More than 110 cruise missiles fired at Lybia

1984ReturnsForReal_2

ses6jwg wrote: »

Gadaffi's forces are bombing and shelling areas with a high concentration of civilians i.e. Benghazi.

That is why they are concentrating on his armour, artillery and air forces.

Benghazi is out of the equation now.

Gaddafi is rounding "the other side" up nearer to home & they will never be seen again.

chewmylegoff

pompeyfaith wrote: »

ask the UN

http://www.un.org/en/contactus/

we are in the UN. the reason there is a UN resolution is because we got together with the US and France and asked them to ratify this. we can hardly now just say "the UN made us do it".

the purpose of the UN resolution is to take action to protect the civilian population. it was not to provide the rebel forces with an air force. what if rebel tanks start shelling a gaddafi held town, are we going to drop a 2000lb laser guided bomb down their gun barrels? i somehow doubt it.

pompeyfaith

we are in the UN.

You dont say WOW I did not know that the point is had the UN not got the vote from its members it would not have gone through so it is logical to ask them as I aint answering any more as I only get shot down when I do.

the purpose of the UN resolution is to take action to protect the civilian population. it was not to provide the rebel forces with an air force. what if rebel tanks start shelling a gaddafi held town, are we going to drop a 2000lb laser guided bomb down their gun barrels? i somehow doubt it

Resolution 1973 (2011) states

Adopting resolution 1973 (2011) by a vote of 10 in favour to none against, with 5 abstentions (Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation), the Council authorized Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory — requesting them to immediately inform the Secretary-General of such measures.


Being the keys words they are not providing the rebels with an airforce if they was the air force would be under there control the airforce is there to provide the no fly zone and the words above gives them the means to knock out any of Gadaffi's arsenal to make the air safe for the coalition air force.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10200.doc.htm

pompeyfaith

Furthermore

I do wish the media would stop referring to them as "the rebels." They are revolutionaries, not rebels.

Gaddaffi is the rebel. He grabbed power for himself in 1969 when King Idris was out of the country undergoing a major medical operation in Turkey.

Generali

kabayiri wrote: »

Whatever we might personally desire there needs to be some kind of checks and balances to world power.

Might is right. That's the way it's always worked.

You may or may not like it but the strong countries get the cake and everyone else gets the crumbs.

pompeyfaith

You all want to know the true Gadaffi a right nutter

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/02/gaddafi-i-knew-kate-adie

I for one will be glad to see him and his family gone and brought before the ICJ for crimes against humanity

1984ReturnsForReal_2

pompeyfaith wrote: »

You all want to know the true Gadaffi a right nutter

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/02/gaddafi-i-knew-kate-adie

I for one will be glad to see him and his family gone and brought before the ICJ for crimes against humanity

He'd signed the book that morning, in revolutionary green ink of course, a curious V-shape, as if an inky fly had slid down the page and staggered back up.

No offence but its hardly constructive journalism if it starts like that....

ash28

pompeyfaith wrote: »

Furthermore

I do wish the media would stop referring to them as "the rebels." They are revolutionaries, not rebels.

Gaddaffi is the rebel. He grabbed power for himself in 1969 when King Idris was out of the country undergoing a major medical operation in Turkey.

And who put King Idris on the throne - we did after WW2 - before that Libya had been an Italian colony, and Idris who had been an Emir of one of the 3 states that came to make up Libya was in exile in Egypt (where he'd been since the early 1920s), the defeat of Italy during WW2 brought that to an end (we and the French took over until independence in 1951) and before the Italians it was part of the Ottoman Empire.

The king was also going to abdicate in favour of his nephew on 2nd September 1969 - the military coup took place on 1st September.

Let's not make the mistake of thinking Libya had a monarchy similar to our own, althought it was a constitutional monarchy, no democratic institutions were developed. Libya has had one king for 18 years - and one who p1ssed off his people mightily by siding with UK over Suez - then when oil was discovered in the 1950s the wealth it generated went one way - p1ssed off people even more - if it hadn't been Gaddafi it would have been someone else.

King Idris died in Egypt about 20 years ago - he was in his mid 90s.

ash28

amcluesent wrote: »

Plenty of ack-ack going up in Tripoli shown in Sky. Nothing much in the way of missile impacts though. Guess Gadaffiduck has thought twice about using his mobi...

I wouldn't want to be in the same ward as Abdelbaset al-Megrahi right now...too big a chance of a cruise missile coming in the window!

I guess the military-industrial complex will be pleased to have another war in which to demonstrate their gear in combat. Always sells better at the next arms fair if you can claim it's conflict proven.

You old cynic!!!

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

Might is right. That's the way it's always worked.

You may or may not like it but the strong countries get the cake and everyone else gets the crumbs.

It's unlikely that is ever going to change, I agree.

I guess I wonder whether technology will be a game changer in terms of future conflicts.

The US have always been sensitive to seeing their servicemen and women shipped home in body bags since Vietnam (rightly so).

If you suddenly find yourself with the ability to wage conflict in remote parts of the world with remote automated capacity like drones, does it change the temptation to become the world's policeman on a more regular basis?