No-fly zone over Libya

[STURM]

Maybe this is one of the rare cases of politicians saying one thing, but actually doing something else..........?

It certainly is and IMO was driven by military and political factors on the ground.

The UN resoulution enabling intervention called for all ''measures needed to protect civillians'' which technically would include toppling Libya's government if needed. Until only about a week ago however,there were no public calls for a 'regime change' by the main countries that pushed for intervention - U.K. and France, nor by the U.S., only 3-4 days ago Obama said that whilst an intervention was neccessary, toppling Gaddafi by force was not a good idea. Like everyone here, I support measures being taken to safeguard Libyan non-combatants but remain concerned what the end-game is and whether enough thought has been given to the equally vital political aspect as to what will happen after Gadaffi is gone.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

If you have any references that show 'Regime Change' was publicly mentioned at the early stages of the intervention, please provide them and I will gladly admit that I'm mistaken......

As I showed you very clearly, no later than 11 March countries were saying that Gaddafi had to go. That is showing that they wanted the regime to change before intervention started.

Here's another one for you.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12735656

Mr Cameron, who attended an EU meeting on the country's crisis on Friday, said his fellow leaders were "crystal clear" Col Muammar Gaddafi should go.

 

[DarthAmerica]

Collateral

See below...

NATO investigates report of coalition airstrike on Libyan rebels – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs

-DA

 

[Feanor]

See below...

NATO investigates report of coalition airstrike on Libyan rebels – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs

-DA

It's started.

 

[H Nelson]

Alright, here we go again.... When plans about the no fly zone were first circulated and when it was actually carried out, none of the countries that pushed for the no fly zone mentioned anything about regime change. The public impression they gave through numerous statements was that they were willing to see Qadhaffi stay in power as long there was a halt in hostilities and a halt in civilian deaths. The emphasis was on preventing attacks on civilians NOT on securing a change of regime. If you have any references that show 'Regime Change' was publicly mentioned at the early stages of the intervention, please provide them and I will gladly admit that I'm mistaken......

Agreed (in part). It's not tough to change a regime, its just tough to change a regime to something you prefer. To do it right, you need ground troops, and the US is firmly against sending ground troops. And I can't imagine we would do it under the auspices of NATO, either.

But we have heard POTUS say that Gadhafi must go. So now what? Do we sit around and pray for it?

Eventually, Gadhafi will die. Maybe it'll be an American bomb or a mob, but he will die. Then there will be chaos as Libyan Factions vie for control. How will we prevent humanitarian disasters then?

 

[swerve]

It's started.

The rebels seem to have accepted it as just one of those things. One of their commanders is putting it down to the fog of war.

I expect that the next rebel dickhead to get over-excited & start shooting an AA gun into the air is going to be dragged off it double quick & knocked around until he sees sense.

 

[DarthAmerica]

The rebels seem to have accepted it as just one of those things. One of their commanders is putting it down to the fog of war.

I expect that the next rebel dickhead to get over-excited & start shooting an AA gun into the air is going to be dragged off it double quick & knocked around until he sees sense.

It's not the rebels who need to accept it, it's the populations local and abroad. That's not going to happen if this conflict is prolonged.

-DA

 

[swerve]

There've been two incidents reported in three days: this 'friendly fire' incident, & collateral damage from an ammunition lorry exploding when hit in an air raid. The local population seems to have shrugged & said "Better than having Gaddafi back". That will probably affect the attitudes of populations abroad.

 

[DarthAmerica]

There've been two incidents reported in three days: this 'friendly fire' incident, & collateral damage from an ammunition lorry exploding when hit in an air raid. The local population seems to have shrugged & said "Better than having Gaddafi back". That will probably affect the attitudes of populations abroad.

Shrugged? What are you basing that on?

-DA

 

[Feanor]

There've been two incidents reported in three days: this 'friendly fire' incident, & collateral damage from an ammunition lorry exploding when hit in an air raid. The local population seems to have shrugged & said "Better than having Gaddafi back". That will probably affect the attitudes of populations abroad.

I think it's too soon to make a judgment call. I'd wait and give it a little more time to start to gauge the reaction.

 

[swerve]

Shrugged? What are you basing that on?

-DA

Reported comments in the press, Libyans interviewed on TV, etc. They're unhappy about the deaths, but seem to have been queuing up to say "Don't stop the bombing." Even the family which is said to have lost three daughters is reported (how accurately I have no idea) that despite their grief they want the bombing to continue. One tired looking doctor who'd just been patching up wounded said to camera that they were saying that they wanted the bombing to carry on.

 

[DarthAmerica]

Reported comments in the press, Libyans interviewed on TV, etc. They're unhappy about the deaths, but seem to have been queuing up to say "Don't stop the bombing." Even the family which is said to have lost three daughters is reported (how accurately I have no idea) that despite their grief they want the bombing to continue. One tired looking doctor who'd just been patching up wounded said to camera that they were saying that they wanted the bombing to carry on.

Thats in no way a representative sample size. Also, Libyans aren't going to hear about this the way you did. They'll get the story word of mouth and via state TV/radio. How do you think the report will be presented? They will say the strikes killed only pregnant women, children and preachers. As I said, this will take a toll during any kind of prolonged conflict. Propaganda works. Just look at the thread title...

-DA

 

[STURM]

As I showed you very clearly, no later than 11 March countries were saying that Gaddafi had to go. That is showing that they wanted the regime to change before intervention started.

All right, so I was mistaken. The no fly zone was implemented not only to prevent attacks on civillians but also in the hope that conditions would be created that would lead to either Gaddafi stepping down or his overthrow. So in essence, the message is that if a ruler of government of a sovereign country uses military force to put down a rebellion by his citizens, the international community will use '' "all necessary measures", including 'regime change' to rectify the situation.

Let's hope that there will be no double standards and 'selective' interventions and that the same rules will apply to citizens of other countries, should the same scenario occur there.......

Reported comments in the press, Libyans interviewed on TV, etc. They're unhappy about the deaths, but seem to have been queuing up to say "Don't stop the bombing." Even the family which is said to have lost three daughters is reported (how accurately I have no idea) that despite their grief they want the bombing to continue.

Robert Fisk: Remember the civilian victims of past 'Allied' bombing campaigns - Robert Fisk, Commentators - The Independent

Quote - Over the years, I got to known the Ghosain family in Beirut, wrote about them, went out to lunch with them, visited their home where their daughter's wonderful paintings still hang. I got to know the parents, and also Kinda, who has since married. But it was with some trepidation that I called them yesterday. Mrs Ghosain answered the phone. "I hope they get him this time," she said. And I asked, timidly, if she meant the man with the moustache. Colonel Gaddafi has a moustache. Mr Obama does not. "Yes," she said. "I mean Ghazzefi." "Ghazzefi" is the Lebanese Arabic pronunciation of the man's name.

 

[T.C.P]

Reported comments in the press, Libyans interviewed on TV, etc. They're unhappy about the deaths, but seem to have been queuing up to say "Don't stop the bombing." Even the family which is said to have lost three daughters is reported (how accurately I have no idea) that despite their grief they want the bombing to continue. One tired looking doctor who'd just been patching up wounded said to camera that they were saying that they wanted the bombing to carry on.

One of the biggest pieces of Propaganda.

 

[swerve]

Thats in no way a representative sample size. Also, Libyans aren't going to hear about this the way you did. They'll get the story word of mouth and via state TV/radio. How do you think the report will be presented? They will say the strikes killed only pregnant women, children and preachers. As I said, this will take a toll during any kind of prolonged conflict. Propaganda works. Just look at the thread title...

-DA

You're saying that Libyans will get this story via state TV? What world do you live in? Have you never heard of satellite? Do you not realise that it's practically universal there? And in the east, they can't even receive state TV except via satellite, since the local transmitters are under rebel control.

 

[DarthAmerica]

You're saying that Libyans will get this story via state TV? What world do you live in? Have you never heard of satellite? Do you not realise that it's practically universal there? And in the east, they can't even receive state TV except via satellite, since the local transmitters are under rebel control.

Are you sure? The level of conviction in your post suggest first hand knowledge. Or are you speculating again? Because first of all, I didn't say anything about the distribution of satellite TV. Second, it too is under the influence of the government.

Media rights body Reporters Without Borders has said press freedom is "virtually non-existent" in Libya, with self-censorship being commonplace.
The state strictly controls the media. Non-governmental media were authorized in 2007, leading to the launch of newspapers and a satellite TV by a company affiliated to one of Colonel Gaddafi's sons. But in 2009, these outlets were nationalized.
The Libyan Jamahiriyah Broadcasting Corporation is the state broadcaster. Pan-Arab satellite TVs are widely watched.
The main newspapers are state controlled. Some international publications are available, but the authorities routinely censor them. Few press visas are issued to foreign journalists.
There were 323,000 internet users by September 2009. Web filtering is selective, focusing on political opposition websites.

Libyan opposition launches TV channel with Qatar | World | RIA Novosti

Now that your strawman is dead, let's get back to what I'm trying to explain to you. By the way, this is first person experience. You cannot wage an air campaign without collateral damage. That's just the nature of throwing explosives around from near supersonic platforms at thousands of feet. You also cannot continue to inflict this on a local population without negative results. Especially in countries like Libya where the government gets the last word on what happened. Finally, let's keep statements like "rebel control" in context. In fact let me explain what the rebels are.

The rebels are little more than groups of armed mobs with little or no coordination, command and control or established logistics. That's why Gaddafi can at will brush them aside. Any "control" they have at present is by virtue of Gaddafi's intentional shortening of his logistical tail in order to reduce vulnerability to air attack in this so called "no fly zone". Rather than occupy contested areas Gaddafi is attritting them via clandestine raids using civilian transportation which seriously complicates things from the air.

-DA

 

[Feanor]

It seems that the US is ending its participation in strikes against targets in Libya. So soon?

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: ÑØÀ ïðèíÿëè ðåøåíèå ïðåêðàòèòü âîåííóþ îïåðàöèþ ïðîòèâ Êàääàôè

 

[swerve]

Are you sure? The level of conviction in your post suggest first hand knowledge. Or are you speculating again? Because first of all, I didn't say anything about the distribution of satellite TV. Second, it too is under the influence of the government.

-DA

What are you on? How does Gaddafi control media in eastern Libya? How does he control Al-Jazeera (strongly anti-Gaddafi) & the numerous other non-Libyan Arabic-language satellite channels? Didn't you hear about attempts to jam Arabsat by Libya? Why would Gaddafi try to jam it, if it's under his influence? How does the government influence what is broadcast from satellites it has no share in? You've not thought it through - or noticed that the situation has changed.

You've also not read your own quote properly. "Pan-Arab satellite TVs are widely watched.". Indeed. Did you know the BBC broadcasts an Arabic TV channel, free to anyone with a satellite dish?

Libya Al Hurra (Benghazi-based, on Arabsat) & Libya Ahrar (based in & using facilities provided by Qatar, on Nilesat), & supposedly a third rebel channel, are broadcasting to Libya.

I noticed that you didn't say anything about the distribution of satellite TV. Exactly my point. You ignored it. You also ignored the fact that Gaddafi's writ does not run in almost half the country, & that TV transmitters there do not relay state TV. You ignored the status of the internet: the government is blocking it, but parts of eastern Libya have been reconnected via an Egyptian ISP. You ignored the universal (more subscriptions than people) mobile phone ownership, & the re-routing being done from eastern Libya to avoid government blocks on both mobiles & land lines. New radio stations have sprung up.

BTW, these 'armed mobs' are paying civil servants & running public services.

 

[DarthAmerica]

What are you on? How does Gaddafi control media in eastern Libya? How does he control Al-Jazeera (strongly anti-Gaddafi) & the numerous other non-Libyan Arabic-language satellite channels? Didn't you hear about attempts to jam Arabsat by Libya? Why would Gaddafi try to jam it, if it's under his influence? How does the government influence what is broadcast from satellites it has no share in? You've not thought it through - or noticed that the situation has changed.

You've also not read your own quote properly. "Pan-Arab satellite TVs are widely watched.". Indeed. Did you know the BBC broadcasts an Arabic TV channel, free to anyone with a satellite dish?

Libya Al Hurra (Benghazi-based, on Arabsat) & Libya Ahrar (based in & using facilities provided by Qatar, on Nilesat), & supposedly a third rebel channel, are broadcasting to Libya.

I noticed that you didn't say anything about the distribution of satellite TV. Exactly my point. You ignored it. You also ignored the fact that Gaddafi's writ does not run in almost half the country, & that TV transmitters there do not relay state TV. You ignored the status of the internet: the government is blocking it, but parts of eastern Libya have been reconnected via an Egyptian ISP. You ignored the universal (more subscriptions than people) mobile phone ownership, & the re-routing being done from eastern Libya to avoid government blocks on both mobiles & land lines. New radio stations have sprung up.

BTW, these 'armed mobs' are paying civil servants & running public services.

Swerve,

What am I on? Reality is what I'm on. I'm not trying to will the situation I want rather than the situation that is. Get this "the East" out of your mind because that is not how it is. Also stop trying to will the rebels into being a coherent fighting force. They are not. Bottom line is that you cannot fight this war from the air and not expect collateral and that the collateral will be used against you.

Finally, there is a huge gulf between generalship and logistics when compared to running a power plant in the context of war. That's why we do so much to train professional armies. The rebels aren't even the quality of a drafted conscript army.

-DA

 

[swerve]

Your reality is distinctly odd. You ignore anything inconvenient. Your conviction that Gaddafi has total control over the flow of information in the entire territory of Libya, for example, is bizarrely at odds with reality.

Given that, it's hard to take anything else you say seriously: "falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus".