|
Off topic discussion and argumentative back and forth will not be tolerated. |
Iran has warned Libya against the West's "colonial intentions" saying they were motivated by oil. Tehran has voiced support for the uprising against Gaddafi, part of what it considers an "Islamic awakening" in the Arab world. Despite this Iran expressed deep suspicion over Western military intervention in Libya.
French air operations are set to continue today as their planes remain in place.
UK forces targeted Libya's integrated air defence system yesterday, largely in the Tripoli area, according to an MoD briefing today. No further details were given.
|
On March 20 2011 19:51 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 17:11 furymonkey wrote:
Nah Pika Chu is right, we should approach all murders with open arms, we will use our heart and passion to win them over.
Edit: Lets modify all the guns to shoot out flowers instead of bullets. Drop bombs made out of cream filled chocolate on top of enemy position, only then, the violence will stop! Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 17:37 furymonkey wrote:
I am merely pointing out the fact that sometimes, violence can be used to stop more violence.
Whichever the case here, it is really a personal opinion, especially we are still yet to see the outcome. And it might take years before we can even decide. The key difference between regular murder and State ordered murder is that the latter can never gotten rid of. You think the would be rebel regime would not use violence against an uprising challenging their power?
Think about what you just wrote, regular murder can be getten rid of? I bet every governament on the planet is ready to hear your advice.
Now back to the context, yes State ordered murders will never dissappear, as well as regular murders.
But you sounded like every regime would use violence against an uprising. Lets just pretend that it's always the case, so your case stands. But that does not mean situation will be worse, or come close to the current one where death tolls are on the rise rapidly due to civil war.
A best case scenario would mean that some sort of democracy are installed, and people use votes to decide the governament. But even I doubt this will be achieved, along with your utopia idea where world with no regular murders.
|
On March 20 2011 20:38 furymonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 19:51 xarthaz wrote:On March 20 2011 17:11 furymonkey wrote:
Nah Pika Chu is right, we should approach all murders with open arms, we will use our heart and passion to win them over.
Edit: Lets modify all the guns to shoot out flowers instead of bullets. Drop bombs made out of cream filled chocolate on top of enemy position, only then, the violence will stop! On March 20 2011 17:37 furymonkey wrote:
I am merely pointing out the fact that sometimes, violence can be used to stop more violence.
Whichever the case here, it is really a personal opinion, especially we are still yet to see the outcome. And it might take years before we can even decide. The key difference between regular murder and State ordered murder is that the latter can never gotten rid of. You think the would be rebel regime would not use violence against an uprising challenging their power? Think about what you just wrote, regular murder can be getten rid of? I bet every governament on the planet is ready to hear your advice. Now back to the context, yes State ordered murders will never dissappear, as well as regular murders. But you sounded like every regime would use violence against an uprising. Lets just pretend that it's always the case, so your case stands. But that does not mean situation will be worse, or come close to the current one where death tolls are on the rise rapidly due to civil war. A best case scenario would mean that some sort of democracy are installed, and people use votes to decide the governament. But even I doubt this will be achieved, along with your utopia idea where world with no regular murders. When you put a murderer to jail, you substitute a worse state of affairs with a better one, in terms of amount of murderers(aka aggression) present, as there is no causal relation between amount of murderers present and the marginal change of amount of murderers over time.
In the case of state murder however, that is not the case. The lack of state violence has a causal relation with increase of state violence, as it constitutes a vacuum of power.
The whole argument that the protests and uprising are anti-violence or anti-aggression is hence incorrect. It is instead an ideological argument, that is the difference in opinion on how state violence is to be used, whether according to democratic or dictatorial means.
|
Libya's government has begun distributing arms to more than one million people and will complete the operation within hours, the state news agency reports today. Jana news agency quoted sources in Libya's defence ministry as saying they "expected the operation to end in the next hours to arm more than a million men and women."
More information on the Arab input into Coalition airstrikes. Planes from the United Arab Emirates are expected to arrive at an Italian air force base today to take part in the operations over Libya, the ANSA news agency reported. The UAE, along with Jordan, Morocco and Qatar, was among Arab nations that took part in a summit in Paris on Saturday on the Libyan crisis.
Edit: Still no confirmation on the claimed downing of a French plane. Anyone seen an update on this?
|
On March 20 2011 22:24 Mofisto wrote:Show nested quote + Libya's government has begun distributing arms to more than one million people and will complete the operation within hours, the state news agency reports today. Jana news agency quoted sources in Libya's defence ministry as saying they "expected the operation to end in the next hours to arm more than a million men and women." Show nested quote +More information on the Arab input into Coalition airstrikes. Planes from the United Arab Emirates are expected to arrive at an Italian air force base today to take part in the operations over Libya, the ANSA news agency reported. The UAE, along with Jordan, Morocco and Qatar, was among Arab nations that took part in a summit in Paris on Saturday on the Libyan crisis. Edit: Still no confirmation on the claimed downing of a French plane. Anyone seen an update on this?
France claimed that every plane returned back.
|
On March 20 2011 16:39 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 16:31 Pika Chu wrote:
Let's put this another way.
Right now, we aren't fighting against Gadafi but we are fighting against Libya. Libyans live in Libya. We are fighting against a part of the libyans therefore (considering a part is welcoming this war).
We have no clue (from a rational not emotional point of view) how much of the population is against the regime. Then again we have no clue how much of the population who is against the regime also wants this war because they realize they live in a country that's going to be in deep shit for a longer while because of it. If 50% percent of the population is actively/passively against the libyan regime, we are fighting 50% of the libyan population.
The military involvement will be full-scaled, a no-fly zone doesn't mean much, which means there will have to be a serious land war to be had with a complete invasion of Libya. More civilians are going to die at the hand of invaders (by mistake, because it's impossible not to) than Gadafi managed to kill in all his life directly or indirectly. The lives of so many will be ruined, war conditions are truly harsh and it may affect you for life.
Then, we will conquer the country judge and hang Gadafi. There will be a constant turmoil for a couple of years which we will need to babysit around to protect the population (is why we need to stay in iraq for so long actually) and given the libyan culture and organization of having a tribal system i can see big problems with organizing a democratic regime and putting a government that isn't a puppet of the west and is viewed as legitimate by libyans.
Next, there will still be supporters of Gadafi, people with money who supported him, money will go to terrorist organizations. There will be libyans who had their lives destroyed by this war. They will always hate us for it, some will dedicate to revenge. Years later we see big news "Paris subway suicide attack kills hundreds of people". We cry and regret it blaming people who do such actions. Could we have avoided it? Yes we could have. Is it a direct consequence of our actions? Yes it is.
So what are we actually accomplishing now? Nothing than bringing more pain, both to libyans and to us. All of which is better than inaction.
1) Gaddafi has been the ruler of Libya for more than 40 years, with all the power focused on him, then a popular revolt managed to seriously threat his rule even though he held all the power, and he only managed to gain control over most of the country when he started using artillery and air power against a bunch of ragtag rebels.
If only 50% of the population opposes Gaddafi in some way, how could the rebels have gained so much ground is such a disadvantageous position?
2) I honestly can't imagine western nations putting regular troops on the ground, who would do it after Iraq and Afganistan?, the US would never do it (didn't the US Defence Secretary said a couple of weeks ago that his country should never do something like that again?) and I can't imagine the UK or France spearheading a ground invasion.
I believe what the "allies" will try to do is force Gaddafi's forces into a corner and train/arm the rebels hoping they can finish the job. If they are succesful then there is a small chance that the country will emerge stronger and peaceful or a bigger chance than there will be unrest and more lifes will be lost, no way to really know.
If nobody intervienes, Gaddafi wins, crush the rebels and makes an example of many by killing them (I'm sorry, but that thing about him forgiving them is just BS, he doesn't think like a rational human being, he thinks like a dictator and they rule through fear) and the becomes even more opressive as to make clear that such a rebellion can never happen again.
Both paths are very bad for the Libyan people, but the first one at least has a chance to turn into something better. You think that Libyans should be left alone to solve their own affairs?, fine, but don't try to pretend that such option will somehow lead to peace and avoid unnecesary lose of life, because it won't, history shows this.
Oh, and about the oil thing in general, if the primary concern is oil, why didn't the western powers just condemn softly the situation but not do anything about it (as they do 99% of the time)?, that way Gaddafi wins, doesn't feel threatened by the west and continues to sell oil.
Instead they use air power without an invasion force (that would cause an inmense political fallout), how exactly can this lead to them taking control of Libya's oil?, maybe the rebel promised cheap oil in exchange for help?, but couldn't they do the same deal with Gaddafi?
I'm not under any ilusion that this is a 100% humanitary mission, Sarkozy just wants to look heroic, Obama was dragged into the situation and the other countries seem to get involved due to NATO obligation or whatever, but at least it means the west is doing something to stop injustice, instead of causing it as usual, if it backfires then sure, let's go back to bashing the hell out of those goverments, but i say it's best to hope that for once in history justice and decency will prevail in the field of international relationships.
|
Khadafi shelling the city of Misurata indescriminately, using rockets, artillery and cluster ammunition.
|
On March 20 2011 20:31 Pika Chu wrote:
Many times it has been showed that democracy can't be imposed with force. Most countries which have a democracy now came to it peacefully or through revolution but without a war.
So... a revolution isn't force?
Shall I remind you of the French revolution, or the American revolution?
I can't think of many examples of democracy stemming from a peaceful event. Chilean "revolution" was peaceful but quickly shut down by the American government - it lasted a few years and went back to dictatorship.
|
On March 20 2011 22:31 Keniji wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 22:24 Mofisto wrote: Libya's government has begun distributing arms to more than one million people and will complete the operation within hours, the state news agency reports today. Jana news agency quoted sources in Libya's defence ministry as saying they "expected the operation to end in the next hours to arm more than a million men and women." More information on the Arab input into Coalition airstrikes. Planes from the United Arab Emirates are expected to arrive at an Italian air force base today to take part in the operations over Libya, the ANSA news agency reported. The UAE, along with Jordan, Morocco and Qatar, was among Arab nations that took part in a summit in Paris on Saturday on the Libyan crisis. Edit: Still no confirmation on the claimed downing of a French plane. Anyone seen an update on this? France claimed that every plane returned back.
I read on BBC that the downed plane was in fact libyan army (a rebel who had defected and was trying to defend Bengzhai) But I cant seem to find the source anymore, so that might no longer be the official story.
I do really hope the libyan people as a whole dont start supporting Gaddafhi again because of western attacks. Alot of people there are very poor and uneducated and have very little idea of whats going on and the reasons for it (all they see is state television). I could absolutely see a large civilian support for Gaddafhi in the near future if the west isnt VERY careful with their strikes. ><
|
On March 21 2011 00:29 Darpa wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 22:31 Keniji wrote:On March 20 2011 22:24 Mofisto wrote: Libya's government has begun distributing arms to more than one million people and will complete the operation within hours, the state news agency reports today. Jana news agency quoted sources in Libya's defence ministry as saying they "expected the operation to end in the next hours to arm more than a million men and women." More information on the Arab input into Coalition airstrikes. Planes from the United Arab Emirates are expected to arrive at an Italian air force base today to take part in the operations over Libya, the ANSA news agency reported. The UAE, along with Jordan, Morocco and Qatar, was among Arab nations that took part in a summit in Paris on Saturday on the Libyan crisis. Edit: Still no confirmation on the claimed downing of a French plane. Anyone seen an update on this? France claimed that every plane returned back. I read on BBC that the downed plane was in fact libyan army (a rebel who had defected and was trying to defend Bengzhai) But I cant seem to find the source anymore, so that might no longer be the official story.
Different incident mate. Libyan TV claimed that gaddafi had downed a french plane later in the day.
More updates:
Missile strikes launched by the United States and Britain hit 20 of 22 targets, the U.S. military said today.
Agence France-Presse journalists Dave Clark and Roberto Schmidt, have been missing since Saturday morning in Libya while working in the eastern Tobruk region, the agency said today
Egypt's official state news agency has claimed that Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa is calling for an emergency Arab League meeting to discuss the situation in the Arab world and particularly Libya.
Cyprus has said it is opposed to any use of British bases on the island to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya but conceded it had no power to stop their involvement. Britain has two sovereign military bases on Cyprus.
Reports of civilian casualties from a hospital in Misrata. Gaddafi's forces have made their way into the former rebel-held town and there have been accounts of fighting there today.
Women and children continue to crowd into the Bab al-Azizia compound in Tripoli, effectively acting as a human shield Sky News reports.
Coalition members conducting air strikes on Libyan targets are coordinating their actions but there is no central command organising the attacks, a source in the French defence ministry, AFP reports
|
I thought this was supposed to be about a no-fly zone, instead there are air strikes and rockets all over the place?
|
The US push through the air strike clause to stop the shelling of rebel held cities. You also have to suppress air defense so you can take air superiority.
|
On March 21 2011 00:54 LemOn wrote:
I thought this was supposed to be about a no-fly zone, instead there are air strikes and rockets all over the place?
You can't enforce a no-fly zone if your planes can't intercept the enemy. Air strikes are supposed to weaken/destroy Libya's GtA installations. And while they're at it, they might as well bomb everything else...
|
Oh maybe I was too naive, and the Arab league with me.
|
People need to get their facts straight.
The UN resolution authorized its member states to take ANY ACTION apart from ground invasion, that clearly includes air strickes against regime forces.
A no fly zone would include air strikes against air defences anyway.
|
On March 21 2011 00:54 LemOn wrote:
I thought this was supposed to be about a no-fly zone, instead there are air strikes and rockets all over the place?
The no-fly zone is only one of the key points of UN resolution 1973. It also includes "all means necessary to protect civilians".
|
On March 21 2011 01:06 pylonsalad wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 00:54 LemOn wrote:
I thought this was supposed to be about a no-fly zone, instead there are air strikes and rockets all over the place? The no-fly zone is only one of the key points of UN resolution 1973. It also includes "all means necessary to protect civilians".
Also, a no fly zone means that anti-air needs to be destroyed, otherwise it can't be enforced.
|
Saif al-Islam continues to insist that his father remains the legitimate ruler of Libya. He told ABC's This Week program:
There is a big misunderstanding. The whole country is united against the armed militia and the terrorists. Our people went to Benghazi to liberate Benghazi from the gangsters and the armed militia. So if you, if the Americans want to help the Libyan people in Benghazi... go to Benghazi and liberate Benghazi from the militia and the terrorists
Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has admitted that Gaddafi's stockpiles of mustard gas could potentially cause "a lot of damage"
|
I find it funny how now Russia, a country who did not want to vote in the no-fly resolution, is now calling the UN to stop intervening in Libya...
|
On March 20 2011 07:12 Pika Chu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 07:06 Half wrote:On March 20 2011 06:52 ManyCookies wrote:On March 20 2011 06:37 Mofisto wrote:On March 20 2011 06:34 ManyCookies wrote:On March 20 2011 06:33 Pika Chu wrote:On March 20 2011 06:27 Grettin wrote:
"2125: A statement from Col Gaddafi is expected shortly on Libyan state television."
Lets see is Gaddafi really "joining al-qaida". Didn't he say something like that if Libya would get attacked. What are you talking about? Al Quaida is directly or indirectly (that's something i don't know) supporting the rebels. They are hoping for the installation of a fundamental islamic republic in Libya. I'm not sure if you're serious anymore... As much as i disagree with what he has said in this thread, what you're quoting this time is true Well, alright, it does make sense for Al Queda to support the revolution. I think I misinterpreted the "indirectly" part as "supplying weapons and supplies" rather than "hoping the revolution turns out alright", and thought Pika was declaring some conspiracy theory or someting. Apologies. And dear god, Yahoo's comments could actually be worse than Youtube's. I'd imagine that that would be a huge part of the reason why the U.S. is supporting the Libyan rebels. If Gaddafi forces the open rebellion into insurgency, with no support from western nations, it will inevitably turn into an Islamic insurgency thats forced to utilize terror tactics. By pouring money into the rebellion now, and then insuring there victory, we ensure that the proceeding government is secular and friendly, if not an outright ally. Wait, what? This is either a mistake you do by being uninformed either you really believe we will do in Libya will be to impose a no-fly zone? How far do you think we are from waging a landwar against the Libyan government?
Extremely far away.
We're going to stick to Naval and Air Power. Why? Because it isn't in our best economic interests to deploy there. We run a million risks and gain very little.
I told that and will keep telling. They aren't going to stand up for Gaddafi, they are going to stand up for Libya. That's what happens when you find your country at war with foreign forces.
Wow! @ShababLibya just reported that ALL Gaddafi troops in Zintan have joined the revolution! #Libya
I admire your predicative powers.
-----
IMO tho the West needs to add another step to there plan. Psy-ops. They need to help the rebels spread propaganda to Gaddafi held cities, esp Tripoli. I'd imagine 90% of the populace there would support the rebels, if they had a clear portrait of what exactly was going on.
Can't really figure out wtf the Arab league is doing with all there ambiguously worded announcements. Not sure what they're playing. Most obvious would be to indirectly support the west by not legislatively opposing them and ensure Libya wins independence, but at the same time, publicly distancing themselves from western powers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
