surpreme
Member
It wouldn't surprise me if it happen look at what at stake oil and its sweet at that. (Something to think about) I do need the oil so I can keep running my car Ha Ha Ha just a joke!!!!!!!
No-fly zone over Libya
- Thread starter lucinator
- Start date
Not to be conspiratorial or pessimistic but rather realistic, Europe has substantial economic interest in Libya that serves as incentive to see a favorable conclusion to the conflict. Much of what's driving various participation is a desire to be involved in dividing the spoils. That could involve "peacekeeping" forces under U.N. or other international authority. It's just semantics in the end...
-DA
And that's precisely why, apart from it being in a more sensitive area, there are no similiar calls to protect civilians in Syria from military force, despite the high toll in lives. And when Saudi sent military and para-military forces into Bahrain to help quell shiite demonstrations due to fears in would spread across their borders, the reaction from the State Department and EU spokesman was very restrained - which would not have been the case if say Libya had done the same with Tunisia. Its realpolitik at work.
There was never any doubt that airpower would take out a large part of Gadaffi's heavy weaponary. The hope was that in doing so, conditions could be created on the ground for the rebels to defeat the pro-Gadaffi forces and enter Tripoli, leading to the formation of a 'friendly' , 'moderate', 'democratic' government - and that hasn't happened yet. If the situation continues abd Gadaffi holds on to power, do the countries that are involved have the political will to stay on indefinitely?
Sturm,
Bahrain is different from Libya and elsewhere because it is a critical basing location for the USN and vital to the U.S. ME/Iran policy. Anything that affects it will be "managed" regardless of moral or humanitarian concerns.
-DA
Bahrain is different from Libya and elsewhere because it is a critical basing location for the USN and vital to the U.S. ME/Iran policy. Anything that affects it will be "managed" regardless of moral or humanitarian concerns.
-DA
surpreme
Member
I just read that French and British sending helicopter. The whole libya crisis just got to the point of setting up more support for the rebel. What next sending in Special Ops to help the rebels? It just seem like it getting closer to that now you have a French Naval Vessel off the coast with armor and troops. It like it not even a no-fly zone its to the point of assist the rebels in taken out Libyian leader or dictator what ever you want to call him. If you see it from a military point of view this is starting of something else. Correct me if Im wrong the French and the British are up to something??? I don't want to sound like some kind conspiracy theory it adding up be about the oil more and more. This just my opinion. What happen to the original plan to pervent Libya aircraft from bombing civilians.
Libyan Oil is very high quality, so yes it's all about the oil. With the scramble for natural resources becoming ever more intense having such a quality supplier close to Europe is a no brainer. BP, RDS & Total have big commercial interests in Libya. If the rebels fail those reserves will be going to China via CNOC.
Sending in more Helo's/CAS still falls within the UN resolution. I think the UK/France simply want to avoid a drawn out and ever more expensive conflict, surge now rather than commit for the long haul. The longer this goes on the more expensive it will become to get those pumps/pipe lines working again.
Another factor is the ongoing flood of refugees, the last thing European governments want/need is a massive influx of Libyan migrants. Immigration is a major electoral bone of contention, which is the elephant in the room for most sitting governments.
More civilians killed in NATO strikes-
NATO airstrikes kill 19 civilians in Tripoli - Libyan TV | World | RIA Novosti
NATO airstrikes kill 19 civilians in Tripoli - Libyan TV | World | RIA Novosti
Maybe - maybe not. We know that nothing Gaddafi or the official Libyan media say can be trusted. Foreign reporters have been shown clumsily faked supposed civilian death sites, for example, & shown 'civilian' injured in hospitals who are all fit young men, & there are reports of people who've died natural deaths being taken from morgues to be shown off as victims of air raids.
It appears that there have been multiple requests to the Russian government to act as a mediator in the conflict in Libya.
http://vz.ru/news/2011/5/26/494702.html
This is from the press-secretary of the president. This could mean 1) the coalition has figured out that they don't have the commitment of resources necessary to remore Gaddafi entirely or 2) a PR move by the Russian government (for internal consumption naturally) to feign some sort of involvement and/or significance to the Libyan situation.
Given a recent visit by a Libyan delegation to Moscow, both are possible.
http://vz.ru/news/2011/5/26/494702.html
This is from the press-secretary of the president. This could mean 1) the coalition has figured out that they don't have the commitment of resources necessary to remore Gaddafi entirely or 2) a PR move by the Russian government (for internal consumption naturally) to feign some sort of involvement and/or significance to the Libyan situation.
Given a recent visit by a Libyan delegation to Moscow, both are possible.
Libya just fired an ASM at an Italian warship. The missile missed the ship, and fell into the ocean.
ÂÇÃËßÄ / Èñòî÷íèê: Ëèâèÿ âûïóñòèëà ïî èòàëüÿíñêîìó ôðåãàòó ñîâåòñêóþ ðàêåòó
What's more worrying is that they still have that capability. You really have to wonder about the effectiveness of the NATO air campaign.
ÂÇÃËßÄ / Èñòî÷íèê: Ëèâèÿ âûïóñòèëà ïî èòàëüÿíñêîìó ôðåãàòó ñîâåòñêóþ ðàêåòó
What's more worrying is that they still have that capability. You really have to wonder about the effectiveness of the NATO air campaign.
Well, Hezbollah managed to hit an Israeli ship from a much smaller territory which had much more air and recce assets buzzing around.
Hiding a couple of AShMs in a semi-urban environment or driving them around in civilian trucks shouldn't be that difficult. Remember the lovely SCUD-hunts of the last decades or the search for the Serbian Army...
What I think is interesting is that the missile wasn't shot down but missed the target. Either it malfunctioned, couldn't track the target or a soft-kill system worked as intended. Is the range involved mentioned in the article?
Well obviously Lady Luck wasn't smiling for the Libyans. Had the ASM hit its intended target it would have been awkward for NATO, not to mention the loss of lives. Would be very interesting to find out if it was decoyed away by a soft kill or actually malfunctioned.
Does or did Libya have any land based ASMs apart from Styxs? What piece of equipment on a ship would warn the crew that is has been 'painted' by a missile systems search radar, wouldn't ESM provide warning or do naval ships have the equivalent of RWRs fitted on aircraft?
Does or did Libya have any land based ASMs apart from Styxs? What piece of equipment on a ship would warn the crew that is has been 'painted' by a missile systems search radar, wouldn't ESM provide warning or do naval ships have the equivalent of RWRs fitted on aircraft?
No. But it does say that it missed its target by two miles. Which really makes me wonder.
The missile was a P-15 Termit (SS-N-2 Styx). Also the article claims that the missile could have sank the ship even if it hadn't exploded, but simply hit the ship.
P-15 Termit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
SS-N-2 Styx has been around for ever. I'm pretty sure it would have made more than a dent into that Italian ship even if the warhead not worked. We would need more info, my first thought was it might not have had proper guidance, Libyans just kind of shot it in the general direction or maybe it just was out of range but they fired it anyways. This is a pretty old system so maybe it doesn't have the range it had when it was brand new.
SS-N-2 Styx has been around for ever. I'm pretty sure it would have made more than a dent into that Italian ship even if the warhead not worked. We would need more info, my first thought was it might not have had proper guidance, Libyans just kind of shot it in the general direction or maybe it just was out of range but they fired it anyways. This is a pretty old system so maybe it doesn't have the range it had when it was brand new.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Does not really matter whether the missiles hit the Italian or not. It's a challenge to the NATO by Khadafi's forces. They know the west now in the economic problem. They know very well that the western population now did not want to spend more on another military adventures, whether it's being package's as humanitarian rescue.
They simply going to say: "look your Air Campaign did not worked. We're still here. Either you faces us in the ground or make the deal with us"
They simply going to say: "look your Air Campaign did not worked. We're still here. Either you faces us in the ground or make the deal with us"
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Perhaps I've rephrase my meaning. It does not make difference in the term of the warning they want to convey. But it matter in term of Military threat they want to send. Whether they manage to sank or hit the Italian ship or not, the warning still the same, but off course if they manage to hit the ship it will be more dire the warning they send.
Still in my opinion the warning still the same: "we're still here, and nothing your air campaign can change that" in other word, put your soldier in the ground, or make deal with us.
The Italian navy has reported that there was no indication that the missile was aimed at any NATO ship. No self-defence measures were used or needed. It was observed by the patrol frigate Bersagliere (10 nautical miles offshore from Zlitan, where there is currently fighting between rebels & Gaddafistas) flying from the coast on a trajectory which was not threatening, & it was tracked until it landed harmlessly in the sea 2 km behind the ship. The language used suggests it was flying a ballistic trajectory.
The Russian claims that it was a P-15 are somewhat mysterious, since the only ship which spotted & tracked it did not identify it by type, & nor have Libyan reports. I suspect it's derived from the assumption that it was an anti-ship missile, because it was flying out to sea, & a look at what Libya has or is thought to have. It may just have been a misfired artillery rocket. The Italian defence ministry said one possibility is that it was a SAM, splashing down after missing a NATO aircraft.
A Libyan government spokesman firstly said it was an attack by Libyan forces, then retracted that & said there had been no attack. Given the quality of their news management, this tells us absolutely nothing.
In other news, rebels seized a Libyan government owned tanker carrying 30000 tons of petrol off Malta, & it docked at Benghazi yesterday.
The Russian claims that it was a P-15 are somewhat mysterious, since the only ship which spotted & tracked it did not identify it by type, & nor have Libyan reports. I suspect it's derived from the assumption that it was an anti-ship missile, because it was flying out to sea, & a look at what Libya has or is thought to have. It may just have been a misfired artillery rocket. The Italian defence ministry said one possibility is that it was a SAM, splashing down after missing a NATO aircraft.
A Libyan government spokesman firstly said it was an attack by Libyan forces, then retracted that & said there had been no attack. Given the quality of their news management, this tells us absolutely nothing.
In other news, rebels seized a Libyan government owned tanker carrying 30000 tons of petrol off Malta, & it docked at Benghazi yesterday.