LIBYA (Merged) Use this thread ONLY
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,868
Received 2,820 Likes
on
1,202 Posts
As this little exercise was only going to run a few months, but with William Vague now saying it is a long term thing ( Go Figure, as if we couldn't have seen that one coming!)
What will be the fate of the Grimrod R1 whose retirement was delayed for a couple of months whilst one dealt with Gadaffi, but one assumes it will still have a role to play until the replacement comes on line now? Is it getting re-extended?
What will be the fate of the Grimrod R1 whose retirement was delayed for a couple of months whilst one dealt with Gadaffi, but one assumes it will still have a role to play until the replacement comes on line now? Is it getting re-extended?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: thread creep. With the benefit of hindsight, history shows that - in war - the only way to deal effectively with the opposition is to use overwhelming firepower. If the ROE place restrictions on operations then irregular opposition operates at a level below which overwhelming firepower is engaged.
For Vietnam, the US could have blockaded the opposition at any time.
For the current conflict in Libya, a blockade of supplies to the Gaddafi forces in Misratah will defeat the Gaddafi forces.
For Vietnam, the US could have blockaded the opposition at any time.
For the current conflict in Libya, a blockade of supplies to the Gaddafi forces in Misratah will defeat the Gaddafi forces.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Europe trying to enjoy retirement “YES”
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks mike7*++
if you want to win you beat the living sh*t out of the opposition. Great stuff if you are the one having to dooo, unfortunately politics *tend to cloud the issue and bugger the master plan. I guess things have not changed over the last 45 years since I was given an impossible task and seemingly failed.
if you want to win you beat the living sh*t out of the opposition. Great stuff if you are the one having to dooo, unfortunately politics *tend to cloud the issue and bugger the master plan. I guess things have not changed over the last 45 years since I was given an impossible task and seemingly failed.
Guest
Posts: n/a
...the only way to deal effectively with the opposition is to use overwhelming firepower...
Mike, you weren't the Major who spoke with Peter Arnett at Ben Tre in '68 were you? He of the infamous, "It became necessary to destroy the town to save it'?
Perhaps the key, recurring issue is that there is no coherent political master plan
Perhaps the key issue is that you have no business being there in the first place.
Mike, you weren't the Major who spoke with Peter Arnett at Ben Tre in '68 were you? He of the infamous, "It became necessary to destroy the town to save it'?
Perhaps the key, recurring issue is that there is no coherent political master plan
Perhaps the key issue is that you have no business being there in the first place.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: any town as retired.
Posts: 2,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UAE F-16 Crash in Italy
The local news papers here in UAE report that a UAE F16 crashed on landing in Italy, on return from Lybia.
The crash as due to bad weather in Italy, the pilot ejected, and the aircraft was slightly damaged.
Q1) How long has UAE been inforcing the resolution.
Q2) Why eject from a servicable aircraft.
Glf
The crash as due to bad weather in Italy, the pilot ejected, and the aircraft was slightly damaged.
Q1) How long has UAE been inforcing the resolution.
Q2) Why eject from a servicable aircraft.
Glf
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike, you weren't the Major who spoke with Peter Arnett at Ben Tre in '68 were you? He of the infamous, "It became necessary to destroy the town to save it'?
Perhaps the key issue is that you have no business being there in the first place.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: airside
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question on Libyan airlines, as a Libyan from Benghazi I have spoken with the pilots etc, it is %100 that they will turn all Afriqiyah to Libyan airlines however I believe we have an airbus or 2 in France ready for delivery obviously with the current situation there is noway they will be delivered but I was wondering how easy will it be to just transfer these planes to the NTC in Benghazi when the NFZ and G is gone, or will they be repainted and delivered to another operator
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
omaaa, it depends if they have been paid for. Also if paid for by the Tripoli company they will have ownership and legal claim to the title even if the aircraft are not released to them.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: airside
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Libyan and Afriqiyah are both owned by the Libyan Afriqiyah holding company which is a gaddafi owned company like much of the country's businesses. I believe there is now a UN sanction on Afriqiyah. If they have been paid for can this be given to the new government? as well as the existing fleet which is in Tripoli airport?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: airside
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Libyans we very much doubt the killing of his son, he claimed his daughter Hana was killed by the US in the 80s, Hana attends Fatah uni everybody in Tripoli knows this, it may just be a ploy to reduce NATO strikes while the world discusses NATO's intentions. God knows best
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Ex-Krantanamo Bay Inmate
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF pilots denied danger money for Libya mission
Tom Coghlan Defence Correspondent
Last updated May 2 2011 12:00AM
British pilots flying combat missions over Libya will not receive the pay bonus for dangerous duties given to their colleagues in Afghanistan.
The Times understands that personnel were surprised and disappointed by the decision, not least because operations over Libya are seen as more dangerous for aircrew than those in theatres where the allowance is being paid.
The money was given in Iraq and is being paid in Afghanistan, according to a defence source. “It is a combination of danger money and recognition of service overseas,” the source said. “This is not the be-all and end-all but I’d love to know the justification for not paying it. It is disappointing and angers me because it seems to imply that [this] is not operational flying. The threat level is higher than in Afghanistan.”
Personnel flying Typhoon and Tornado jets on operations to enforce UN Resolution 1973, which authorises the use of force to protect civilians in Libya, have destroyed dozens of tanks, other armoured vehicles and artillery pieces used by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi since March 19.
In response, the Gaddafi Government has put up barrages of anti-aircraft artillery. The regime also possesses more than 216 surface-to-air missiles — possibly as many as 400. These include a long-range Soviet missile system, known to Nato as the SA-5A Gammon, which can shoot down aircraft at up to 150km range.The revelation follows a day of intense military and diplomatic activity in which:
- Libya claimed that a Nato airstrike on Colonel Gaddafi’s Tripoli compound had killed his youngest son and three grandchildren;
- Pro-Gaddafi mobs set fire to the UK and Italian diplomatic missions in Tripoli and the United Nations announced it was recalling its staff;
- Britain expelled Libya’s ambassador to London;
- Libyan government troops shelled the besieged port of Misrata as an aid ship attempted to unload food and medical supplies.
Personnel serving on Operation Herrick (Afghanistan), Operation Telic (Iraq) and Combined Task Force Iraqi Maritime (naval operations in the Gulf) all qualified for the extra “operational allowance”, as did personnel in the Balkans peacekeeping operations until 2007.
The allowance was increased from £14.51 a day to £29.02 for personnel in Afghanistan by David Cameron last June. This followed complaints that US troops received tax-free pay on operations and that Canadian, French and Australian forces all have bonus schemes for operational tours overseas. For personnel on a six-month tour it meant a tax-free £5,280.88 windfall on their return.
At the time Liam Fox, the Defence Secretary, said: “I am delighted that we have doubled the operational allowance for those of our troops who are engaged in the very highest areas of conflict. In doing so we have fulfilled a key commitment set out in our coalition Programme for Government.”
In a further effort to achieve deep cuts in defence spending, the Ministry of Defence has declared service personnel supporting the operation over Libya from Italy to be living in “field accommodation”. This means they do not qualify for allowances usually paid to those abroad, such as subsistence payments, saving the MoD about £600 a month per person.
Field deployment usually means that they are being fully catered for and living under canvas. However, the personnel are being put up in hotels near the Italian base of Gioia Del Colle.
When approached by The Times, the Ministry of Defence confirmed that the operational allowance was not being paid. An MoD statement said: “Operational allowance is paid to those service personnel on operations where they are working at high risk over a sustained period.”
However, it added that the policy could be changed if the risk was reassessed by Permanent Joint Headquarters. “The risk to those deployed on operations in Libya is kept constantly under review by PJHQ and, if it is judged appropriate, operational allowance will be paid.”
Last updated May 2 2011 12:00AM
British pilots flying combat missions over Libya will not receive the pay bonus for dangerous duties given to their colleagues in Afghanistan.
The Times understands that personnel were surprised and disappointed by the decision, not least because operations over Libya are seen as more dangerous for aircrew than those in theatres where the allowance is being paid.
The money was given in Iraq and is being paid in Afghanistan, according to a defence source. “It is a combination of danger money and recognition of service overseas,” the source said. “This is not the be-all and end-all but I’d love to know the justification for not paying it. It is disappointing and angers me because it seems to imply that [this] is not operational flying. The threat level is higher than in Afghanistan.”
Personnel flying Typhoon and Tornado jets on operations to enforce UN Resolution 1973, which authorises the use of force to protect civilians in Libya, have destroyed dozens of tanks, other armoured vehicles and artillery pieces used by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi since March 19.
In response, the Gaddafi Government has put up barrages of anti-aircraft artillery. The regime also possesses more than 216 surface-to-air missiles — possibly as many as 400. These include a long-range Soviet missile system, known to Nato as the SA-5A Gammon, which can shoot down aircraft at up to 150km range.The revelation follows a day of intense military and diplomatic activity in which:
- Libya claimed that a Nato airstrike on Colonel Gaddafi’s Tripoli compound had killed his youngest son and three grandchildren;
- Pro-Gaddafi mobs set fire to the UK and Italian diplomatic missions in Tripoli and the United Nations announced it was recalling its staff;
- Britain expelled Libya’s ambassador to London;
- Libyan government troops shelled the besieged port of Misrata as an aid ship attempted to unload food and medical supplies.
Personnel serving on Operation Herrick (Afghanistan), Operation Telic (Iraq) and Combined Task Force Iraqi Maritime (naval operations in the Gulf) all qualified for the extra “operational allowance”, as did personnel in the Balkans peacekeeping operations until 2007.
The allowance was increased from £14.51 a day to £29.02 for personnel in Afghanistan by David Cameron last June. This followed complaints that US troops received tax-free pay on operations and that Canadian, French and Australian forces all have bonus schemes for operational tours overseas. For personnel on a six-month tour it meant a tax-free £5,280.88 windfall on their return.
At the time Liam Fox, the Defence Secretary, said: “I am delighted that we have doubled the operational allowance for those of our troops who are engaged in the very highest areas of conflict. In doing so we have fulfilled a key commitment set out in our coalition Programme for Government.”
In a further effort to achieve deep cuts in defence spending, the Ministry of Defence has declared service personnel supporting the operation over Libya from Italy to be living in “field accommodation”. This means they do not qualify for allowances usually paid to those abroad, such as subsistence payments, saving the MoD about £600 a month per person.
Field deployment usually means that they are being fully catered for and living under canvas. However, the personnel are being put up in hotels near the Italian base of Gioia Del Colle.
When approached by The Times, the Ministry of Defence confirmed that the operational allowance was not being paid. An MoD statement said: “Operational allowance is paid to those service personnel on operations where they are working at high risk over a sustained period.”
However, it added that the policy could be changed if the risk was reassessed by Permanent Joint Headquarters. “The risk to those deployed on operations in Libya is kept constantly under review by PJHQ and, if it is judged appropriate, operational allowance will be paid.”