Libyans protest, Gadhafi orders troops to open fire

[7StringedBeast]

Once we intervene its just going to be the same old bullshit blood for oil argument and USA oppression and colonization and all that crap.  Something needs to be done.  But its time for the USA to not spear head this one and let another country step up to the plate.  There are so many other countries out there with capable armies to fight off the Libyans.

I just hate how everyone likes to talk shit about USA and then it turns out we are the only ones willing to get shit done.

[El Barto]

I agree, but as it is now the same people are bitching about how we only help out people who we like.  This could be viewed as us tacitly supporting Moammar's regime.  Again, America won't come out of it looking good either way.  Might as well at least try to do the decent thing. 

[rumborak]

The good news is that the rebels asked for something specific, a no-fly zone. The bad news is that while the term "no-fly zone" sounds nice, it is tantamount to entering the war. Because the first thing you have to do is to knock out the anti-aircraft artillery, and that means bombing.

Apparently the Arab League is convening this weekend on the issue. They are the ones everybody is looking at for a strong stance on this.

rumborak

[7StringedBeast]

Exactly what I said a few posts ago regarding the no fly zone.   

[emindead]

why doesn't China step up to help.

They want to but the Security Council doesn't let them without unanimity.

[7StringedBeast]

why doesn't China step up to help.

They want to but the Security Council doesn't let them without unanimity.

interesting.

[Progmetty]

Severe shortage in Mud Engineers because all the Libyan ones either left or didn't come back for their shift, I'm on my 7th week at the rigs now, they keep moving us around to cover the shortage.

[rumborak]

Good news for once. The Arab League supports a no-fly zone over Libya and are officially asking the UN to establish one.

rumborak

[El Barto]

Gotta say, our response to this (technically the lack of one) is pretty embarrassing.  It's becoming quite clear that we just want to look the other way and hope this thing resolves itself quietly.  We've probably already reached the point where Moammar has solidified his position enough so that a no-fly zone won't matter.  This whole thing is just going to go down as a failed coup that left a shitload dead and plenty more hung out to dry.  In the end, we'll just say "we wanted to help, but nobody would go along with us." 

The fact that the French are the ones yelling the loudest while we drag our feet should be embarrassing as fuck.  I suppose that they could act unilaterally; it's not like we won't.  But at the same time, we've seen in the past that all that's needed is for us to make the case and others will fall in line.  If America lobbied for it, France and England would already be TCB'ing over there.  And while I'm well aware that everybody else just wants us to deal with it like we always do, and I agree that it's bullshit,  that doesn't mean that we should hang these people out to dry like we have so many times with others. 

I've defended Obama in previous scenarios for staying the hell out of other people's business.  This is a nice change from prior policy that had us meddling in everything.  Bush would have made Iran and Egypt much worse by interjecting American concerns into their rebellion.  But there's a point where you actually do need to get involved to prevent a wholesale slaughter, and Obama doesn't seem to get that. 

[rumborak]

The problem is that a no-fly zone will do jack shit. The only way to effect a change in the conflict is to put troops on the ground. However, apart from the totally different thing this would be, the rebels also specifically asked to not do so.

rumborak

[El Barto]

At this stage of the game, yes, a no-fly zone will do jack shit.  A week ago it would have made all the difference in the world.  Aside from denying him the use of his hinds, which he's been using with moderate success, it would have given him a completely different front to concern himself with, as well as provide a huge shift in the morale of both sides. 

[PlaysLikeMyung]

So who's winning? I haven't seen much coverage of the conflict lately because of the earthquake in Japan

[El Barto]

Ghadaffi has turned the corner.  He's reclaiming fallen cities and generally capturing all of the momentum.  The rebels are committed to this, so they're going to go down fighting, but that's looking somewhat inevitable right now.  Better to be gunned down by a Russian BTR than be captured and have to answer to Moammar. 

[PlaysLikeMyung]

That's disappointing. They had a golden opportunity to depose him and they blew it... Maybe they'll turn it around again. And I agree with our governments wishy-washy response to it. I don't support sending in troops to a conflict we really have no business fighting in, but we could have given them some form of help

[rumborak]

At this stage of the game, yes, a no-fly zone will do jack shit.  A week ago it would have made all the difference in the world.  Aside from denying him the use of his hinds, which he's been using with moderate success, it would have given him a completely different front to concern himself with, as well as provide a huge shift in the morale of both sides.  

That's all true, but I also understand the desire of Western nations to wait for the Arab countries to be on board. We're already in 2 Middle-Eastern countries; going unilaterally into yet another one is not good.

Frankly, the brutal truth is that the timing was bad. And a lot of conflicts are decided by timing. Japan's disaster didn't help either.

rumborak

[El Barto]

The Arab nations are on board, they just don't want to deal with it themselves. 

Plus, I don't think it needed to be half as involved as they've made it out to be.  Yes, there would need to be some suppression of air defenses, but on the scale we're talking about it wouldn't have been too difficult.  Lots of even well-trained fighters have a tendency to run like hell when the HARMs show up.  Their air force wouldn't have engaged at all.  Honestly, the mere presence of a carrier would have probably kept most of them grounded.  Frankly, the Libyans really do suck at this sort of thing.

The problem now is that as soon as he gets his security situation under control, he's going to find every single person that was opposed to him and have them shot.  What are we going to do then? 

That's disappointing. They had a golden opportunity to depose him and they blew it... Maybe they'll turn it around again. And I agree with our governments wishy-washy response to it. I don't support sending in troops to a conflict we really have no business fighting in, but we could have given them some form of help

It's not fair to say that they blew it.  These were untrained civvies facing off against a standing army and a shitload of mercenaries.  They were behind the curve from the onset.  Plus, Moammar actually does appear to enjoy some popular support.  As I said form the get-go, while they're not free, they certainly don't have the cause for anger that a lot of the other countries have.  Moammar tended to spend their oil money lavishly on the people, rather than himself.  These guys gave it a pretty good shot, but really needed some outside help to have been able to pull this thing off. 

[El Barto]

U.S. mulls air strikes

This is really fucked up.  It sounds like they're ratcheting up the rhetoric as the point where it's too late gets closer.  State knows full well that they'll never get UN approval and the backing of Arab nations before the bloodbath is underway in Benghazi.  Plus, I'm not sure another Highway of Death is really what they want to do, but it's probably the only thing that'll prevent slaughter. 

[zerogravityfat]

the un, nato, eu will i'm sure do something about this situation. they will send plenty of body bags to clean up the massacre so gaddafi can give us a discount on the gas.

[TheVoxyn]

UN has approved the no-fly zone and 'any measures necesarry to protect the civilians'.

[El Barto]

I'm certainly glad to hear it, but it's cutting it pretty close.  The next question is who has what, where.  We can blow the shit out of any building on Earth, and air suppression won't be too challenging, but this phase of the game's going to mean significant ground attack if the plan is to protect Benghazi.  We're quite good at that sort of thing, but it's not really carrier work when dealing with this sort of scale.  This should be a damned fascinating venture.  I'm interested to see what the game plan is. 

[Riceball]

Reports on our 24-hour news channel are saying that the UN has approved "any measures necessary" to end the conflict, bar a foot-soldier invasion.

My translation: The West will come in with as little human presence as possible, do a bit of shock and awe to put a bit of fear into the regime and, assuming all does well, Gadafi backs down. Assuming all doesn't go well, the place gets fisted in the arse.

[ack44]

Gadhafi needs to go. It would have given the overthrow more legitimacy if this was done without foreign intervention, but its more important to get rid of this loon. I'm still kind of confused as to who the rebels are, though.

[XJDenton]

About time is all I can say.

[XJDenton]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12787739

Libya 'to halt military action'

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.

[El Barto]

My guess is that he wants to close the distance between his armor and Benghazi before the West can get it's shit together and he's hoping this will stall them for a day or two.  Honestly, if he's still moving East, he should still be considered fair game.  If he's able to get inside Benghazi, it's going to be very tough to deal with him.  The Brits said they'd be able to engage them by this morning, and I'm sure the French are already good to go,  so this was probably meant to buy him a day or so. 

There were also reports that the Egyptians were ferrying weapons and ammo into Benghazi.  Advisers would probably be more useful, but this is still quite helpful.  They'll need to be able to put up some defense regardless of Western intervention. 

[XJDenton]

Looks like we called his bluff.

[El Barto]

Well, he's already making his first forays into Benghazi, combined with some shelling.  I think it's going to take some significant pounding from the West to keep him out, and if he gets in then there's a real problem.

I gotta say, if Obama manages to pull of the sort of maneuver he's shooting for, I'll be fairly impressed.  All indications are that he's looking for the US's involvement to be a very strong support role while the rest of NATO does the heavy lifting.  This could be a very good strategy.  We have a lot of unique capabilities and anybody can drop bombs on ground forces.  If we provide quality battlefield reconnaissance and electronic warfare support, the Brits, French and token Arabs can really whip some ass against Gadaffi's armor.  Plus, it doesn't put us solely at the head of the policy decisions.  He's trying to make this much more like Bosnia than Iraq and that's a good call.

The policy decisions are a sticky wicket.  Aside from trying to prevent wholesale slaughter in Benghazi, I'm really not sure what the objective should be here.  There is no mandate for NATO to take out Moammar, but I don't see how you just leave him there in charge of 85% of Libya.

[rumborak]

My concern is that we're just playing into his hands with this enforced cease fire. Bottom line is, he still is the ruler of Libya, and the UN forces have no direct mandate of combating that fact. So, Gadhafi gets what he wants; the rebels put down their weapons, and then he gets to rat out the rebels covertly later.

rumborak

[ReaPsTA]

We're launching missiles at Libyan air defenses.  Good times.  I like how war with other countries is cool again now that Bush is gone.

I sorta don't know what to think.  If we just invaded with the intention of overthrowing Ghaddafi, it'd be us very clearly saying their government has failed and it's time for something new.  This way, it's like we're saying their government has authority over the country, but only authority we let them.  Well that's kinda weird, isn't it?

I get the impression the rest of the world is hoping the rebellion succeeds.

[73109]

This is getting a lot bigger than what I thought it would turn into. You have France and America leading over 10 countries against Libya, and you have Libya in a civil war against a fucked up tyrant. This has the opportunity to get much bigger, granted, I don't think it will.

[ack44]

I wonder what Ron Paul has to say about the military intervention.

[pogoowner]

I wonder what Ron Paul has to say about the military intervention.

He's been preaching against it since the idea was brought up.

[Nick]

And I personally support Paul's stance on the subject. As others have pointed out there are plenty of other countries with far more interest in Libya that could step up to the plate on this one, and quite frankly the United States is not responsible for the welfare of the Libyan people or the direct judges of their government.

[El Barto]

We're launching missiles at Libyan air defenses.  Good times.  I like how war with other countries is cool again now that Bush is gone.

And I personally support Paul's stance on the subject. As others have pointed out there are plenty of other countries with far more interest in Libya that could step up to the plate on this one, and quite frankly the United States is not responsible for the welfare of the Libyan people or the direct judges of their government.

There are such things as just causes.  We all agree that other nations should be taking care of this, but that doesn't mean you stand by and watch a massacre out of some dutiful sense of neglect.

[Nick]

Negligence implies we have an obligation to Libya or Libyans, when we have neither.