ahead of parliamentary elections.

“This transition period has its own challenges. One thing we will be doing is working very closely with the NTC and listening to the Libyan people,” Keeb said after 26 of the 51 NTC members elected him for the post in Tripoli on Monday.

An academic and a businessman, Keeb has spent much of his life outside Libya, studying in the United States before taking up academic posts in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

NTC members described Keeb as “quiet and friendly” and said he had helped with the financing of the revolt against Gaddafi. 
More on link


----------



## The Bread Guy

> Canadian Forces members are returning to Canada after a successful operation in the skies over Libya and the Central Mediterranean. Canada took a leading role in the UN-mandated, NATO-led Operation to protect the people of Libya from the former Gaddafi regime while also imposing an arms embargo and a no-fly zone.
> 
> “Canada once again punched above its weight as part of an international coalition. The men and women of the Canadian Forces confirmed their leadership position at NATO and the role they can play in successful international operations,” said the Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence. “I am extremely proud of the men and women of the Royal Canadian Air Force and Royal Canadian Navy whose contribution was, without a doubt, instrumental in the protection of civilians from the violence of the Gaddafi regime.”
> 
> Canada responded rapidly and strongly after the passage of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 of March 17, 2011. In less than 24 hours, CF-18s were airborne from 3 Wing Bagotville enroute to their operating base in Trapani, Italy, along with strategic air-to-air refuelling support from 8 Wing Trenton’s Polaris aircraft.  8 Wing’s CC-177 Globemasters followed immediately with all personnel and equipment needed to quickly establish an effective operational capability.
> 
> “Throughout this deployment, our airmen and airwomen demonstrated their outstanding skills and agility in successfully conducting air-to-air integrated operations with our NATO Allies, flying side-by-side conducting surveillance and bombing missions, providing air refueling to coalition aircraft, and patrolling the shore of Libya,” said Lieutenant-General André Deschamps, the Commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force. “Their professionalism and dedication played a significant role in the protection of innocent civilians against an oppressive regime, and it is with pleasure that we welcome them home after a job well-done.”
> 
> The deployment of Canadian assets to the region, including a frigate, CF-188 Hornet fighters, CC-150 Polaris in-flight refuelling tankers, CC-130 Hercules tankers, and CP-140 Aurora maritime patrol aircraft – gave Canada and the Canadian Forces the flexibility and capability to respond to the ongoing crisis in the region by providing critical aviation support to coalition efforts.
> 
> The CF-18 aircraft conducted 946 sorties, making up ten percent of NATO strike sorties. Over the course of their sorties, Canada’s fighters dropped 696 bombs of various types.
> 
> The two CC-150T and one CC-130T aircraft deployed flew 389 air-to-air refueling sorties. They dispensed a total of 18,535,572 lbs of fuel to aircraft from six nations involved in Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR – France, Italy, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Qatar.
> 
> The two CP-140 aircraft deployed on Operation MOBILE flew 181 sorties off the coast of Libya and over land. They conducted Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) sorties, as well as strike coordination and armed reconnaissance-coordinator sorties that provided critical information and helped the NATO effort to protect civilians ....


CF Info-Machine, 4 Nov 11


----------



## aesop081

Well done to all my CP-140 brothers and sisters who deployed to TF LIBECCIO. Welcome home. We took the Aurora to battle for the first time and opened allot of eyes on what we can bring to the fight at sea and over land. Fly safe and keep kicking a** !!


----------



## smale436

Welcome home to you all from someone who spent 6 months on the other side of the island! For the record, the two times I made it out to Sig were worth the 3 hour drive to satisfy the craving for Subway and English magazines. I enjoyed chatting with the very nice CP-140 DetCO sitting next to me on the plane home.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Weeeeeellll, that didn't take long....


> At least two men have been killed in a second day of clashes as fighters from Zawiya set up roablocks to prevent rivals from the nearby town of Wershefana entering their territory.
> 
> There are conflicting reports about what triggered the confrontation on Saturday near a military camp.
> 
> One local commander, amid the sound of gunfire, claimed to be fighting Gaddafi loyalists, but those claims were impossible to verify.
> 
> "We don't have any problems with our brothers in the neighbourhood," Ali al-Deeb told AP news agency, at a checkpoint on the main road where his men were stopping vehicles.
> 
> "We are fighting with the pro-Gaddafi followers. Gaddafi followers still exist and we're still tracking them down and capturing them. We will clean the country of them."
> 
> In video
> 
> Niger has said it will grant Gaddafi's son Saadi asylum
> 
> Mohamed Sayeh, a member of Libya's interim government, the National Transitional Council (NTC), played down the fighting.
> 
> He told the Reuters news agency it was an attack of men from Zawiya who wanted control of the Imaya military base, and who had been misled by a rumour that Gaddafi loyalists were in the area ....


Al Jazeera English, 13 Nov 11


----------



## Fishbone Jones

8)


----------



## The Bread Guy

> Prime Minister Stephen Harper today announced that a special recognition ceremony for troops who served on the NATO-led Operation Unified Protector in support of the Libyan people will take place on November 24, 2011, on Parliament Hill. Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard will also be honoured for his leadership of the mission. The Prime Minister will be accompanied by Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence.
> 
> “Since the onset of the crisis in Libya, Canada has played a pivotal role in helping protect innocent civilians in Libya,” said the Prime Minister. “On November 24, I will join Canadians in paying tribute to the more than 2,000 brave men and women in uniform whose dedication, courage and professionalism helped Libyans put an end to 42 years of oppression at the hands of the Gaddafi regime.”
> 
> The Canadian Armed Forces were instrumental in achieving success in Libya: establishing and maintaining a no-fly zone, flying over 1,500 military missions, and taking a leadership role with their allies to help Libyans build the path towards a brighter future.
> 
> On October 28, 2011, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Minister MacKay announced the successful conclusion of Canada’s Libyan military mission.


PM announcement, 16 Nov 11


----------



## The Bread Guy

> His Excellency the Right Honourable David Johnston, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada, will be joining the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, at a ceremony to be held at the Senate on November 24, 2011. This ceremony will recognize the efforts of Canadian military personnel who took part in the NATO mission in Libya.
> 
> As governor general, His Excellency also announces the awarding of a Meritorious Service Cross (Military Division) to Lieutenant-General Joseph Jacques Charles Bouchard of the Canadian Forces. This decoration will be presented at the ceremony.
> Lieutenant-General Joseph Jacques Charles Bouchard, C.M.M., M.S.C., C.D.
> Chicoutimi, Quebec
> Meritorious Service Cross (Military Division)
> 
> From March to September 2011, Lieutenant-General Bouchard was the commander, Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) Unified Protector. In a complex political environment, he developed a campaign plan that put pressure on the entrenched regime while successfully synchronizing the efforts of multiple nations. Leading an intricate combination of multinational naval and air forces, Lieutenant-General Bouchard brought great credit to Canada with his demonstration of exceptional operational and strategic acumen, which helped to protect the citizens of Libya from harm during this period of civil strife.
> 
> (....)


Governor-General Info-Machine, 21 Nov 11


----------



## GAP

Canadian navy to introduce drones in new Mediterranean mission: admiral
By: The Canadian Press Posted: 11/22/2011
Article Link

 OTTAWA - Canadian warships will soon be deploying drones on overseas operations.

The crew of HMCS Charlottetown is currently testing the lightweight ScanEagle, a leased, unmanned aircraft the army used to great effect in Afghanistan.

Vice-Admiral Paul Maddison, head of the Royal Canadian Navy, says the idea is to deploy the drone when the frigate heads back to the Mediterranean next year as part of the government's recently announced plan to keep a warship in the region throughout 2012.

But instead of hunting for Taliban planting roadside bombs, Maddison says the plane will provide surveillance over both sea and land.

The Canadian navy has experimented with drones, but the use of the ScanEagle represents the first step towards their introduction into service.

The ScanEagle, with a three-metre wing-span, is capable of staying airborne for 20 hours and carries an infrared camera as well as a radar system.

It's launched by catapult and lands by snagging a wire.

Maddison says the drone is not a substitute for the vessel's aging Sea King helicopter, but will enhance the warship's existing capability.

"A UAV provides an excellent capability ... to do that surveillance and reconnaissance," he said. "We saw this as a real opportunity."

The frigate is currently testing the drone off the coast of Nova Scotia.

American warships have used unmanned aircraft since 2005 and defence experts say they've proven themselves especially valuable tracking pirates in the Gulf Aden and in the waters off Somalia.

Maddison made the comments in a teleconference while visiting HMCS Vancouver, which has been directed to join NATO's standing counter-terrorism mission in the Mediterranean.
More on link


----------



## Rheostatic

http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/v2/nr-sp/index-eng.asp?id=12437 said:
			
		

> Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada, David Johnston, will join Prime Minister Stephen Harper at a ceremony to be held at the Senate on Nov. 24, 2011. This ceremony will *recognize the efforts of Canadian military personnel who took part in the NATO mission in Libya*.





			
				http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/massive-rcaf-flyby-over-parliament-hill-on-thursday-1590568.htm said:
			
		

> *Massive RCAF Flyby Over Parliament Hill on Thursday*
> 
> OTTAWA, ONTARIO--(Marketwire - Nov. 23, 2011) - In recognition of the significant CF contribution of providing critical aviation support to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas in Libya, a flyby representing the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) aircraft that deployed on OP MOBILE will take place over Parliament Hill on Thursday morning.
> 
> The flyby will commence over Parliament Hill shortly before 10 a.m. on November 24, and is expected to include the following aircraft:
> 
> a CC-177 Globemaster;
> a CC-150 Polaris tanker;
> seven CF-18 fighters; and
> a CH-124 Sea King helicopter.
> 
> The aircraft will conduct their flyby - travelling west to east - at an altitude no lower than 500 feet above the highest point in their flight path before resuming a higher flying altitude for the return to their respective bases. Flybys by RCAF aircraft are carefully planned and closely controlled to ensure public safety at all times.


----------



## 57Chevy

Shared with provisions of The Copyright Act

Honours for mission to end 'brutal' Libyan regime
Meagan Fitzpatrick, CBC News  24 Nov
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/11/24/pol-libya-ceremony.html

Prime Minister Stephen Harper paid tribute to the Canadian military Thursday for its role in ending Moammar Gadhafi's "brutal and psychotic" dictatorship.

An elaborate ceremony on Parliament Hill also included a special honour for Lt.-Gen. Charles Bouchard, the Canadian in charge of the NATO-led mission launched in March.

Harper, Defence Minister Peter MacKay, Gov. Gen. David Johnston, commander-in-chief of the Canadian Forces, and Gen. Walt Natynczyk all attended the event, thanked the Canadian Forces and hailed the intervention as a success.

“It is a day to pay tribute to the extraordinary men and women of our Armed Forces who played their part. And yes, it is a day to honour the great Canadian who led them," Harper said.

The prime minister said the mission was undertaken for a noble purpose, to help protect Libyans who were uprising against Gadhafi and asking for freedom.

"And, why would they do otherwise, having experienced over four decades of dictatorship so brutal and psychotic, that it had literally taken their country out of the mainstream of human existence?" Harper said.

The prime minister said Gadhafi's harsh and violent response to the uprising was "an invitation to genocide" and that is why Canada joined its NATO allies to support the United Nations-backed response.

He said Canada will always defend what is right. "For we believe that in a world where people look for hope and cry out for freedom, those who talk the talk of human rights must from time to time be prepared to likewise walk the walk," said Harper.

A 21-gun salute and a flypast over Parliament Hill kicked off the morning's event before it began in the Senate chamber.

The flypast involved seven CF-18 fighter jets, a Sea King helicopter, an Airbus and a Globemaster aircraft, and was meant to pay tribute to the aviation support provided by the Canadian Forces in the Libyan mission.

Bouchard was given the meritorious service cross, a recognition for a military activity that, according to the Department of National Defence's description, "has been performed in an outstandingly professional manner, according to a rare high standard that brings considerable benefit or great honour to the Canadian Forces."

The medal was pinned to his uniform by Gov. Gen. Johnston, who in his remarks, said the Canadian Forces served with distinction.

"On behalf of all Canadians, I thank you for your service in this mission," he said.

When Bouchard accepted his medal and made his speech, he called those who participated in the mission "true Canadian heroes."

Bouchard wanted Gadhafi captured alive

He said Canadian air crews helped conduct the most precise air campaign in NATO's history and sea crews faced dangerous conditions to help allow for humantarian aid to be delivered to Libya's ports.

"Libya and Libyans are the true victors of this campaign. They have won their war and every day, as we see it, they are winning their peace," he said.

Bouchard said he is hopeful to see an effective judicial system soon in Libya, and expressed disappointment later to reporters that Gadhafi was killed and won't face it.

"The death of Gadhafi was unfortunate in the sense that I would have preferred to see him taken to justice," Bouchard said.

Harper, Natynczyk and MacKay all paid tribute to Bouchard and his role in leading the international effort.

MacKay said Bouchard, who is set to retire in January, "exemplified the best that our country has to offer."

"To Gen. Bouchard, and all of our fine men and women in uniform, I thank you, the Libyan people thank you, Canadians everywhere thank you and thank your families," the defence minister said.

Earlier in the day, MacKay addressed questions about why a ceremony was held to mark the Libyan mission and not the Afghanistan one. The defence said the Afghanistan mission isn't over yet, but that it too will be commemorated.

"We're looking at ways in which we can appropriately pay respects and honour Afghanistan veterans in addition," he said Thursday.

"This mission came about very quickly ... it has now successfully concluded. Suffice it to say there is more work to be done in Afghanistan with respect to the stabilization of that country and Canadian Forces are still there. That is one major difference. To suggest somehow that the Afghan mission has come to a close and that we would commemorate it in such a way as we are celebrating today is simply inappropriate."

About 900 troops are conducting a training mission in Afghanistan, based in Kabul.

Ceremony called 'showpiece' for government

One critic called Thursday's ceremony a "garish display" at a time when the government is trying to cut costs, and that there is a fine line between celebrating the military and putting on a "political show."

"It goes beyond just recognizing the contributions of members of the Canadian Forces to being a showpiece for the Conservative government," Stephen Staples, president of the Rideau Institute, told CBC News. "The government has to be careful here. While the public supports the Armed Forces, they don't want them used as props for Stephen Harper, Peter MacKay and this government."

Canadian troops left for Libya in March with a mission to enforce an arms embargo and no-fly zone imposed over Libya through a United Nations resolution.

About 630 military personnel served in the region at any one time until operations came to an end on Nov. 1, after Gadhafi's capture and death Oct. 20. A number of fighter jets and other aircraft were deployed along with HMCS Charlottetown to patrol the waters off Libya. It was later replaced by HMCS Vancouver. In total, about 2,000 troops served a tour in the region.

Canadian Forces aircraft dropped more than 600 bombs, helped refuel the aircraft of allies and gathered intelligence.

Gadhafi ruled Libya for 42 years until he was ousted by his own people in an uprising that became a civil war.


more at link.


----------



## The Bread Guy

From the Commander in Chief's speaking notes:


> .... On these occasions, I sometimes quote my predecessor, General Georges P. Vanier, who once said:
> 
> “The overpowering strength of a free people is the readiness voluntarily to defend not merely themselves, not only their allies, but the very democratic principles they cherish.”
> 
> The Canadian Forces members who served in Libya did so in defence of our cherished democratic principles. You stood in solidarity with the Libyan people, providing security in their quest for self-determination, and supporting their demands for fundamental rights and freedoms.
> 
> Your actions allowed Libyans to overcome injustice after so many years of hardship and repression.
> 
> As commander-in-chief, I often speak to Canadian Forces members of their responsibility as role models, both here in Canada and internationally. I tell them that their commitment to duty, honour, and service is a reinforcement of the values we hold dear and a reflection of the best of Canada.
> 
> In Libya, you served with distinction at all levels, bringing great credit to the Canadian Forces and to Canada ....



From the PM's speaking notes:


> .... “For more than six months, Royal Canadian Navy frigates and aircraft of the Royal Canadian Air Force patrolled the Libyan theatre, carrying a share of the operations out of proportion to the size of the Force deployed.
> 
> “Numbers don't tell the whole story, but it bears repeating that Canadian fighter jets flew nearly a thousand sorties – roughly ten per cent of all sorties – without caveats against Gaddafi’s military. Canadians should also know that the taking of Tripoli by rebel forces was materially assisted by the CF-18 missions that cleared away Gaddafi’s remaining mechanized forces.
> 
> “Meanwhile, ships of the Royal Canadian Navy, on top of their role of enforcing the naval blockade, played a vital role in intelligence gathering, targeting and information operations. And, for the first time since the Korean War, a ship of the Royal Canadian Navy – the frigate Charlottetown – came under hostile fire.
> 
> “The intervention of the ships of the Royal Canadian Navy and the aircraft of the Royal Canadian Air Force, in concert with the NATO and Arab League allies was extremely effective. Because they held the ring, the Libyan people were able to lift Gaddafi’s yoke from their necks. And thanks to their own sacrifices, Libyans have won the opportunity to build for themselves a better future ....



From a statement issued by the Defence Minister:


> “As Minister of National Defence, I am pleased to officially welcome home the Canadian Forces members who participated in Canada’s successful operation in the skies over Libya and in the Central Mediterranean. Through their leadership and quick, effective response as part of a UN-mandated, NATO-led mission, innocent Libyans were spared the violence of a brutal, entrenched regime. The Libyan people can finally look towards the future with hope. For that, the world thanks the brave men and women of the Canadian Forces.
> 
> Less than 24 hours after the passage of the UN Security Council Resolution calling on the international community to protect innocent civilians against Gadhafi’s cruel and oppressive regime, CF-18 Hornets from CFB Bagotville and CC-150 Polaris strategic air-to-air refuelling support from CFB Trenton were on their way overseas. Canada’s CC-17 Globemasters followed shortly with personnel and equipment.
> 
> The deployment of a frigate and CP-140 Aurora maritime patrol aircraft gave Canada and the Canadian Forces the flexibility and capability to respond to the crisis effectively and play a leading role in the Operation.
> 
> Under the direction of Canadian Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard, Canadian Forces members played a significant role in facilitating humanitarian aid, enforcing the arms embargo and imposing the no-fly zone over Libya.
> 
> Throughout this deployment, our men and women clearly demonstrated that their professionalism and outstanding skills enhance the role they can play in successful international operations ....


----------



## old medic

Mexico 'stops entry' of Libya's Saadi Gaddafi
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-16075043


> The Mexican authorities say they have stopped a plot by a criminal organisation to smuggle one of the sons of Libya's ex-leader Col Muammar Gaddafi into the country.
> 
> Saadi Gaddafi has been under house arrest in the West African state of Niger since he fled Libya in September.
> 
> A spokeswoman for the Mexican government said Saadi Gaddafi and some members of his family were stopped as a result of intelligence reports.
> 
> Several people have been arrested.
> 
> Mexican officials said the plot - uncovered on 6 September - involved false names and documents.
> Safe houses
> 
> Mexican Interior Secretary Alejandro Poire said the plan involved a criminal ring "of international dimensions," but it was uncovered in September before it could be carried out.
> 
> The ring involved people from several different countries, including Mexico, Denmark and Canada, Mr Poire told a news conference in Mexico City.
> 
> They were buying safe houses and opening bank accounts, he said.
> 
> On 14 September - eight days after the Mexican plot was uncovered - Niger said Saadi Gaddafi, 38, arrived in the capital, Niamey.
> 
> He was reported to have been flown in on a military transport plane from the town of Agadez in the north of the country.
> 
> On 29 September, Interpol issued a "red notice" for the arrest of Saadi Gaddafi, requiring member states to arrest him if he was on their territory.
> 
> The international police agency says he is wanted on allegations of misappropriating properties through force and armed intimidation when he headed the Libyan Football Federation.
> 
> Saadi Gaddafi, who used to play football in Italy's Serie A, is also subject to a travel ban and asset freeze under a UN Security Council resolution passed earlier this year.





Canadian part of network that tried to smuggle Gadhafi son into Mexico
REUTERS
http://www.winnipegsun.com/2011/12/07/canadian-part-of-network-that-tried-to-smuggle-gadhafi-son-into-mexico



> MEXICO CITY - Mexico uncovered and stopped an international plot to smuggle late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's son Saadi into the country using fake names and false papers, authorities said on Wednesday.
> 
> Four people were arrested on Nov. 10 and 11, they said, over an elaborate plan to settle Saadi Gaddafi, who is now in Niger, and his family on Mexico's Pacific coast using forged documents, safe houses and private flights.
> 
> Mexican officials got a tip about the network - which included Mexican, Danish and Canadian members - in September, Interior Minister Alejandro Poire said.
> 
> In preparation for the family's arrival, the criminal ring bought properties around Mexico, created fake identities and opened bank accounts with the aim of settling them near Bahia de Banderas, home to the popular tourist destination Puerto Vallarta.
> 
> The network arranged for private flights to smuggle in the family and established identities under assumed names, including Moah Bejar Sayed and Amira Sayed Nader.
> 
> The plotters themselves used a network of flights between Mexico, the United States, Canada, Kosovo and the Middle East to plan the route and organize the logistics for Saadi Gaddafi's arrival, Poire said.
> 
> "Mexican officials ... succeeded in avoiding this risk, they dismantled the international criminal network which was attempting this and they arrested those presumed responsible," he told a news conference.
> 
> A Canadian woman, Cynthia Ann Vanier, was the ringleader of the plot and directly in touch with the Gaddafi family, Mexican authorities said.
> 
> Also arrested was a Danish man, Pierre Christian Flensborg, who authorities said was in charge of logistics, and two Mexicans, Jose Luis Kennedy Prieto and Gabriela Davila Huerta, also known as de Cueto.......................





http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/315728


> ..........According to the Telegraph the plot involved Mexican, Canadian and Danish suspects, who flew into Mexico to open bank accounts and purchase safe houses. Poire said
> Digital Journal reported in October that Saadi's Ontarian bodyguard, Gary Peters, was involved in Saadi's escape to Niger. He said at the time that his escape plans included either Mexico or Canada. The National Post has now reported that Peters was also involved in an elaborate plot to smuggle Saadi into the Mexican resort of Punta Mita, on the Pacific Coast.
> Mexican authorities arrested the ringleader, Canadian Cynthia Anne Vanier, in Mexico City, along with three other suspects. The smuggling ring was allegedly linked to forged documents, organized crime and human trafficking. Mexican security expert Alberto Islas told the National Post....................





All those appear to match up to this article from November 17th 2011:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/11/17/canadian-with-ties-to-libya-arrested-in-mexico/

Canadian with ties to Libya arrested in Mexico
Stewart Bell



> A Canadian who led a fact-finding mission to Libya last summer has been arrested in Mexico, and two partners of the U.S. private security contractor who supplied her plane are also in custody.
> 
> The Department of Foreign Affairs in Ottawa confirmed the arrest of Cynthia Vanier and said consular officials at the Canadian embassy in Mexico City were gathering information from local authorities.
> 
> Also arrested were two partners of Gregory Gillispie, an ex-Marine who heads Veritas Worldwide Security, a San Diego-based company that offers, among other services, “clandestine operations,” “armed combat” and provision of weapons........


----------



## old medic

Story from the BBC, Pretty good way to start wrapping up this "2011" thread.

Libya independence: King Idris anniversary celebrated
BBC
24 December 2011
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16325383

For the first time in 42 years, Libya is celebrating the anniversary of its independence. 



> The United Libyan Kingdom was formed on 24 December 1951 under King Idris.
> 
> However, after Col Muammar Gaddafi seized power in 1969, only the date of his coup was allowed to be marked.
> 
> Celebrations are planned in Tripoli, including lunch for several thousand, served on tables which organisers say could stretch for 2km (1.2 miles) along Tripoli's seafront.
> 
> The day's central event will be a march from Martyrs Square to the country's national museum - the former Royal Palace - where there will be speeches.
> 
> But many Libyans remain unaware of the significance of 24 December due to the anniversary not being celebrated under Col Gaddafi's four-decade rule.
> 
> The rally has begun, with senior members of the Libyan National Transitional Council, including its chairman, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, and interim Prime Minister Abdurrahim al-Keib, expected to be joined by a number of international dignitaries.
> 
> One of those present at the celebrations, Prince Idris bin Abdullah al-Senussi, who was among the royal family members forced into exile, told the BBC that he had dreamed of being able to one day return to Libya.
> 
> "Libyans are determined to build a country, to have a democracy," he said.
> 
> "I think they will never accept anymore somebody to dictate or humiliate them. Libyans will run their country by themselves."
> 
> The BBC's Mark Lowen, in the capital, says the country has huge challenges ahead including building a strong national government, disarming the militias that still wield power in the country, and promoting reconciliation between pro- and anti-Gaddafi fighters.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Why no Canadian media coverage? Libyans desecrate Commonwealth war graves‏.  The Brits and Aussies are all over this story, but here?
https://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&biw=1252&bih=548&tbm=nws&q=libya+war+graves&oq=libya+war+graves&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=12&gs_upl=0l0l0l22046l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&gs_l=serp.12...0l0l0l22046l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0

I discovered it at _Norman's Spectator_:
http://www.members.shaw.ca/nspector4/

"SUNDAY, MARCH 4, 2012
...
Mail on Sunday front page: Shocking video of Churchill's Desert Rats' graves being smashed to rubble by Libyan rebels http://tinyurl.com/76tyrbh

Libyan rebels smashed headstone of Canadian pilot, M. P. Northmore/killed in October 1943/buried in Benghazi http://tinyurl.com/76tyrbh"

Then at _Spotlight on Military News and International Affairs_
http://www.cfc.forces.gc.ca/257-eng.html

"Sunday, 4 March 2012  - Updated at 1845 hrs EST
...
International News
...
Herald Sun
    Commonwealth war graves in Benghazi desecrated
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/sickening-attack-on-diggers-war-graves/story-fn7x8me2-1226288480111

 - More "
http://www.smh.com.au/national/disgust-at-desecration-of-diggers-graves-in-libya-20120305-1ubj9.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

_Toronto Star_ plays up the--quite limited--Canadian angle (surprised?):

Libyan mob’s desecration of British and Canadian war cemetery ‘absolutely appalling’
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1140915--libyan-mob-s-desecration-of-british-and-canadian-war-cemetery-absolutely-appalling?bn=1

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## The Bread Guy

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> _Toronto Star_ plays up the--quite limited--Canadian angle (surprised?):
> 
> Libyan mob’s desecration of British and Canadian war cemetery ‘absolutely appalling’
> http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1140915--libyan-mob-s-desecration-of-british-and-canadian-war-cemetery-absolutely-appalling?bn=1
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa


Just like Afghanistan - no reporters on the ground = limited OR no coverage


----------



## MarkOttawa

In fact it seems ten Canadians are buried at the cemetery:
http://www.canadaatwar.ca/memorial/world-war-ii/cemetary/1/Benghazi%20War%20Cemetery/

Via _SOMNIA_:
http://www.cfc.forces.gc.ca/257-eng.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## GAP

Libya: Semi-autonomy declared by leaders in east
6 March 2012 Last updated at 07:27 ET
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17271431

Civic leaders in eastern Libya have declared semi-autonomy for the oil-rich region.

The decision was made at a meeting attended by at least 2,000 people near the eastern city of Benghazi.

Supporters of the move say the region, known as Cyrenaica, has been neglected for decades and local people should now decide on local matters.

But the governing National Transitional Council has argued against federalism, amid fears it could break up Libya.

The BBC's Gabriel Gatehouse, reporting from the meeting, called the announcement a declaration of intent by the tribal leaders of Cyrenaica.

It is not yet clear what degree of autonomy the leaders are seeking, and will likely be the subject of much debate with the NTC in Tripoli over the coming months, he adds.
end


----------



## GAP

The Return Of The King
March 7, 2012
Article Link

  Egyptian police believe several thousand weapons a month are being smuggled in from Libya. These include assault rifles, RPG launchers, machine-guns, mortars, small caliber rockets, shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles and ammunition. Only about 20 percent of these weapons are seized by police. The smugglers have been operating along the largely desert border for generations, and are quite good at avoiding Egyptian border patrols. Part of the problem is that there is no border security on the Libyan side and no national police force there either.

National elections are still on for June, and the best organized groups tend to be Islamic conservatives or radicals. Meanwhile, the NTC (National Transitional Council) is having a hard time restoring government and the economy because of corruption and a shortage of skilled foreign workers. Like all oil-rich Arab states, Libya depended on skilled foreigners for key technical jobs (especially medicine and running the oil operations) and unskilled foreigners for the dirty jobs no Libyan wanted to do (garbage collection and unskilled labor tasks). Countries are unwilling to allow their citizens to return until the NTC can assure the safety of the foreign workers. Some foreign workers have returned anyway, relying for safety on the assurances of the company or local government they are working for. The NTC is also changing Kaddafi-era banking and business laws to allow foreign companies to invest in and set up operations in Libya. At the moment, foreign companies have to make deals with local militias and keep lots of cash handy for bribes and "security."

A major reason the NTC cannot get the government going is corruption. This bribery and theft was somewhat organized under Kaddafi, but now it's a free-for-all and too much money just disappears before it can be spent on needed goods or services. The NTC is finding that local leaders cannot be trusted, and they will often steal much of the money they have been given for distribution to individuals and families. This lack of "civil society" (enough people willing to work for the public good without stealing or engaging in other forms of corruption) is causing widespread anger and resistance to any new national government. While tribal leaders are more trustworthy, they will also steal. But not as much as strangers and at least you know who the tribal leaders are and who they are related to. Thus the resurgence of tribal politics, for the tribe is an ancient form of government that, in chaotic times, is often the only viable alternative.

March 6, 2012: Leaders of eastern Libya declared autonomy. The new region would be called Barqa and would still leave foreign affairs, the national defense and managing the oil fields to the central government. This call for federalism was not unexpected, as Kaddafi came from western Libya, and favored tribes there at the expense of eastern Libya. The people in the west are accustomed to running things, but they no longer have the popular, or military, power to do so. Worse, most of the armed men in the country belong to over a hundred militias, most of them based on tribal affiliation. Meanwhile, the key to eastern autonomy is the oil workers in the area. The east is where most of the oil is, and if the 3,000 oil workers agree with autonomy, the situation becomes very serious.

The NTC, which began in the east, but has since moved to Tripoli, blamed this new separatism on foreign interference by other Arab countries. Some Libyans still refer to the east by its ancient name, Cyrenaica. Before Kaddafi took over the 1960s, the monarchy ruled the country as three provinces, each with more autonomy than Kaddafi ever allowed. The eastern group calling for autonomy is led by a great-nephew of the last king of Libya. Compared to Kaddafi, old timers remember royal rule as much kinder and gentler.

This development spotlights some fundamental truths about the country. Libya has three distinct physical regions: the northwest coast, the northeast coast, and the Sahara Desert southern region that covers more than 90 percent of the nation. The northwest coastal region (the old Roman province of Tripolitania) consists of the narrow coastal plain and the Jaffara Plain inland. The northeastern Libyan coastal region (roughly the old Roman province of Cyrenaica) lies to the east of the Gulf of Sidra.

About 85 percent of Libya's six million people live along the coast. About five percent are still nomadic. About 90 percent are Arabic-speakers of mixed Arab-Berber ancestry. Berbers who retain their ancient language and culture, comprise only four percent and most of them live in small villages in the western hill country south of Tripoli. Other minorities comprise about six percent of the population. Nearly 100 percent of the population speaks at least some Arabic and 97 percent are Sunni Moslems.

March 4, 2012: In Tripoli, the new Libyan Army graduated its first class of soldiers. The 225 graduates were volunteers from anti-Kaddafi militias and underwent four months of training.

March 2, 2012: A UN report concluded that everyone in Libya behaved badly during 2011, and that the victorious rebels still hold over 5,000 prisoners (Kaddafi loyalists, foreign mercenaries and sundry suspicious characters). While Kaddafi has more blood on his hands (having killed many more Libyans in just a few months), the rebels sought vengeance on pro-government gunmen and pro-Kaddafi civilians. The UN believes that the current prisoners are being mistreated.

February 27, 2012: Tribal elders have finally negotiated a ceasefire to end the tribal fighting in the southeast. The violence has left over a hundred dead in the last few weeks. This is one of the many expected tribal wars, and is taking place in near the borders of Egypt, Chad and Sudan. There, the dark skinned Toubu tribe, which was persecuted under Kaddafi, is under attack by the larger and lighter skinned Zwai. The Toubu accuse the NTC (National Transitional Council) of backing the Zwai. Like many tribes in Africa, the Toubu have branches in Niger and Chad. There has long been racial and ethnic conflict along the southern border of the Sahara Desert (the Sahel region), where light skinned Arabs, Tuaregs and Berbers bump into darker skinned Africans.

February 25, 2012: Additional pro-government militiamen arrived in the south east, to encourage warring tribesmen to settle down.

February 20, 2012: Misarata, the city that suffered the most during the rebellion against Kaddafi, was the first city to hold local elections.

February 17, 2012: Around the country, many Libyans celebrated the first anniversary of the anti-Kaddafi revolution. The rebellion officially ended eight months after it began, with the death of Kaddafi last October 20th.
More on link


----------



## observor 69

Brian Stewart: new Libya post-mortems highlight NATO's flaws

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/04/18/f-vp-stewart-nato-libya.html

For the knee jerk CBC critics this is:
" a confidential after-action NATO assessment of campaign "flaws" that was just obtained by the New York Times, which published details on the weekend."

Same story NT Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/world/africa/nato-sees-flaws-in-air-campaign-against-qaddafi.html

And just came upon this Opinion editorial from today's NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/19/opinion/nato-after-libya.html?hp

And check out the "comments" , some good discussion.


----------



## sean m

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17889660

Libya ex-Minister Shukri Ghanem dead in Danube River

Mr Ghanem defected from Libya in the midst of the anti-Gaddafi uprising
Continue reading the main story
Libya Crisis

Divisive bid
Dangers lurk
Should Sirte be rebuilt?
War victims' care scandal
The body of Libya's former Oil Minister Shukri Ghanem has been found in the Danube River, Austrian police say.

A spokesman said there were no signs of violence to Mr Ghanem's body, which was in the river that flows through Vienna.

The former prime minister, 69, worked as a consultant for a Vienna-based company. He apparently left his home early on Sunday, police said.

Mr Ghanem defected from Libya as the country was engulfed in the uprising against Col Muammar Gaddafi last year.

At the time, he criticised the bloodshed in Libya, saying that the situation had become "unbearable", making his position untenable.

He served as Libyan prime minister from 2003 to 2006 and then as oil minister until 2011.

Post-mortem examination
A passer-by reported seeing the body under a bridge near a popular recreation ground in Vienna.

Police spokesman Roman Hahslinger said Mr Ghanem was dressed when he was found but had no personal identification documents on him, with the exception of one naming the company he was working for. An employee of the company had identified him, the spokesman said.

Mr Hahslinger said: "There would be no signs of violence if someone pushed him in. But it's also possible that he became ill and fell into the water."

A post-mortem examination has been ordered for the coming days.

The former prime minister is understood to have been in Europe since his defection last June, and to have had family in Vienna.

His connection to the city dates back to the time he worked at the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec) - a forum he later visited regularly as Libyan oil minister.

The Libyan uprising ended in October last year with the killing of Col Gaddafi.

In June Libya will hold elections to a constituent assembly, whose first task will be to draw up a constitution.


----------



## GAP

True cost of Libya mission was seven times gov't. estimate: documents
 By Lee Berthiaume, Postmedia News May 10, 2012
Article Link

Amid allegations the Conservative government intentionally lowballed the price of the F-35 stealth fighter project, newly released National Defence documents indicate the full cost of last year's Libya mission was nearly $350 million — seven times what Defence Minister Peter MacKay told Canadians it cost.

The revelation is likely to raise further accusations of a systemic effort to hide the true cost of Canadian military operations and equipment purchases, and lead to fresh demands for accountability.

Last October, with Moammar Gadhafi dead and NATO wrapping up its seven-month air-and-sea campaign in Libya, MacKay said the mission had cost taxpayers $50 million — or about $10 million less than the Defence Department had predicted.

"As of Oct. 13, the figures that I've received have us well below ($60 million), somewhere under $50 million," MacKay told the CBC on Oct. 28, three days before the mission officially ended. "And that's the all-up costs of the equipment that we have in the theatre, the transportation to get there, those that have been carrying out this critical mission."

But buried in a report tabled in the House of Commons this week are Defence Department figures pegging the full cost of the mission at more than $347.5 million.

Even taking into account the Defence Department's controversial practice of only reporting "incremental costs" — those deemed to be above and beyond normal operating expenses — the mission still came in at $100 million, or almost twice what MacKay claimed.

Reached Thursday night, MacKay's spokesman, Jay Paxton, said only that the final "incremental costs" of the mission "were presented to Canadians, through Parliament, in the Department's Report on Plans and Priorities.
More on link


----------



## tamouh

GAP said:
			
		

> True cost of Libya mission was seven times gov't. estimate: documents
> By Lee Berthiaume, Postmedia News May 10, 2012
> Article Link
> 
> Amid allegations the Conservative government intentionally lowballed the price of the F-35 stealth fighter project, newly released National Defence documents indicate the full cost of last year's Libya mission was nearly $350 million — seven times what Defence Minister Peter MacKay told Canadians it cost.
> 
> The revelation is likely to raise further accusations of a systemic effort to hide the true cost of Canadian military operations and equipment purchases, and lead to fresh demands for accountability.
> 
> Last October, with Moammar Gadhafi dead and NATO wrapping up its seven-month air-and-sea campaign in Libya, MacKay said the mission had cost taxpayers $50 million — or about $10 million less than the Defence Department had predicted.
> 
> "As of Oct. 13, the figures that I've received have us well below ($60 million), somewhere under $50 million," MacKay told the CBC on Oct. 28, three days before the mission officially ended. "And that's the all-up costs of the equipment that we have in the theatre, the transportation to get there, those that have been carrying out this critical mission."
> 
> But buried in a report tabled in the House of Commons this week are Defence Department figures pegging the full cost of the mission at more than $347.5 million.
> 
> Even taking into account the Defence Department's controversial practice of only reporting "incremental costs" — those deemed to be above and beyond normal operating expenses — the mission still came in at $100 million, or almost twice what MacKay claimed.
> 
> Reached Thursday night, MacKay's spokesman, Jay Paxton, said only that the final "incremental costs" of the mission "were presented to Canadians, through Parliament, in the Department's Report on Plans and Priorities.
> More on link



I think $100 million for 6 months operation using air, sea and likely land troops is relatively cheap in the context of war.


----------



## tomahawk6

What did we buy for our trouble ? Another failed islamist state ?>


----------



## Kirkhill

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> What did we buy for our trouble ? Another failed islamist state ?>



The West's new long term strategy: Aerial Whackamole.


----------



## aesop081

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> What did we buy for our trouble ? Another failed islamist state ?>



Doesn't matter. The memory of Canadians is short and they forgot a long time ago that they asked for something to be done in Libya.

Something was done but now now it cost $$$ so..............Plus it was just more war mongering by Obama (a Nobel peace prize winner no less) and Harper.

Canadians are stupid.


----------



## dogger1936

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> What did we buy for our trouble ? Another failed islamist state ?>



I fully agree. From best standard of living in Africa to it's current state.

-There is no electricity bill in Libya; electricity is free for all its citizens.

-There is no interest on loans, banks in Libya are state-owned and loans given to all its citizens at    zero percent interest by law.

-Having a home considered a human right in Libya.

-All newlyweds in Libya receive $60,000 dinar (U.S.$50,000) by the government to buy their first apartment so to help start up the family.

-Education and medical treatments are free in Libya. Before Gaddafi only 25 percent of Libyans were literate. Today, the figure is 83 percent.

-Should Libyans want to take up farming career, they would receive farming land, a farming house, equipments, seeds and livestock to kickstart their farms are all for free.

-If Libyans cannot find the education or medical facilities they need, the government funds them to go abroad, for it is not only paid for, but they get a U.S.$2,300/month for accommodation and car allowance.

-If a Libyan buys a car, the government subsidizes 50 percent of the price.

-The price of petrol in Libya is $0.14 per liter.

-Libya has no external debt and its reserves amounting to $150 billion are now frozen globally.
If a Libyan is unable to get employment after graduation the state would pay the average salary of the profession, as if he or she is employed, until employment is found.

-A portion of every Libyan oil sale is credited directly to the bank accounts of all Libyan citizens.

-A mother who gives birth to a child receive U.S.$5,000.

-40 loaves of bread in Libya costs $0.15.

-25 percent of Libyans have a university degree.

-Gaddafi carried out the world’s largest irrigation project, known as the Great Manmade River project, to make water readily available throughout the desert country.


----------



## GAP

Soooo.....you're saying we made a mistake? If things were so grand, why did the populace rebel?


----------



## Maxadia

If you look there is good things contained in all evil empires. 

Doesn't make them right.


----------



## dogger1936

RDJP said:
			
		

> If you look there is good things contained in all evil empires.
> 
> Doesn't make them right.



Must be. We backed LIFG in Lybia while fighting AQ in Afghanistan. Just have to look for the good things in all evil empires I guess.

Edit to add: http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm


----------



## aesop081

Could it be.........?

I know that Denmark has decided to issue it's own national medal for OUP but i have not heard what Canada has decided to do.


----------



## Good2Golf

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Could it be.........?
> 
> I know that Denmark has decided to issue it's own national medal for OUP but i have not heard what Canada has decided to do.



If they're that good, maybe they really do deserve to keep Hans Island?


----------



## NavyShooter

Interesting photo....is there a source?


----------



## aesop081

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Interesting photo....is there a source?



Just found it doing a Google image search. I didn't find anything on the NATO website so i'm not confident that this is the actual medal (though i know NATO has created a Non-Article 5 for OUP).

Here is the link where i originaly trace the picture:

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php/topic/54402-nato-libya-medal/

Link to a photo i have also found:

http://www.eekelers-centini.be/catalog/popup_image.php?pID=952795

Link to the photo i previously posted:

http://www.eekelers-centini.be/catalog/images/001_998se120315x.JPG

The site where the picture is from:

http://www.eekelers-centini.be/catalog/

I does seem that this is one of those "fake bling" LoF suppliers...........But their other medals look exactly like the issued ones so if it is not a legit medal, it likely is an exact copy.


----------



## NavyShooter

Interesting.....hmmmm....


----------



## eliminator

Any update on possible medals for those who participated in Op Mobile? Will Canada simply adopt the NATO OUP Medal, or issue a GCS/GSM?

Looks like the UK forces will go with the NATO medal for now...



> MEDAL FOR PERSONNEL IN SUPPORT OF OP ELLAMY / NATO OP UNIFIED PROTECTOR
> 
> It has been recommended that all UK personnel who have completed the necessary qualifying service in support of Op ELLAMY are to receive the NATO Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR (OUP) Non-Article 5 Medal. This has still to be formally staffed through the Service Chiefs.
> 
> Eligibility Criteria.
> 
> SHAPE has confirmed the eligibility criteria for the NATO Non-Article V medal for OUP. In order to qualify personnel must have between 23 Mar – 31 Oct 11 completed 30 days’ continuous service or 60 days’ accumulated service under the following circumstances:
> 
> (a) Those Forces under NATO command or control, or in support of NATO, whilst deployed in the Joint Operations Area (JOA).
> 
> (b) Those Personnel serving exclusively on OUP, whether inside or outside the JOA, under the CJSOR and supported by a formal Transfer of Authority.
> 
> (c) Those Alliance personnel serving exclusively on OUP duties in the three HQs supporting OUP: HQ CJTF OUP Naples, HQ MC OUP Naples and HQ CFAC OUP Poggio Renatico.
> 
> (d) Those Alliance personnel deployed outside the JOA exclusively in support of OUP.


----------



## old medic

Libya elections: polling station raids mar first vote since Gaddafi's death

Libyans turn out in their millions for first national ballot since 1964 despite efforts by federalists to disrupt polls

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/07/libya-elections-polling-raids-vote



> Federalists in eastern Libya attacked several polling stations on Saturday as the country voted in the historic first election since last year's revolution and the death of Muammar Gaddafi.
> 
> Although voting took place peacefully across much of the country, armed gangs in Benghazi stormed a polling station and set alight ballot papers. Two other polling stations were attacked, with one man shot in the arm. There were similar incidents in the eastern coastal towns of Guba and Suluq, where fighters stopped ballot papers being delivered.
> 
> However, in the capital, Tripoli, and other cities thousands queued from 8am to vote, the overwhelming majority for the first time.
> 
> Libya's last election took place in 1964 under King Idris al-Senussi, the monarch Gaddafi ousted five years later at the point of a rifle.
> 
> Many residents were overwhelmed at the opportunity to vote. "I'm so excited. I woke up at 6 this morning, before my daughters," said Mabroka Amar, 69, at a polling station in Tripoli. She said that she dimly remembered last voting almost half a century ago, adding: "A new country has been born. God willing, I will be alive to vote again and again."
> 
> The mood across the capital was festive. Residents waved the red, black and green revolutionary colours and honked their car horns. Several hundred gathered at Martyrs' Square, in the centre of the city, and kissed the ground. Others posted photographs of their fingers – dyed purple by officials after voting – on Facebook. One jokey doctored version showed the late Gaddafi also voting.
> 
> Many said that the idea of taking part in an election had previously been little more than fantasy, with Gaddafi a vehement opponent of parliamentary democracy. "I'm 35 years old. I've never voted. The devil was with us from 1969. This is like the first man on the moon," said Ali Ilhouri at Tripoli's Allassma high school, which was serving as a polling station.
> 
> He dismissed the federalist protesters in Benghazi and eastern Libya as a relatively small group of "mad fanatics". He said: "I was born in Benghazi. There are lots of other peaceful ways to protest in this election. It isn't civilised."
> 
> The federalists are deeply unhappy at the distribution of seats in the new national congress. The outgoing National Transitional Council allocated seats on the basis of population numbers, with 100 going to the west, 60 to the east and 40 to the south. The federalists say that the regions should have a third each.
> 
> The revolution has reignited Benghazi's long-standing feelings of marginalisation and injustice, fuelled by the city being the first to rise up against Gaddafi on 17 February last year.
> 
> On Friday, armed groups shut several important eastern oil terminals in protest. They also used anti-aircraft guns to fire on a helicopter carrying election materials, forcing it to land and killing a 22-year-old election volunteer.
> 
> "The country will be in a state of paralysis from now on because no one in the government is listening to us," Hamed al-Hassi, a defiant former rebel who now heads the high military council of Cyrenaica, the name for the eastern region, told Reuters.
> 
> The national election commission in Tripoli admitted that some election material had been "destroyed" in Benghazi. But it said that polling had gone ahead in 94% of voting centres – 1,453 out of 1,554 – with officials trying to deliver new ballot papers where the security situation allowed.
> 
> Against expectations, voting was a success across the south, it said, including in the remote south-eastern town of Kufra, the scene of vicious fighting between Arab Zuwayy and black Toubou forces. Two polling stations for Toubou were functioning, said the commission.
> 
> A spokesman for the interior ministry, Araaf al-Hoja, admitted that it was hard to stop federalist gunmen from "violating" polling stations. "Unfortunately we know many people have weapons," he said. "But overall the security situation is very good."
> 
> Western leaders praised the election, with the US senator John McCain on a visit to Tripoli, and British foreign secretary William Hague tweeting enthusiastically that the vote was a "historic moment and achievement after much suffering".
> 
> Results will not be known for several days. The Muslim Brotherhood's Justice and Development party is expected to do well, with some predicting that Islamists will sweep to power, as they have done in post-Arab spring elections in neighbouring Tunisia and Egypt.
> 
> On Saturday, however, many voters said that they had instead supported Mahmoud Jibril, a pragmatic moderate and Libya's former interim prime minister until his resignation in October. His political coalition, the National Forces Alliance, appears to enjoy broad appeal, especially in the capital and with younger and more educated voters. Some expect him to win by a landslide.
> 
> "I voted for Jibril. He has a reasonable image. He favours knowledge rather than ideas. He wants the country to advance," said Othman Bashir, a surgeon who spent 10 years in the UK. Bashir, who had brought his teenage son along to witness the voting, added: "People are more polarised in England. Labour is Labour and Conservative is Conservative. For us, it's all new."


----------



## GAP

Libya election results give lead to liberal alliance
National Assembly to form government and replace interim ruling cabinet
The Associated Press  Jul 18, 2012
Article Link

Final results released Tuesday placed a liberal alliance ahead of other parties in Libya's first free nationwide vote in half a century, leaving Islamists far behind, but each side is already trying to build a coalition with independents.

It appeared to be a rare Arab Spring setback for Islamists, who won elections in Egypt and Tunisia — but the structure of the parliament, heavy with independent members, left the final outcome uncertain.

The election is a major step for a country emerging from 42 years of Moammar Gadhafi's one-man rule. It also marks the end for the interim National Transitional Council, which has been running Libya with varying degrees of success since Gadhafi was overthrown and killed last year.

The election commission said former interim prime minister Mahmoud Jibril's National Forces Alliance won 39 seats, or nearly half of those allocated for parties.

The Muslim Brotherhood's Justice and Construction party came in second with 17 seats. Smaller factions won the other 24 seats set aside for parties.

Only one woman won a seat as an independent, according to the final results announced late Tuesday in the capital, Tripoli. Unofficial returns showed about 33 women winning seats in the parties section.

In a surprise result, the Islamist National Party, led by ex-jihadist and former rebel commander Abdel-Hakim Belhaj, won no seats.

The balance of power lies with the 120 seats set aside for independent candidates, some of whom are likely affiliated unofficially with parties.

The 200-seat National Assembly will be tasked with forming a new government to replace the NTC's cabinet.

An early test will be a decision on whether to uphold a decree by the NTC for another election to select a 60-member panel to write a new constitution — or revert to the original plan and choose the panel itself.
end

and this from  aljazeera

Libya's defeated Islamists
Liberals unexpectedly won recent elections, partly due to disorganisation and splits among Islamists.
Last Modified: 18 Jul 2012 
Article Link


----------



## GAP

On this one I happen to agree with Scott Taylor.....


TAYLOR: Gadhafi gone, but another monster hatched
September 4, 2012 By SCOTT TAYLOR | ON TARGET 
Article Link

 The civil uprising in Syria is now entering its 18th month and the level of violence continues to escalate.

Embattled President Bashar al-Assad has been hampered by an international arms embargo and strict trade sanctions from the outset.

On the flip side, while Western leaders voice concern for the safety of the Syrian people, they continue to furnish the Free Syrian Army rebels with increasingly sophisticated weaponry.

Were it not for the provision of arms and money from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, it is undeniable that the rebellion would have been suppressed by Assad loyalists in its infancy.

In the oversimplified Western propaganda, Assad is portrayed as an evil despot who must be deposed by the freedom loving, pro-democracy Syrian civilian fighters.

The reality of course is far more complex, with Assad’s predominantly Alawite (secular Shiite) government fighting an assortment of rebel militias that include Sunni fundamentalists and Kurdish separatists.

The only unifying brand for the ideologically diverse rebel factions is the objective of deposing Assad.

While that might still seem a noble cause worthy of international, including Canadian, support, in recent weeks it has become quite clear that this conflict is not just about embittered Syrian civilians uniting to overthrow a tyrant.

In the early stages of the fighting, Assad claimed that a large proportion of the rebels were in fact foreign fighters — Islamic fundamentalists from Iraq and Libya. This of course did not fit the mould for the Western propaganda machine.

But even the most casual observer of international conflict would recognize that Canada has just spent more than a decade combating Islamic fundamentalists in Afghanistan and that this would in some way create some empathy for Assad’s beleaguered security forces.

Thus Assad’s claims had to be denounced as the delusional ravings of a hated dictator who cannot bring himself to believe that his own people have taken up arms against him.

Over the ensuing months, the portrayal of Assad as a demon has become so complete that even the reality of foreign Islamic fundamentalist in Syria is being hailed as positive.

Late last week, it was reported that Syrian rebels had attacked and seized at least a portion of the military airbase as Taftanaz. Footage released by the Free Syrian Army showed the downing of a fighter jet and an airfield ablaze with the wreckage of at least five Syrian air force helicopters.

This successful strike was carried out by the Liwa’ al-Ummah Brigade, which is comprised of Libyan volunteers and is openly affiliated with al-Qaida.

The British media hailed this attack as another major blow against Assad.

The unasked questions are, of course: what is an entire Libyan brigade doing in Syria? How exactly did they manage to transport themselves and their weaponry into an area supposedly subject to an embargo? And most importantly, what happens to these heavily armed mujahedeen when Assad is eventually toppled?

To answer the latter question, one need only look to the current situation in post-Gadhafi Libya.

Last week, more than 200 Islamic fundamentalists stormed a Sufi school in Tripoli in an armed rampaged bent on destroying textbooks and vandalizing a neighbouring graveyard.

As the attack took place, the interim Libyan security forces stood idly by simply observing the destruction.
More on link


----------



## Jed

GAP said:
			
		

> On this one I happen to agree with Scott Taylor.....
> 
> 
> TAYLOR: Gadhafi gone, but another monster hatched
> September 4, 2012 By SCOTT TAYLOR | ON TARGET
> Article Link
> 
> More on link



moi aussi ...


----------



## vonGarvin

Proof, I believe, that even a broken clock can be right.  Sometimes.


----------



## brihard

GAP said:
			
		

> The unasked questions are, of course: what is an entire Libyan brigade doing in Syria? How exactly did they manage to transport themselves and their weaponry into an area supposedly subject to an embargo?



I think he forgets that insurgent forces in that part of the world are a tad more liberal with the term 'Brigade' than even we are.


----------



## vonGarvin

Of course.  But it is a good question.


----------



## brihard

Oh, certainly. I'm not gonna assume for a second that most Western states don't have their fingers in this pie to some extent or another.


----------



## Retired AF Guy

Brihard said:
			
		

> I think he forgets that insurgent forces in that part of the world are a tad more liberal with the term 'Brigade' than even we are.



Here is a link  to a 09 Aug article in Foreign Policy magazine about the Liwa’ al-Ummah Brigade.  The article does state there is link to Libya, but that 90% of its members are Syrians. A couple of the people interviewed were actually ex-pats living in Europe when they joined the revolution. It also states that the "brigade' has 6,000 members, which does not necessary mean they have 6,000 members under arms. While there is a religious aspect to the organization there is no indication in the article that the unit is made up of Al-Qaida members or associated with the group.

Taylor is right that Islamic extremists did destroy Sufi religious sites in Libya with bulldozers while police forces did nothing. The article (National Post??) I read, however, made no mention of "200" fanatics storming the site. There was also lots of opposition among ordinary Libyans to the destruction.


----------



## GAP

Canada’s Top Guns rang up $11 million in hotel bills during Libya mission
Published on Thursday September 20, 2012 
Article Link

OTTAWA—Canada’s Top Guns and their support crews rang up $11 million in hotel bills during their time patrolling the skies over Libya.

But defence officials insisted Thursday it was more Motel 6 than Mediterranean villas with the average nightly rate ringing in at $115.

The defence department was sent scrambling Thursday after CBC News revealed that Canadian military personnel who took part in the NATO mission last year were housed in hotels.

That included the pilots and crews of the seven CF-18 Hornets that flew more than 900 sorties over Libya, along with the crews for a CC-150 Polaris refuelling aircraft that also took part.

The total cost of last year’s mission, known as OP Mobile, was $104 million. The cost of housing 440 personnel deployed over 227 days — from March to November — rang in at $11.5 million.

On Thursday, defence staff defended the decision saying logistics and cost dictated the decision to check-in.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper sent Canadian aircrews to join a NATO mission that was enforcing a UN-sanctioned no-fly zone and supporting demonstrators on the ground who eventually overthrew long-time leader Moammar Gadhafi.

But with crews arriving from many NATO nations, there wasn’t enough room at the Italian military bases to accommodate everyone, forcing Canadians to search for other housing options.

Adding to the headache was the fact that NATO extended the mission several times, sometimes in 60-day increments, “which made long-term planning very difficult,” defence spokesman Daniel Blouin told the Star Thursday.

“Several options were considered for housing personnel, including building our own camp, but the bases of operations in southern Italy were full,” he said.
More on link


----------



## aesop081

What's the media's angle in this ?

Slow news day ?

The base in Sigonella ( the base the media seems to forget we were also based out if) was so full when we arrived that they were removing furniture from single rooms so they could house 3 people. Even hotels were tough to get because if the influx. Building a camp wouldn't have been cost effective either even if it had been possible.


----------



## R.C.

This news "report" is laughable. Print first, investigate later...the media's motto of late.


----------



## Jarnhamar

Many reservists on TF0306 and TF0308 to Afghanistan spent a year of work up training in transient quarters crammed 8 or 9 people to a 4 person room.
Some SNCOs were put 4 people to a room that barely fit 1 person.  It would have been nice for that to hit the news.


----------



## SupersonicMax

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Many reservists on TF0306 and TF0308 to Afghanistan spent a year of work up training in transient quarters crammed 8 or 9 people to a 4 person room.
> Some SNCOs were put 4 people to a room that barely fit 1 person.  It would have been nice for that to hit the news.



We worked very odd hours.  Not everybody was on the same schedule.  There was no available shack on base and on our "operational camp", we were right where 20 000 lbs of explosive was stored, out in the open.  Having sleeping tents/quarters close to work would have been unmanageable (ie: every time there is a thunderstorm warning, you need to evacuate the place, not ideal for someone on crew rest for an 8 hours mission a couple of hours later).  Not to mention planes taking off and landing at every hour.  Not the place I would want to be resting before operating an F-18 dropping a couple of 1000s lbs of explosive on targets...

Honestly, as nice as the Hotel was, it was a pain in the ass to drive 30-45 minutes each way.  I would have rather lived on base, however it was impossible.  

You cannot compare Army operations with Air Force operations.  We are governed by different rules, are subjected to different realities and operate in a very different way.


----------



## YZT580

And what were the room rates of the reporters assigned to the airbase.   Undoubtably higher!  Definitely another attempt by CBC to smear the military.


----------



## brihard

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Not to mention planes taking off and landing at every hour.  Not the place I would want to be resting before operating an F-18 dropping a couple of 1000s lbs of explosive on targets...
> 
> You cannot compare Army operations with Air Force operations.  We are governed by different rules, are subjected to different realities and operate in a very different way.



Good thing we never sent you guys to Kandahar then. Busiest single airstrip in the world and we lived a few hundred meters away. You would have hated it. The Dutch, Brits and French got on alright though.

Different realities indeed...


----------



## aesop081

Brihard said:
			
		

> Different realities indeed...



And is all pretty freakin' moot.

In Sigonella, on-base accommodations, tented or otherwise, were not possible. Period. Our detachment lived in rented apartments ( 6 to a 3-bedroom in  my crew's case) 35 minutes away from base.

I don't know what the conditions were like in Trapani, i was not there.

We all chose our load-station, CA and RCAF alike. Don't like yours, read CFAO 11-12.


----------



## MJP

Brihard said:
			
		

> Good thing we never sent you guys to Kandahar then. Busiest single airstrip in the world and we lived a few hundred meters away. You would have hated it. The Dutch, Brits and French got on alright though.
> 
> Different realities indeed...



Woe be it for me to defend air crew guys but very few fighters staged out of there.  Lots of helos and transport it seemed.   Even then the pilots had decent quarters in order to have the ability to rest properly.   If you went up to Bagram they had an even sweeter set up for the pilots so they could have crew rest.  I certainly don't begrude the RCAF for having well rested guys in the sky dropping bombs around people.  Especially considering the political sensitivity of the mission if the wrong thing was hit.  

A great deal of our fast air came from out of country and I bet they also had great set-ups if they weren't at there home station.


----------



## brihard

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> And is all pretty freakin' moot.
> 
> In Sigonella, on-base accommodations, tented or otherwise, were not possible. Period. Our detachment lived in rented apartments ( 6 to a 3-bedroom in  my crew's case) 35 minutes away from base.
> 
> I don't know what the conditions were like in Trapani, i was not there.
> 
> We all chose our load-station, CA and RCAF alike. Don't like yours, read CFAO 11-12.




EDIT- Nope, I had one thing written on this, but on reflection I think from my end a simple apology is in order. I got snippy when I oughtn't have been. Max, and any other aviators who may have taken any offence that I assure you was unintentional, I'm sorry.


----------



## muskrat89

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Many reservists on TF0306 and TF0308 to Afghanistan spent a year of work up training in transient quarters crammed 8 or 9 people to a 4 person room.
> Some SNCOs were put 4 people to a room that barely fit 1 person.  It would have been nice for that to hit the news.



Guys - wind your horns in. I think what OZ was saying is that it was ironic that the media is all over $11 million in hotel accommodations (which may have been reasonable under the circumstances) but didn't bat an eye when soldiers were stacked 6-9 high. Two sides of the same coin.


----------



## vonGarvin

In terms of media lines...and money...where Libya was enforcing foreign policy...what about all the money so soldiers can go to Ottawa to participate in a run?


----------



## OldSolduer

muskrat89 said:
			
		

> Guys - wind your horns in. I think what OZ was saying is that it was ironic that the media is all over $11 million in hotel accommodations (which may have been reasonable under the circumstances) but didn't bat an eye when soldiers were stacked 6-9 high. Two sides of the same coin.



Soldiers stacked 6-9 to a room won't make the news. The public doesn't care. Eleven million dollars they will understand. 

I don't see a great public backlash over this though. No nasty letters to the editor here in Winnipeg.


----------



## muskrat89

> Soldiers stacked 6-9 to a room won't make the news. The public doesn't care. Eleven million dollars they will understand.
> 
> I don't see a great public backlash over this though. No nasty letters to the editor here in Winnipeg.



Jim - unless I misunderstood, that's exactly what OZ was trying to say. It appears that some took it as an army versus air force dig.


----------



## smale436

"I don't know what the conditions were like in Trapani, i was not there."

 - I had to laugh at some of the farcical comments the CBC commenters were posting. Things like wondering if there was $16 OJ in case Bev Oda came to visit. In Trapani we were split between two hotels. Sure one was on the beach (not mine), sure they both had outdoor pools and free OJ with the free breakfast. But honestly the 45 minute drive to and from work was a pain as time went on. Dealing with the locals became an issue at times as well. I recall some log people mentioning how they tried to buy thousands of dollars of lumber at a store and they were pretty much told to get lost as some Italians did not like our presence (because of the mission) whatsoever.


----------



## Kat Stevens

Sounds rough.


----------



## OldSolduer

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Sounds rough.


 :sarcasm: ?

I bet is was.......


----------



## dogger1936

Boo hoo Kandahar stories. 

As far as I'm concerned I like the fact the Canadian press does release this stuff. Hopefully (In my mind at least) this always ensures govt and military officials are using the most cost effective means. It seems all cost for hotels was legit and required due to the operational environment. 

These "KAF" stories of SNR NCO's stuck three to a room ( The horror!!! Having to wait for the other two to go to Green bean to get some alone time) make me ill.

My last tour I didn't get a haircut for 5 months and pooped in those silver bags 90% of the time. And I wouldn't have traded it for anything; I enjoyed it. It's the army after all; pretty well how I expected it to be. We didn't have access to razors one time for a couple weeks which made me look like a slightly out of shape special forces guy. 

I like having my CAS well rested. As long as they are on station dropping pretty little things out of the sky on places I want them to do so; I'm happy.

It seems from the media anyway the pilots and crew got rounds on target with little collateral; I'll take that as my uneducated guess they did a fine job. They followed the guidelines laid out for them as aircrew (rest etc) and did their mission. BZ.


----------



## MJP

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Boo hoo Kandahar stories.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned I like the fact the Canadian press does release this stuff. Hopefully (In my mind at least) this always ensures govt and military officials are using the most cost effective means. It seems all cost for hotels was legit and required due to the operational environment.
> 
> These "KAF" stories of SNR NCO's stuck three to a room ( The horror!!! Having to wait for the other two to go to Green bean to get some alone time) make me ill.



OZ was talking about the pre-training not KAF.  People not really reading make me ill...


----------



## dogger1936

MJP said:
			
		

> OZ was talking about the pre-training not KAF.  People not really reading make me ill...



Oh so it's Petawawa stories. I apologize. Replace Green Bean with the mess or Greco.


----------



## MJP

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Oh so it's Petawawa stories. I apologize. Replace Green Bean with the mess or Greco.



True either way you still sound like an @ss


----------



## dogger1936

MJP said:
			
		

> True either way you still sound like an @ss



Complaining that a Snr NCO had to live with his peer's in a slightly small room and that it should be brought to media attention doesn't turn your "be an ass" switch on I guess. It does with me.


----------



## MJP

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Complaining that a Snr NCO had to live with his peer's in a slightly small room and that it should be brought to media attention doesn't turn your "be an ***" switch on I guess. It does with me.



No you didn't comprehend the reasoning behind his post and the subsequent explanations from other forum members.   But rather turned it into yet another inside/outside the wire "I had it so much harder" rant.  I had you on ignore for a while.  Time methinks to turn you back on as I see you haven't changed much.


----------



## dogger1936

MJP said:
			
		

> No you didn't comprehend the reasoning behind his post and the subsequent explanations from other forum members.   But rather turned it into yet another inside/outside the wire "I had it so much harder" rant.  I had you on ignore for a while.  Time methinks to turn you back on as I see you haven't changed much.



 :boring:
It's far from a inside outside the wire rant. I think we had it rather easy and enjoyed it; infact I made a reference to that. 3 meals a day and a sleeping bag regardless; whats to hate about that. 

Ignore away.


----------



## NavyShooter

Apparently, there is to be some sort of OP Mobile awards thing at Stad on the 16th of November.

Alas, I'm on leave.  Maybe they'll send me the medal via 1000 miler....


----------



## old medic

‘I begged them to kill me’: Wounded Libyan freedom fighters find more than just medical care in Toronto

Adrian Brijbassi, National Post Staff
26 Dec 2012
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/12/26/ayoub-badi-libyan-freedom-fighters-toronto-canada/


> Sixteen months ago, Ayoub Badi was so beaten up, sad, hopeless and sick with the relentless pain only torture can inflict he begged for his own death. These days, he’s in Toronto wishing for a date.
> 
> Mr. Badi is alive. And, like the other wounded Libyan freedom fighters who’ve recently arrived in downtown Toronto, he is eager to enjoy living. The war veterans are in Canada to receive medical care for injuries incurred during the 2011 revolution that led to the overthrow of dictator Muammar Gaddafi. They’re also determined to make the most of their experience.
> 
> They’ve discovered the Masjid mosque on Dundas Street, halal grocery stores, a restaurant that serves Afghan food similar to Libyan cuisine, and a taste for Burger King.
> 
> “For the past few years, Gaddafi had become unbearable, killing people in huge numbers and torturing people for their political opinion. We couldn’t allow him to do it anymore. It was time it stopped,” Mr. Badi said in Arabic before detailing the monumental price he paid in the revolution.
> 
> On Feb.19, 2011, Mr. Badi, a student, joined the uprising that had begun two days earlier. Despite not having any military training, he and his fellow shabab (or “boys”) in Misrata, a city on the Mediterranean Sea, battled well-armed Gaddafi forces. Mr. Badi’s brother was killed and he was captured after being shot on March 28. He was held until Aug. 20, the day the rebels overtook Tripoli, Libya’s capital.
> 
> “I told the men beating me that I wished they would just kill me. I begged them to kill me, but they said, ‘No.’ They preferred me alive so they could keep doing what they were doing.” Electric shock was used on Mr. Badi during his nearly five months in captivity. His nose and cheekbones were broken. His ribs cracked. As he told his story, the 24-year-old with soft, brown eyes often spoke with a shy smile that connoted both incredulity over his ordeal and a sense of resolve that has amazed his new neighbours in Toronto.
> 
> “The spirit of these people is unbelievable. They are so uplifting,” said Harvey Brown, a concierge of the building in the Entertainment District where seven of the freedom fighters reside. The Libyans are cheerful and eager to practice their English. “If you have a bad day, all you have to do is look at these guys and think about what they’ve been through and you can’t stay sad for long.”
> 
> The Red Cross contributed funds for Mr. Badi’s nine previous surgeries — which included repairing those broken bones — in Turkey and Belarus. The Libyan government is paying for his knee surgery at Toronto General hospital as well as the medical care for the other injured soldiers, some of whom fought in Benghazi, where the revolution began.
> 
> Soon after the defeat of Gaddafi, Libya established a transitional council that budgeted for the medical care of the victorious rebels. In most cases, the initial treatment was completed in Europe and North Africa but earlier this year the soldiers began to arrive in Canada.....................



Story continues at the link:
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/12/26/ayoub-badi-libyan-freedom-fighters-toronto-canada/


----------



## 57Chevy

Terror threat in Benghazi: Canada urges citizens to leave

 The Canadian Press 

OTTAWA — Canada has joined several European countries in urging its citizens to immediately leave the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi.

In an advisory posted Thursday on its website, Foreign Affairs Canada also warned against non-essential travel to the country because of the fragile political situation there.

It says there is a “heightened risk of terrorism throughout Libya, including in Benghazi.”

Earlier, Britain, Germany and the Netherlands warned of an imminent threat against westerners, days after a deadly hostage crisis in neighbouring Algeria.

European officials said schools were among the potential targets.

In its advisory, Foreign Affairs warns “terrorist attacks could occur at any time and could target areas frequented by expatriates and foreign travellers.”


                                            Article is shared with provisions of The Copyright Act


----------



## Edward Campbell

Former Ontario Premier and interim leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, Bob Rae reminds of why _intervention_, even with the best of intentions, is just the first step in this article whch is reproduced under the fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/in-libya-and-beyond-interventions-just-the-start/article12934330/#dashboard/follows/


> In Libya and beyond, intervention’s just the start
> 
> BOB RAE
> Tripoli — Special to The Globe and Mail
> 
> Published Wednesday, Jul. 03 2013
> 
> Even at a seaside hotel, the distant sounds of guns from a militia clash in southern Tripoli break the midnight silence.
> 
> The West and the United Nations have little difficulty spending billions on the military side of intervention. When it comes to bringing down a Saddam Hussein or a Moammar Gadhafi, cash and troops are no problem. But the end of such repressive regimes, as costly as this end can be in money and human lives, is just the beginning of the struggle for security and greater democracy.
> 
> Writing in the time of the English Civil War, with Europe still reeling from the violence, torture, rape and sheer mayhem of the Thirty Years’ War, Thomas Hobbes made a simple point. The war of “all against all,” where life was “nasty, brutish and short,” had to end for real life to begin. Security – the monopoly of weapons, order and authority in some kind of sovereign state – was the essential precondition for other pursuits. Future political thinkers would come to worry about those other pursuits and the importance of freedom, pluralism and the rule of law. But Hobbes’s essential point was that chaos must end before other things begin.
> 
> Libya has made a good case in point. The country of six million people suffered through a brutal dictatorship for more than 40 years. Col. Gadhafi’s regime benefited from an annual $60-billion cash flow from oil and gas, but he did not invest in people, institutions or infrastructure, and his leaving was accompanied by much suffering and destruction.
> 
> In particular, the militias so heavily armed in the effort to defeat him have not disbanded. They have moved into organized crime and extortion, “protection services” and fighting for turf like so many gangland desperados.
> 
> The interim government, which succeeded a transitional government, has few levers and little power. The central institutions of state, such as the army, are small, poorly trained and poorly equipped. The General National Council, the temporary legislature body that hopes to create a constitutional committee (that will in turn write a constitution and then have elections) is poorly resourced and staffed and argues among itself.
> 
> Aid money is drying up, because governance assistance is the weak sibling of every Western government. But things fall apart when the centre cannot hold. And the consequences of this would be serious indeed – a failed state on the shores of the Mediterranean, unable to police its borders or provide for its people.
> 
> It is a simple lesson, yet to be learned: We need to deal with the consequences of military intervention with the same focus, determination and resources we have given to the destruction of bad actors. We can’t leave the job less than half done.
> 
> If the militias are allowed to persist as separate power bases, and are not either disbanded or included in the army and police – and then trained effectively – the central government’s ability to provide even minimal services will simply not be there. This requires further political reconciliation, persuasion and the capacity to carry out the necessary plan. The UN and those who decided Col. Gadhafi had to go still have work to do. The cameras may have left, but the task remains.
> 
> _Bob Rae is working with the National Democratic Institute in Libya._




This is, of course, a plea for more and more and more Western help; but ...

     1. The US led West is sick and tired of bailing out failed states;

     2. The US led West, with manifold problems of its own, doesn't have the capacity to bail out failed states; and

     3. I hope the US led West is, however slowly, coming to the conclusion that failed and failing states must take their own destinies in their own hands and help themselves - painful and bloody though DIY will be.

Mr. Rae, very correctly, says, _"... things fall apart when the centre cannot hold. And the consequences of this would be serious indeed – a failed state on the shores of the Mediterranean, unable to police its borders or provide for its people."_ That's all true but Italy and France, etc, can, if they really want, police *their own* borders and several countries of the US led West have serious trouble providing for *their own* people.


----------



## tomahawk6

A Libyan memo is being circulated concerning the confessions of 6 Egyptians arrested for the attack on the US mission in Benghazi.According to the memo the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi were linked to the terror cell.


----------



## OldSolduer

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> A Libyan memo is being circulated concerning the confessions of 6 Egyptians arrested for the attack on the US mission in Benghazi.According to the memo the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi were linked to the terror cell.



How authentic is this?


----------



## medicineman

And my Arabic reading ability really sucks - anyone know what it says?


----------



## Kat Stevens

I only got the first two lines, but it seems to say;

There once was a man from Benghazi,
who got his arse stuck in the khazi...

the rest is written in an accent I can't read..... ;D


----------



## tomahawk6

Authentic.Written as an interdepartmental memo from the Libyan National Security offices in Tripoli to the Ministry of the Interior.
Written solely as a perfunctory after-action report as the results of the Libyan investigation in the events of that night. 
It was prepared by Mahmoud Ibrahim Sharif, the Director of National Security of Libya.


----------



## CougarKing

ISIS's Libya franchise strikes again:

Reuters



> *Foreigners seized by Islamic State in Libya: Austria*
> 
> VIENNA (Reuters) - Islamic State militants in Libya seized a group of foreigners at the al-Ghani oilfield last week, a spokesman for the Austrian foreign ministry said citing "secure information" on Monday, adding that they were alive when taken.
> 
> *There has been no sign since of the nine oil workers from Austria, the Czech republic, Bangladesh, the Philippines and at least one African country who went missing, the spokesman said.*
> 
> "We know that they were not injured when they were transported away from the al-Ghani oilfield," the spokesman said, adding Austria had information the group was taken by Islamic State militants.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## tomahawk6

Mount a rescue op to get all foreigners out.Libya cannot protect the workers and a pullout will shut down their oil/gas fields.Maybe that will get their attention.


----------



## daftandbarmy

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Mount a rescue op to get all foreigners out.Libya cannot protect the workers and a pullout will shut down their oil/gas fields.Maybe that will get their attention.



An interesting article on the state of their oil economy from the US Energy Information Administration:

http://www.eia.gov/countries/cab.cfm?fips=ly


----------



## The Bread Guy

Bumped with the latest:  U.S. now bombing the heck out of ISIS in LBY ...

*"U.S. Conducts Airstrikes Against ISIL in Sirte, Libya"* (Pentagon Info-machine)
*"U.S. Marine Corps helicopters aboard amphibious assault ship and USAF drones lead new round of U.S. air strikes on ISIS in Libya"* (_The Aviationist_)
*"U.S. launches strikes targeting IS in Libya"* (AP)
*"US Begins Sustained Air Campaign Against ISIS in Libya"* (Reuters, via Newsweek)
*"US fighter jets target ISIL in Libya for first time"* (Al Jazeera English)


----------



## CougarKing

The latest in the fight against IS in Libya:

Army Times



> *U.S.-backed Libyan forces take over Islamic State HQ*
> Rami Musa, The Associated Press 3:07 p.m. EDT August 10, 2016
> 22nd MEU Performs Contingency Operations
> 
> BENGHAZI, Libya — U.S.-backed Libyan forces said on Wednesday they have taken over the Islamic State group's headquarters in Sirte, the militants' final bastion in Libya, breaking a weeks-long stalemate with the help of U.S. airstrikes.
> 
> The fighters said that they had seized control of the sprawling convention center that was used as ISIS's headquarters in the coastal city. The fighters, who are mainly from the nearby city of Misrata, launched their offensive against ISIS in June. They also said that they had seized the city's main hospital of Ibn Sina from ISIS militants.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## CougarKing

Pirates or IS militants or another faction?

Marine Insight

*Rescue Vessel Bourbon Argos Attacked By Armed Men*
By MI News Network | In: Shipping News | Last Updated on August 29, 2016



> On 17 August 2016, while conducting search and rescue operations off the Libyan coast, the MSF rescue vessel *Bourbon Argos *was approached and attacked by a group of armed men onboard an unidentified speedboat. MSF strongly condemns this violent act towards a medical humanitarian organisation whose sole objective in the Mediterranean is to conduct search and rescue activities in the absence of safe and legal channels for those fleeing armed conflict, disasters and extreme poverty, who lack safe and legal channels to flee.
> 
> The attack occurred 24 nautical miles north of the Libyan coast. Armed men on board the speedboat fired shots toward the Bourbon Argos from a distance of 400 to 500 metres and then boarded the vessel. There were no rescued people onboard that day, and neither the crew members nor the MSF staff were harmed.


----------



## The Bread Guy

This from LBY media, shared under the Fair Dealing provisions of the _Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42)_ ...:


> The spokesman of Khalifa Haftar’s forces, Ahmed Al-Mismari, vowed in a presser last Thursday that their forces will bomb the Canadian ship that is laden with humanitarian aids, which will likely arrive in Ganfouda in mid-December.
> 
> The Canadian ship is going to distribute humanitarian aids and medicines to the civilians trapped in Ganfouda.
> 
> “The Canadian ship will come to Ganfouda with evil intentions in the disguise of humanitarian assistance,” Al-Mismari said in the presser that was aired by Al-Thanni government’s Libya Al-Rasmiya TV.
> 
> He added that when human rights are used for such ends, then the Canadian ship must rethink its journey to Ganfouda because the security of the country is much more important than the human rights that are sponsored by the traitors.
> 
> “All ports and terminals in Benghazi and Derna are closed, except for the Brega and Tobruk commercial ports. This is because we have issued an order treating all the ports in military operations’ areas as shutdown ports,” Al-Mismari added.
> 
> He remarked that their forces are going to bomb any party that toys with the Libyan policy in its territorial waters.
> 
> Al-Mismari also likened the attempt of the Canadian ship to distribute aids to Ganfouda besieged people to that of the Turkish Mavi Marmara to break off the Israeli siege on Gaza when he said; “This ship is like the Mavi Marmara ship that wanted to enter Israel and Gaza.”


----------



## daftandbarmy

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> This from LBY media, shared under the Fair Dealing provisions of the _Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42)_ ...:



I'd bomb it too if all it was carrying was AIDS


----------



## George Wallace

:rofl:

A little black humour never hurt anyone.......(Until thin skinned PC folk became involved.)


----------



## The Bread Guy

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I'd bomb it too if all it was carrying was AIDS


Proofreading team -- UP!


----------



## The Bread Guy

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> This from LBY media, shared under the Fair Dealing provisions of the _Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42)_ ...:
> 
> 
> 
> The spokesman of Khalifa Haftar’s forces, Ahmed Al-Mismari, vowed in a presser last Thursday that their forces will bomb the Canadian ship that is laden with humanitarian (aid), which will likely arrive in Ganfouda in mid-December.
> 
> The Canadian ship is going to distribute humanitarian aids and medicines to the civilians trapped in Ganfouda ...
Click to expand...

Update***:  delay in shipment ...


> A flotilla was planned to set sail on December 10th with humanitarian aid for the suffering civilians of Ganfouda. Activists from the US, Canada, the UK, Switzerland, Libya and others committed to join the trip in hopes of delivering the much needed aid to the Benghazi suburb.
> 
> In an official press conference on December 1st, a Colonel for General Khalifa Haftar’s forces, which is known as the Libyan National Army (LNA), stated on National Libyan TV that any attempt to send humanitarian aid, even if Canadian, will be bombed and attacked by air strikes and ground artillery. The UN and international community have yet to condemn the complete disregard for human rights by the LNA.
> 
> The flotilla has been named after a little girl, “Fatouha,” whose home was bombed and family members killed in Ganfouda. Activists, including medical experts, intend on delivering humanitarian aid including food packages, water, basic medicine and sanitary supplies.
> 
> Organizers are seeking the support of international humanitarian organizations including the UN OCHA, the ICRC, the Turkish Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (İHH) to endorse and confirm the nature of the supplies on board so that there is no doubt of the ship’s contents.
> 
> A final date for departure is yet to be announced.



*** - Statemement from a web site called freeganfouda.org, claiming to represent a group of some 130 families trapped/"held hostage" in the neighbourhood of Benghazi by forces (led by this guy) opposing the U.N.-sanctioned-government.  The URL's registered via Domains by Proxy, so not much to see there.  The group's Twitter account says it's based in the U.S.  All that said, caveat lector ...


----------



## daftandbarmy

Anthony Bourdain, Parts Unknown, Libya

I particularly enjoyed the part where he was unmasked as a former Boy Scout:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IL4cDUDSVn0


----------

