Libyan Uprising - Page 110

As for your last quote... what defines "its" country. The rebels were able to topple Tripoli's power in several different cities. Should we therefore partition it? (and prevent the rebel forces in one city from aiding neighboring cities?)

Perhaps I should counter with
"If a government is unable to defend itself from foreign aggression, then it is wrong to say it can rule the country"[not saying I'd totally agree with that statement, but It is just as good as your quote]

And as for your mercenary comment, it is possible to be a principled mercenary. How many soldiers in the Egyptian(or any) army would fight without pay?

Do you think if Any country was invaded that the army might not pull some of their forces back from towns that it might not be able to defend successfully, so as to more successfully defend others?

Basically Group A is getting involved in a dispute between Groups B and C. instead of between groups D and E.

Members of group A could have MULTIPLE reasons for choosing one and not the other.
The fact that one involvent is apparently easier to get involved in (costs them less) the fact that in one dispute they are less neutral about the result (either because they in principle support one side more OR stand to gain more from one side) OR because they believe they can have a bigger imapct on the result.

All of those factors come into play.

As for armed political parties... that is good, as long as they are not using those arms. Unless those arms Need to be used to get a better government.

"If a government cannot secure the peaceful support of an armed populace, then it is wrong to say it can rule the country" [not saying I'd totally agree with that statement, but It is just as good as your quote]

Changes in government really stink... but that is a subdivision of the rule that ALL change is bad, the only benefit is that you can't have something better without change.
However, I definitely agree that extending the degree of involvement to ground troops in Libya would be a BAD idea (partition Might be Far better..ironically given his suggestion for Switzerland).

TRIPOLI, Libya – NATO fighter jets struck three ports in bombing runs overnight, targeting Moammar Gadhafi's navy in an effort to protect the nearby rebel-held port of Misrata, NATO said Friday. It was the broadest attack on Libya's naval forces since the alliance joined the conflict.

One bombing run hit the main port of Tripoli, where reporters could see flames and smoke rising above the stricken warship into the night sky. Other targets were the Khoms port, between Tripoli and Misrata, and Sirte, east of the city.

In Brussels, NATO confirmed that its warplanes targeted the ports and accused Libya of using its ships in the escalating conflict, including attempts to mine the harbor in Misrata. Rebels trying to end the nearly 40-year rule of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi have been struggling to hold Misrata against repeated attacks by Gadhafi's forces.

British Maj. Gen. John Lorimer, a communications officer, said British warplanes hit two Libyan corvette warships in the Khoms harbor and "successfully targeted a facility in the dockyard constructing fast inflatable boats, which Libyan forces have used several times in their efforts to mine Misrata and attack vessels in the area."

He said the port was the nearest concentration of regime warships to the port of Misrata, which Gadhafi has repeatedly attempted to close to humanitarian shipping.

On May 17 2011 04:59 Fattah wrote:


Do Everything= only the fool will say that
Do Everything or Do Nothing=unless a fool, only the coward will say that (to provide an excuse for doing nothing)]

They have to do everything or nothing.



You are definitely correct. You say it is aggression not peacekeeping, maybe that's not the point and I understand. Similarly the rebels are not able to defend their country from foreign aggression because Gaddafi is using mercenaries and they can't handle it.



I'm sorry I totally disagree with this point. Fighting someone for your land is different from fighting someone for someone else' land. Defense is the opposite of offense. If it is a war between 2 nations, then yes you will have to take sides. But, in a civil war no one should get involved, other than mediating and actual peace keeping(as opposed to selectively bombing targets).



Of course, that is what the reserve is for. Having your reserve be of other nationalities...... let's not repeat ourselves.



All or nothing, I'm sorry. Peacekeeping is peacekeeping. If they want they will. Do you mean to tell me that after all these years of diplomacy with all the countries in the world and all the technology the US/NATO have, they can't find reasons to be everywhere? Or is there one underlying reason for mostly all interventions by these countries?



Armed political parties is definitely not good. Far from it. Politics and guns is recipe for disaster.
Arms are need to change the government, well that's either a war or a coup. These rebels were not in political parties. They were peaceful protestors who in response to being shot at, attacked army barracks and got armed and flipped the equation from peaceful protests to a civil war.

As for your second quote, look at Iraq and Afghanistan. These governments are still there because it "the occupations government" no more no less. You are correct. If you can't keep your country in peace then you should look for something else to do other than governing your country. Half of Africa's governments should go, but no one is even considering "peacekeeping" because these governments supply US/NATO countries with everything they need, and if changed they might lose a lot. Somalia, that guy was an Islamist warlord who became president for some shady reasons.



Disagree with partitioning. Just like I do in the Sudan case, but that is an internal matter, not an occupation saying so(see Iraq).

Catherine Ashton, the European Union foreign policy chief, has pledged support for Libya's rebels during her first visit to the opposition stronghold of Benghazi.

Ashton became the highest-ranking foreign diplomat to visit the city since the revolt against longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi began in mid-February.

She toured the waterfront courthouse square where thousands of people in February called for Gaddafi's ousting and came under fire from army and security forces.

The square has become the public heart of the protest movement in Benghazi and is covered in memorials for those who have died in the conflict.

Ashton opened an EU diplomatic mission in the city of around 700,000 people, which stood on the brink of street warfare two months ago, before international air strikes forced the retreat of troops loyal to Gaddafi.

Speaking to Al Jazeera in Benghazi on Sunday, Ashton said: "We are here to support them [the rebels] for the long term.

"What I was really interested to discuss with people, with them [the rebels] and with groups of people I've met, women's groups, young people I've met, people from the media here, and so on, is the kind of things they're looking for.

"Some of it is about capacity building, the ability to be able to build the institutions that don't exist, having a political process that's going to last by having [a] political parties system, whatever they decide.

"Also things like security and border management, really practical ways in which people can feel secure here."

On May 21 2011 07:02 elitesniper420 wrote:
To me Gaddafi is a hero. The West came to Libya for profit, Gaddafi understands that and is simply doing what he can to not be destroyed by these countries. The rebellion has always been minor, Libya was a peaceful country and flourished under Gaddafi as Gaddafi was a major asset in improving Africa from the shithole it is. He even built a giant Water pipeline to create self-sufficiency in Africa.


The same thing happened in Iraq, except Saddam let the US into his country until they destroyed it. Libya had the same chance but Gadaffi chose the right thing to do and fought against the US. Now the West is desperately trying to fuel a propaganda campaign in order to take control of Libya's industries, but so far it isn't working to its full extent.

BENGHAZI, Libya – Libyan rebels clashed Wednesday with Sudanese mercenaries fighting for Moammar Gadhafi near the border with Sudan, as President Barack Obama predicted the Libyan leader would be forced to step down if NATO keeps up its military campaign with the U.S. playing a key role.

Speaking at a news conference in London, Obama said the U.S.-led NATO coalition was engaged in "a slow, steady process in which we're able to wear down the regime forces."

"There will not be a let up in the pressure we are applying" on Gadhafi, Obama said. "I believe that we have built enough momentum that as long as we sustain the course we're on, he will step down."

Government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim reacted angrily to Obama's assertion, saying "Gadhafi's destiny, Gadhafi's future, is for the Libyan nation to decide."

"It would be a much more productive statement to say that the Libyan people need to engage in an inclusive peaceful democratic transparent political process in which they can chose the shape of their political system and the leaders of their system," he said.

The Libyan Ambassador to European Union, Elhadi Ehdeba, has defected and joined the opposition.

Medvedev told reporters from the G8 summit in France on Friday that Gaddafi "should leave".

"If Gaddafi makes this decision, which will be beneficial for the country and the people of Libya, then it will be possible to discuss the form of his departure, what country may accept him and on what terms, and what he may keep and what he must lose," Medvedev told reporters.

Previous attempts at mediation by the African Union, Turkey and the United Nations have collapsed upon Gaddafi's refusal to leave and the opposition's refusal to accept anything less.

Russia, which has previously criticised NATO's involvement in Libya, is possibly in a position to end the conflict, although some analysts are sceptical of its level of influence, given Gaddafi's resistance to other mediation attempts and insistence on maintaining power throughout the conflict.

More local powers were unconvinced by any real potential for change through Russia's mediation.

Secret channels are being opened between the Libyan government of Muammar Gaddafi and British representatives over a possible ceasefire, sources have told Al Jazeera.

Abdelati al-Obeidi, the Libyan deputy foreign minister, who has been leading the government's diplomacy after Musa Kousa, the foreign minister, defected, gave hints on Saturday to Al Jazeera's James Bays about the secret talks to end the war.

The Al Jazeera correspondent, who spoke to al-Obeidi on a flight to the southern Tunisian town of Djerba, said the Libyan official was quite guarded in his approach and said that "he really was not authorised to tell me what had taken place at this meeting".

"The deputy foreign minister did admit that he had come for talks which have been taking place with British officials. He could not say what the talks were about but did say it was an exchange of views and a channel of communication being opened by them," he said.

Though he denied that there was any talk of an exit strategy for Gaddafi, he said the government was willing to talk to the opposition in Benghazi, our correspondent said.

He quoted al-Obeidi as saying: "We want to end this war and we want to end soon."

"It is an indication of British agenda playing quite a leading role here, and in this behind-the-scene process, probably British diplomats or members of MI6 may be involved. Remember they [MI6] were also involved in Kousa's defection about two months ago," our correspondent said.

ROME — Eight top Libyan army officers, including five generals, who have defected from Moammar Gadhafi's regime appealed to their fellow officers Monday to join the revolt to hasten the end of Gadhafi's 40-year rule.

Italian Foreign Ministry officials presented the generals, two colonels and a major to reporters in Rome three days after they fled Libya.

One of the officers, Gen. Melud Massoud Halasa, estimated that Gadhafi's military forces are now "only 20 percent as effective" as what they were before the revolt broke out in mid-February, and that "not more than 10" generals remain loyal to Gadhafi.

Former Libyan Foreign Minister Abdel Rahman Shalgam, who now backs the anti-Gadhafi rebels, told the news conference that the eight officers are "part of 120 officials who left and abandoned Gadhafi and are now out of Libya."

A U.N. resolution justifies the targeting of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, a senior NATO military official with operational knowledge of the Libya mission told CNN Thursday.

Asked by CNN whether Gadhafi was being targeted, the NATO official declined to give a direct answer. The resolution applies to Gadhafi because, as head of the military, he is part of the control and command structure and therefore a legitimate target, the official said.

NATO has been ramping up pressure on the regime, employing helicopters last weekend for the first time against Gadhafi's forces. Explosions are heard often in Tripoli, evidence of allied air strikes.

NATO began bombing Libya on March 31, under a U.N. mandate to protect civilians who have been targeted by Gadhafi's military.

Resolution 1973 said allied forces could use "all necessary measures" to protect civilians.

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Wednesday it is time to start planning for what to do in Libya after Gadhafi's departure "because Gadhafi's reign of terror is coming to an end."

On June 10 2011 18:44 FREEloss_ca wrote:
I can't stand watching US media coverage of this senseless war. If anyone thinks this is solely a humanitarian effort, you're a fool. This is the same bullshit as Iraq, and it's being fueled by Western propaganda.

On June 10 2011 22:55 3Form wrote:
One of the reasons that the UK has been so proactive in all this is because 'wet-behind-the-ears' Cameron wants to muscle his way onto the world stage and establish himself as a key player.

What a farce. The Libyan uprising was a useful casus belli for the west, nothing more.