LIBYA (Merged) Use this thread ONLY
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Europe trying to enjoy retirement “YES”
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great stuff and well done to the girls and boys involved. However back to the commitment to hit and kill targets and the clearance to do so. Sorry presently do not see that commitment and see indecision.
My theory is that the lull in missions was because the coalition began fretting over what would happen if the rebels attempted to enter and take Sirte. As a consequence we have cut them loose over the past two days.
From what I can ascertain the fighting appears to be taking place up and down the narrow corridor of the coastal highway. Gaddafi's forces seem well able to counter this - they know there's no danger the rebels will attempt to flank them, given their lack of training and equipment.
From what I can ascertain the fighting appears to be taking place up and down the narrow corridor of the coastal highway. Gaddafi's forces seem well able to counter this - they know there's no danger the rebels will attempt to flank them, given their lack of training and equipment.
Caspian237,
No problem. Here are some image links of the RAF WSO on exchange. The aircraft is a Mirage 2000
RAF WSO on exchange with the French Air Force.
Links to images.
http://i53.tinypic.com/2mfjb6r.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/b8l6px.jpg
French technician checking a Mirage 2000.
http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/5143/x800z.jpg
TJ
No problem. Here are some image links of the RAF WSO on exchange. The aircraft is a Mirage 2000
RAF WSO on exchange with the French Air Force.
Links to images.
http://i53.tinypic.com/2mfjb6r.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/b8l6px.jpg
French technician checking a Mirage 2000.
http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/5143/x800z.jpg
TJ
"Why do we need an Army with all its technical kit?
All we need is a fleet of Toyotas with a few big guns attached, a handful of AKs and RPGs and Bobs your uncle. If untrained rebels can advance so well with just that kit being randomly fired into the air and a bit of air support, we can cutback on defence savings and hold out until our economy is better.
"
"It appears that lack of air sorties has allowed the Colonel's very own troops to send the rebels packing from Ras Lanuf. Sirte is apparently no longer under threat.
The Hope/Crosby "Road to Tripoli" film has been, as of this writing, delayed.
"
I guess these two post (extracts) were ironic.
To anyone remembering some military history this is all looking reminiscent of the 'Benghazi Handicap races' of WW2. Ground gained doesn't matter much in territory like this - it's the 'army in being' that counts, and the length of the vulnerable supply line. Hmm. Hooks around coastal strip strongpoints anyone? Come back the LRDG - or of course their successors.....
All we need is a fleet of Toyotas with a few big guns attached, a handful of AKs and RPGs and Bobs your uncle. If untrained rebels can advance so well with just that kit being randomly fired into the air and a bit of air support, we can cutback on defence savings and hold out until our economy is better.
""It appears that lack of air sorties has allowed the Colonel's very own troops to send the rebels packing from Ras Lanuf. Sirte is apparently no longer under threat.
The Hope/Crosby "Road to Tripoli" film has been, as of this writing, delayed.
"I guess these two post (extracts) were ironic.
To anyone remembering some military history this is all looking reminiscent of the 'Benghazi Handicap races' of WW2. Ground gained doesn't matter much in territory like this - it's the 'army in being' that counts, and the length of the vulnerable supply line. Hmm. Hooks around coastal strip strongpoints anyone? Come back the LRDG - or of course their successors.....
Why do we need an Army with all its technical kit
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dead_pan
I wonder what particular eventuality they were envisaged for, and whether they will ever be used in anger?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sydney, AU
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, Libya is going to be partitioned.
http://[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/....html?_r=1&hp]
http://[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/....html?_r=1&hp]
NATO Warns Rebels Against Attacking Civilians
....
The increasing murkiness of the battlefield, as the freewheeling rebels advance and retreat and as fighters from both sides mingle among civilians, has prompted NATO members to issue new “rules of engagement” spelling out when the coalition may attack units on the ground in the name of protecting civilians.
.....
The traditional laws of war distinguish between combatants, who may be lawfully attacked, and civilians, who generally must be protected. Civilians who pick up weapons and join in fighting can be lawfully attacked as long as they are directly participating in hostilities.
But the laws of war are vague about how to categorize internal rebels, rather than external enemies. And the recognized government of a country — even an internationally despised one like the Qaddafi government — is generally seen to have a right to use force to put down an armed insurrection, said David Glazier, a professor of national security law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.
....
The increasing murkiness of the battlefield, as the freewheeling rebels advance and retreat and as fighters from both sides mingle among civilians, has prompted NATO members to issue new “rules of engagement” spelling out when the coalition may attack units on the ground in the name of protecting civilians.
.....
The traditional laws of war distinguish between combatants, who may be lawfully attacked, and civilians, who generally must be protected. Civilians who pick up weapons and join in fighting can be lawfully attacked as long as they are directly participating in hostilities.
But the laws of war are vague about how to categorize internal rebels, rather than external enemies. And the recognized government of a country — even an internationally despised one like the Qaddafi government — is generally seen to have a right to use force to put down an armed insurrection, said David Glazier, a professor of national security law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With Europe running the show, this is looking more and more like a repeat of the Somali pirates fiasco.
We'll go to war... but not of it will hurt someone.
We'll support the rebels... but not if that might cause casualties to the other side.
Ohmigod! Some of the rebels aren't really nice people!!!! Quickly, withdraw support before unruly elements within the rebel ranks hurt civilians on the government side!
...and the people running Europe have only now come to the rather startling conclusion that, whichever side wins, there's going to be a flood of refugees seeking asylum? (Easy fix: partition the country so that no one wins and we can send any asylum seekers to whatever side they supported. [Yeah, right...])
We (the West) have become the laughing stock of the rest of the world.
We'll go to war... but not of it will hurt someone.
We'll support the rebels... but not if that might cause casualties to the other side.
Ohmigod! Some of the rebels aren't really nice people!!!! Quickly, withdraw support before unruly elements within the rebel ranks hurt civilians on the government side!
...and the people running Europe have only now come to the rather startling conclusion that, whichever side wins, there's going to be a flood of refugees seeking asylum? (Easy fix: partition the country so that no one wins and we can send any asylum seekers to whatever side they supported. [Yeah, right...])
We (the West) have become the laughing stock of the rest of the world.
So what do you suggest we do?
- Stand idly by, watch as there are civilian atrocities, do nothing.
- Invade the country & stay there for years fighting various insurgencies.
- Arm the 'rebels', train them, find out later that some arms were used in atrocities, some have gone 'missing'.
It's f' easy to criticise but absolutely no response that The West ever makes will please everybody, but we have an obligation, if we can help, to do so in the best way we possibly can. And that way will vary in every single case depending upon the local situation, the will of our governments, the political atmosphere at the time and our own public opinion.
I think, at the moment - we are doing the best we can.
- Stand idly by, watch as there are civilian atrocities, do nothing.
- Invade the country & stay there for years fighting various insurgencies.
- Arm the 'rebels', train them, find out later that some arms were used in atrocities, some have gone 'missing'.
It's f' easy to criticise but absolutely no response that The West ever makes will please everybody, but we have an obligation, if we can help, to do so in the best way we possibly can. And that way will vary in every single case depending upon the local situation, the will of our governments, the political atmosphere at the time and our own public opinion.
I think, at the moment - we are doing the best we can.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lord Toad, I choke over the point that if George Bush had done exactly what Barak Obama has done in Libya, there'd be tens of thousands of people out on the streets in western European (and US) cities protesting at his war mongering.
I have an even bigger problem with the way the West, ever since Korea, goes into such ventures half-arsed, placing self-imposed limitations on our armed forces that in the long run, cost far more lives (both to our forces and to the civilian population of the country involved) than a short, sharp, no holds barred action ever would.
I agree with what others have said before me, that supporting the Libyan rebels could really backfire on us, (forget 'could' - make that 'will'), because I don't believe we'll ever be thanked for it if they ever get the upper hand - and quite possibly, they'll turn out to be another Mujahadeen/Taliban a la Afghanistan, which could prove to be really interesting so close to western Europe. (Is there a modern day El Cid out there somewhere? We may well need him, and soon!)
If we're going to back the rebels, let's back them and destroy the Qaddafi regime - and more particularly, Qaddafi himself - and put a stop to all this bleeding heart rubbish about not harming anyone. Far fewer civilians will end up dead or injured in such a campaign than will certainly be killed or injured if this is allowed to go on for months or even years, as this softly softly European policy is almost guaranteeing.
I have an even bigger problem with the way the West, ever since Korea, goes into such ventures half-arsed, placing self-imposed limitations on our armed forces that in the long run, cost far more lives (both to our forces and to the civilian population of the country involved) than a short, sharp, no holds barred action ever would.
I agree with what others have said before me, that supporting the Libyan rebels could really backfire on us, (forget 'could' - make that 'will'), because I don't believe we'll ever be thanked for it if they ever get the upper hand - and quite possibly, they'll turn out to be another Mujahadeen/Taliban a la Afghanistan, which could prove to be really interesting so close to western Europe. (Is there a modern day El Cid out there somewhere? We may well need him, and soon!)
If we're going to back the rebels, let's back them and destroy the Qaddafi regime - and more particularly, Qaddafi himself - and put a stop to all this bleeding heart rubbish about not harming anyone. Far fewer civilians will end up dead or injured in such a campaign than will certainly be killed or injured if this is allowed to go on for months or even years, as this softly softly European policy is almost guaranteeing.
This fear of the Muslim rising up to kick our arses goes back to 1914-18 at least (probably farther still but I haven't read further back yet). It's getting rather tiring as the supposed raging fire that spreads from Africa, M.East to Europe never has happened other than a very few terrorist atrocities which while tragic are small potatoes compared to what we've done to each other over the years.
George Bush V Barack Obama? Not much difference -n the first got us into two wars, one totally unnecessary and the other still going on and Obama et al have no idea when it'll finish - been going on longer than both world wars now. So I'm going to suggest - if we went into Libya that once again we'd end up staying there for years - now if people think it's worth it - vote on it and do it. If it isn't - don't.
George Bush V Barack Obama? Not much difference -n the first got us into two wars, one totally unnecessary and the other still going on and Obama et al have no idea when it'll finish - been going on longer than both world wars now. So I'm going to suggest - if we went into Libya that once again we'd end up staying there for years - now if people think it's worth it - vote on it and do it. If it isn't - don't.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Hampshire
Age: 62
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andu,
Thats an interesting opinion. Heres an old article entitled "give war a chance" that maybe of interest..
"Since the establishment of the United Nations, great powers have rarely let small wars burn themselves out. Bosnia and Kosovo are the latest examples of this meddling. Conflicts are interrupted by a steady stream of cease-fires and armistices that only postpone war-induced exhaustion and let belligerents rearm and regroup. Even worse are U.N. refugee-relief operations and NGOs, which keep resentful populations festering in camps and sometimes supply both sides in armed conflicts. This well-intentioned interference only intensifies and prolongs struggles in the long run. The unpleasant truth is that war does have one useful function: it brings peace. Let it."
Give War a Chance | Foreign Affairs
Thats an interesting opinion. Heres an old article entitled "give war a chance" that maybe of interest..
"Since the establishment of the United Nations, great powers have rarely let small wars burn themselves out. Bosnia and Kosovo are the latest examples of this meddling. Conflicts are interrupted by a steady stream of cease-fires and armistices that only postpone war-induced exhaustion and let belligerents rearm and regroup. Even worse are U.N. refugee-relief operations and NGOs, which keep resentful populations festering in camps and sometimes supply both sides in armed conflicts. This well-intentioned interference only intensifies and prolongs struggles in the long run. The unpleasant truth is that war does have one useful function: it brings peace. Let it."
Give War a Chance | Foreign Affairs
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bury St. Edmunds
Age: 64
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lord Toad - I think what you are alluding to (in politically incorrect speak) is "The White Man's Burden". A throw-over of guilt from slavery and the legacy of Empire........
We're dammed if we do, and dammed if we don't. This leads to the desire to intervene everywhere to "right" the wrongs of earlier foreign policy mistakes. We feel it more as Brits but France, Belgium, Italy etc. still find it hard to leave their former colonial empire alone.
You only have to look at the multitude of ethnic populations resident in countries such as France, the Netherlands and Spain (not to mention the UK) to see what I mean. Not an easy problem to solve but neither we, nor our European neighbours, can provide a safe haven to the people displaced by internal disputes, civil wars and revolution - even in nations that border Europe.
If we feel that we can't ignore the injustices of the world around us, the only option is to try any help protect them in situ which UN resolution 1973 is all about.
IMHO, it's time for the UK to shed its historic legacy of Empire and interfere less on the world stage and not feel guilty any more about the past. Let the Arab world sort it own problems out for itself.
There's only one problem though - we still need their OIL.
MB
We're dammed if we do, and dammed if we don't. This leads to the desire to intervene everywhere to "right" the wrongs of earlier foreign policy mistakes. We feel it more as Brits but France, Belgium, Italy etc. still find it hard to leave their former colonial empire alone.
You only have to look at the multitude of ethnic populations resident in countries such as France, the Netherlands and Spain (not to mention the UK) to see what I mean. Not an easy problem to solve but neither we, nor our European neighbours, can provide a safe haven to the people displaced by internal disputes, civil wars and revolution - even in nations that border Europe.
If we feel that we can't ignore the injustices of the world around us, the only option is to try any help protect them in situ which UN resolution 1973 is all about.
IMHO, it's time for the UK to shed its historic legacy of Empire and interfere less on the world stage and not feel guilty any more about the past. Let the Arab world sort it own problems out for itself.
There's only one problem though - we still need their OIL.
MB
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Next door
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For national interest, read stability. For stability read growth.
All the other excuses are minor in comparison. The west (mainly UK and US, with Italy, Germany and France (who have separate issues and reasoning), didn't get to be world trading powers, by letting vast parts of the world descend into anarchy.
Why would the Arab nations, intervene, when either way they still have a commodity the world needs, and if it all goes pear shaped, they can point to the imperial ambitions of the west.
Now if a Gulf blockade happens, I wonder how soon China would start to vote with the west???
What really bugs me are the bleeding heart liberals who applaud when the west is accused of intervening because of oil, when the stability and freedoms they take for granted, are often because of intervention by the west, however ill conceived at times.
All the other excuses are minor in comparison. The west (mainly UK and US, with Italy, Germany and France (who have separate issues and reasoning), didn't get to be world trading powers, by letting vast parts of the world descend into anarchy.
Why would the Arab nations, intervene, when either way they still have a commodity the world needs, and if it all goes pear shaped, they can point to the imperial ambitions of the west.
Now if a Gulf blockade happens, I wonder how soon China would start to vote with the west???
What really bugs me are the bleeding heart liberals who applaud when the west is accused of intervening because of oil, when the stability and freedoms they take for granted, are often because of intervention by the west, however ill conceived at times.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: High in the Afghan Mountains
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surprise, surprise, BBC now reporting breaking news that 'civilians killed in NATO airstrikes'. Apparently some doctor says it happened so it must be true - thus we enter the traditional stage 3 of the Campaign
1. Start conflict because liberals decry antics of dictator
2. Media support 'Our Boys' in their heroic stand against badness in their gee whizz high tech kit (lasts approx 5-10 days)
3. Bad people claim that 'Our Boys' have killed the wrong people; media turn on 'Our Boys'; liberals decry 'interventionist' antics of Govt.
Who would have thought that Gaddafi would think to play a card like that? Who would have thought that our media would believe it????
1. Start conflict because liberals decry antics of dictator
2. Media support 'Our Boys' in their heroic stand against badness in their gee whizz high tech kit (lasts approx 5-10 days)
3. Bad people claim that 'Our Boys' have killed the wrong people; media turn on 'Our Boys'; liberals decry 'interventionist' antics of Govt.
Who would have thought that Gaddafi would think to play a card like that? Who would have thought that our media would believe it????
MoD released footage of the results of Storm Shadow against a bunkered ammunition storage facility at Sabha, Central Libya. Other Coalition aircraft were also involved in the destruction of this complex.
Ministry of Defence | Defence News | Military Operations | RAF and allies destroy Gaddafi ammunition bunkers
Google Map link to bunkered storage area in Libya.
sabha - Google Maps
TJ
Ministry of Defence | Defence News | Military Operations | RAF and allies destroy Gaddafi ammunition bunkers
Google Map link to bunkered storage area in Libya.
sabha - Google Maps
TJ
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
Rector
Expected, but what's interesting is that only a few days ago the BBC and other Media outlets were reporting that the Colonel was moving bodies into places hit by the Coalition to claim civvy deaths.
So now they have moved on to believing this rubbish.
.
Expected, but what's interesting is that only a few days ago the BBC and other Media outlets were reporting that the Colonel was moving bodies into places hit by the Coalition to claim civvy deaths.
So now they have moved on to believing this rubbish.
.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
So what do you suggest we do?
- Stand idly by, watch as there are civilian atrocities, do nothing.
- Invade the country & stay there for years fighting various insurgencies.
- Arm the 'rebels', train them, find out later that some arms were used in atrocities, some have gone 'missing'.
- Stand idly by, watch as there are civilian atrocities, do nothing.
- Invade the country & stay there for years fighting various insurgencies.
- Arm the 'rebels', train them, find out later that some arms were used in atrocities, some have gone 'missing'.
As mentioned above, plinking tanks gave the rebels the chance to advance, stop plinking them and they retreat.
The best solution would be the creation of a Green Zone with any combattants of either side prohibited.
The problem would be just where to establish the zone boundary and that it would create a defacto partition of the country much like the 19th Century boundaries.
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
Pontius
I feel that that action will just prolong the whole mess even longer
and put the whole country into a never ending scenario.
The Allies have the capability to surgically remove armour and / or artillery even in towns and when added to political pressure, could achieve the outcome desired.
I see the biggest problem being organization of the rebels which sometimes seems to show a flicker but most times none at all.
On another note - now the Libyan Minister is in the UK, i really hope they pressure him to give some decent answers regarding the PC Fletcher and Lockerbie - and other things.
I feel that that action will just prolong the whole mess even longer
and put the whole country into a never ending scenario.
The Allies have the capability to surgically remove armour and / or artillery even in towns and when added to political pressure, could achieve the outcome desired.
I see the biggest problem being organization of the rebels which sometimes seems to show a flicker but most times none at all.
On another note - now the Libyan Minister is in the UK, i really hope they pressure him to give some decent answers regarding the PC Fletcher and Lockerbie - and other things.
