LIBYA (Merged) Use this thread ONLY
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Certainly not wanting to turn this into a political argument but...
...tt seems strange that we civilised countries pick and choose which tyrants to attack... There is more to this than merely 'protecting' innocents
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.
"We cannot stand idly by when a tyrant tells his people there will be no mercy," he said.
Modern Elmo wrote,
Why do you say that? French forces have been involved in Afghanistan for quite some time now. Mirage 2000, Mirage F1, Super Etendard and Rafale with support aircraft have been providing close air support for years now. Other French forces have also been involved in Afghanistan.
TJ
Seriously, this Libyan business may be a useful image-changing event for French armed forces.
TJ
I've heard rumors about a French MIG 23 down?!? Anyone heard anything about something? French MIG 23???
Sablatnic,
French forces don't operate any MiGs. The MiG-23 was earlier today over Benghazi. It is believed that it was a rebel operated MiG-23. See previous post in this thread.
Libyan state TV has stated that a French warplane has been shot down. The French defence ministry have stated that all aircraft are safe and none are missing.
TJ
French forces don't operate any MiGs. The MiG-23 was earlier today over Benghazi. It is believed that it was a rebel operated MiG-23. See previous post in this thread.
Libyan state TV has stated that a French warplane has been shot down. The French defence ministry have stated that all aircraft are safe and none are missing.
TJ
I know that. That was the reason for all my ???'s.
It could have been a Mirage F1. Are they still using them?
It could have been a Mirage F1. Are they still using them?
pr00ne,
As a British citizen I agree with your sentiment that the UK should try to act as a "force for good" (a phrase lifted from the UK military's mission statement, in fact). However, the reality is that last year's National Security Strategy only listed threats which directly affected our hard-headed national interest. Our force structures and funding levels have been based on its assumptions through the medium of SDSR.
Imagine if this had kicked off a few weeks later - perhaps post-PR11? We would have had no Nimrod R1, possibly fewer VC10s, possibly no GR4s beyond those committed to the HERRICK cycle, possibly no Typhoons due to lack of F3 cover at home, no HMS Cumberland...
I guess my point is that if we are going to retain this level of capability to perform forced interventions outside of the direct national interest, we need to state it in the National Security Strategy; after all, human rights abuses by dictators are far more common than many of the other threats listed therein. This would affect the priority applied to the relevant capabilities in our defence reviews - and would enable the appropriate arms to be funded accordingly.
As a British citizen I agree with your sentiment that the UK should try to act as a "force for good" (a phrase lifted from the UK military's mission statement, in fact). However, the reality is that last year's National Security Strategy only listed threats which directly affected our hard-headed national interest. Our force structures and funding levels have been based on its assumptions through the medium of SDSR.
Imagine if this had kicked off a few weeks later - perhaps post-PR11? We would have had no Nimrod R1, possibly fewer VC10s, possibly no GR4s beyond those committed to the HERRICK cycle, possibly no Typhoons due to lack of F3 cover at home, no HMS Cumberland...
I guess my point is that if we are going to retain this level of capability to perform forced interventions outside of the direct national interest, we need to state it in the National Security Strategy; after all, human rights abuses by dictators are far more common than many of the other threats listed therein. This would affect the priority applied to the relevant capabilities in our defence reviews - and would enable the appropriate arms to be funded accordingly.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Overlooking the beach, NZ
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All forces deploying over seas have to take the following quiz, a bit like a recce quiz.
Charlie Sheen v Muammar Gaddafi: whose line is it anyway? | World news | guardian.co.uk
Charlie Sheen v Muammar Gaddafi: whose line is it anyway? | World news | guardian.co.uk
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So far on the news all I have seen is an aircraft flown by the rebel’s crash. A lot of people are saying that the peace fire has been broken………but by whom.
A few other points, as shown on the news:
What is the difference between the civilians on Gadhafi’s side, to the civilians on the rebel’s side? If you watch ALL of the news reports you will see that Col G does have a fair amount of civilian support. And don’t tell me it is all propaganda from Gadhafi.
Is this fight to give people democracy? Is it to save civilian lives? What the hell is it about? We really are sticking our noses into an internal problem this time and using terms such as civilian casualties and democracy to justify it.
Finally, by the way 52 more civilians in Yemen and a further 10 in Bahrain killed today. These are the same civilians who are demonstrating because they want democracy.
Don’t get me wrong Gaddafi is yet another evil man that needs to go, but we are doing this all the wrong way.
Pr00ne
Yes they are, it just so happens that it is on a slightly smaller scale and the countries involved happen to be friends with us. Oh and half of the African states, but we also choose to do nothing about that.
A few other points, as shown on the news:
What is the difference between the civilians on Gadhafi’s side, to the civilians on the rebel’s side? If you watch ALL of the news reports you will see that Col G does have a fair amount of civilian support. And don’t tell me it is all propaganda from Gadhafi.
Is this fight to give people democracy? Is it to save civilian lives? What the hell is it about? We really are sticking our noses into an internal problem this time and using terms such as civilian casualties and democracy to justify it.
Finally, by the way 52 more civilians in Yemen and a further 10 in Bahrain killed today. These are the same civilians who are demonstrating because they want democracy.
Don’t get me wrong Gaddafi is yet another evil man that needs to go, but we are doing this all the wrong way.
Pr00ne
No other country is attacking their own civilian population like Gadaffi is
Last edited by SRENNAPS; 19th Mar 2011 at 22:42.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike
"100+ Tomahawks 24 hours after a UN resolution? There's a signal there somewhere.
Although I'm uncertain regarding the long term political objectives."
Yep, the US doesn't like him and unlike Blair, didn't "forget the past" and cuddle up to him.
"100+ Tomahawks 24 hours after a UN resolution? There's a signal there somewhere.
Although I'm uncertain regarding the long term political objectives."
Yep, the US doesn't like him and unlike Blair, didn't "forget the past" and cuddle up to him.
Is this fight to give people democracy? Is it to save civilian lives? What the hell is it about?
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How long before ground troops are needed to police the inevitable ceasefire??