EPTLibyan Uprising - Page 90
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Off topic discussion and argumentative back and forth will not be tolerated. | ||
|
Ghad
Norway2551 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6324 Posts
[quote]. His total military personnel number like 50,000, some of them defected, and only some of them, 5,000 - 10,000, were considered 100% loyal and as such were well-trained and well-equipped. A lot of those guys and their gear are burnt useless bloody bits now. [/QUOTE] Actually it was an estimated 10-12k and he flew quite a few soldiers in. And after the no fly zone was announced more of gadaffi's military defected and it looks like he is losing it quite rapidly now. The momentum is with the rebels now that Gadaffi doesn't have the tech advantage anymore. | ||
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6642 Posts
Libyan rebels sweeping westwards Libyan rebels have recaptured four more towns and are moving quickly towards Muammar Gaddafi's heartland of Sirte. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12873434 This could be over faster than even I suspected! And yeah, Gadaffi's military only had 12k troops to begin with, he's always been afraid of enlarging it lest it turn on him, turns out that is speeding up his downfall. | ||
|
blomsterjohn
Norway476 Posts
This only fuels the uprising even more(I hope at least). | ||
|
FallDownMarigold
United States3710 Posts
[QUOTE]On March 27 2011 22:49 DeepElemBlues wrote: [quote]. His total military personnel number like 50,000, some of them defected, and only some of them, 5,000 - 10,000, were considered 100% loyal and as such were well-trained and well-equipped. A lot of those guys and their gear are burnt useless bloody bits now. [/QUOTE] Yep. Qaddafi lost all his tech structures after the NATO members allied with the the rebels. Mass air has obviously proven itself to be very OP, so it's unsurprising that the collection of loyal government forces is rapidly dwindling. Even without any tech we still have to be vigilant, however, because Qaddafi is still capable of massing up for a final all-in. At this point Qaddafi is liable to pull that kind of all-in cheese strat since he really doesn't stand a chance in a straight up macro game. He lost his expansions in Benghazi and Brega recently, and just today rebel forces secured the rich gas expo at Ras Lanuf. Qaddafi is basically stuck on one base in a 4v1, GG. | ||
|
Ilfirin
United States102 Posts
[QUOTE]On March 27 2011 22:58 RvB wrote: [QUOTE]On March 27 2011 22:49 DeepElemBlues wrote: [quote]. His total military personnel number like 50,000, some of them defected, and only some of them, 5,000 - 10,000, were considered 100% loyal and as such were well-trained and well-equipped. A lot of those guys and their gear are burnt useless bloody bits now. [/QUOTE] Yep. Qaddafi lost all his tech structures after the NATO members allied with the the rebels. Mass air has obviously proven itself to be very OP, so it's unsurprising that the collection of loyal government forces is rapidly dwindling. Even without any tech we still have to be vigilant, however, because Qaddafi is still capable of massing up for a final all-in. At this point Qaddafi is liable to pull that kind of all-in cheese strat since he really doesn't stand a chance in a straight up macro game. He lost his expansions in Benghazi and Brega recently, and just today rebel forces secured the rich gas expo at Ras Lanuf. Qaddafi is basically stuck on one base in a 4v1, GG.[/QUOTE] Hahaha, this is pretty funny. Nice analysis. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
NoobieOne
United States1183 Posts
On March 28 2011 13:47 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Rebels have taken Sirte. Gaddafi's hometown. Is that really a big advantage? I would think it would be more important to take large cities? | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On March 28 2011 13:53 NoobieOne wrote: Is that really a big advantage? I would think it would be more important to take large cities? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirt Population (2009) - Total 135,451 Major explosions reported in Gaddafi's home town of Sirte, looks like the battle may not be completely over there... #Libya | ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
My question is: how did they get those heavy weapons? And if they already have it, is it the no fly zone that allows them to use them? And what do they mean by "heavy weapons"? Is light artillery considered heavy weaponry? Still a lot of questions as the situation remains unclear. : / | ||
|
0mar
United States567 Posts
On March 28 2011 21:34 Kukaracha wrote: Reports this morning said that Rebels were blocked in Ajdabiya... but managed to move forward by using heavy weapons. My question is: how did they get those heavy weapons? And if they already have it, is it the no fly zone that allows them to use them? And what do they mean by "heavy weapons"? Is light artillery considered heavy weaponry? Still a lot of questions as the situation remains unclear. : / It's probably from defections and raids. Egypt has also been supplying the rebels with arms as well. It's obvious that using such heavy weaponry will result in civilian casualties though. And since the mandate is about stopping civilian deaths, will NATO fly against the rebels? Of course not. We are the rebels' airforce now. All in all, this is a bad precedent set. Are we going to sit idly after the rebellion takes power and institutes a series of revenge killings against Gaddfi's loyalists? Are we going to even allow a strong, independent Libya? | ||
|
TheStonedGuest
United States19 Posts
On March 28 2011 21:34 Kukaracha wrote: Reports this morning said that Rebels were blocked in Ajdabiya... but managed to move forward by using heavy weapons. My question is: how did they get those heavy weapons? And if they already have it, is it the no fly zone that allows them to use them? And what do they mean by "heavy weapons"? Is light artillery considered heavy weaponry? Still a lot of questions as the situation remains unclear. : / Kinda wondering this myself, as I've seen some news reports refer to "heavy weaponry" and then describe/show pictures of how they're attacking with some pickup trucks that have four RPGs mounted on the back...occasionally they show the light AA gun mounted on back, but either way I doubt any military in the world would honestly consider them to truly be heavy weapons. | ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
On March 28 2011 21:52 0mar wrote: It's probably from defections and raids. Egypt has also been supplying the rebels with arms as well. It's obvious that using such heavy weaponry will result in civilian casualties though. Of course but has Egypt sent... tanks and artillery? It doesn't seem likely. They also need trained personel to be used and the numbers of soldiers in the rebellion are surprizingly low (looks like most of them just ran home). | ||
|
Thereisnosaurus
Australia1822 Posts
The west intervened to *stop Gaddafi*. We didn't go in to set up a stable, western democracy. If some other guy takes over and rules with an iron fist, mission still successful. We can only hope that when the shit hits the fan again, he'll remember what happened to the last guy who went a little overboard cracking down... That, of course, isn't fantastic, but the goal is admirable, achievable and so far looking good. Don't get big eyes and expect miracles, nor moral whiteness. This is a bad situation, we're only looking to avoid the worst outcome, not achieve the best. | ||
|
Petruccio
90 Posts
You know that Jamahiriya is actually better then western so called democracy? That the level of life is quite high. People are socially protected. Medicine is for free. There is virtually no corruption, no crime. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita - Libya is not even in the list. GDP of Libya is 12.000 and this money does not go outside of the country and distributed quite equally, because there are very few extremely reach people. So what is wrong with Gaddafi? Who wants to change the things? Who are these rebels, why they are not happy? Why West cut off internet access in Libya? Have you seen "Wag the dog?" Reed also this http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http://kungurov.livejournal.com/33074.html&act=url Try to find other then western point of view on the situation. | ||
|
Elegy
United States1629 Posts
On March 29 2011 00:48 Petruccio wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FGrrGTrQaQ You know that Jamahiriya is actually better then western so called democracy? That the level of life is quite high. People are socially protected. Medicine is for free. There is virtually no corruption, no crime. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita - Libya is not even in the list. GDP of Libya is 12.000 and this money does not go outside of the country and distributed quite equally, because there are very few extremely reach people. So what is wrong with Gaddafi? Who wants to change the things? Who are these rebels, why they are not happy? Why West cut off internet access in Libya? Have you seen "Wag the dog?" Reed also this http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http://kungurov.livejournal.com/33074.html&act=url Try to find other then western point of view on the situation. Gunning down peaceful protesters who were upset at a 40+ year dictatorship might be something to take into consideration. I lol @ no corruption. Moreover, as any first year IR student knows from their basic courses, national interest and moral principles are not mutually exclusive. | ||
|
Petruccio
90 Posts
Gunning down peaceful protesters who were upset at a 40+ year dictatorship might be something to take into consideration. I lol @ no corruption. Why being upset? For becoming an African country with the highest standards of living? For the fact the petrol is not being sold by western companies? Dictatorship <> corruption. I suggest you to find and read what is the life in Libya is. | ||
|
Elegy
United States1629 Posts
On March 29 2011 01:14 Petruccio wrote: Why being upset? For becoming an African country with the highest standards of living? For the fact the petrol is not being sold by western companies? Dictatorship <> corruption. I suggest you to find and read what is the life in Libya is. Upset? I lol'ed, that's hardly upset, that's happy! I know this is going nowhere, but only a fool would claim Libya has no corruption. By every objective measurement, Libya ranks in the top tier(s) of the most corrupt nations in the world. And again, you fail to realize that a government loses the right to govern its people when it violently suppresses initially peaceful protests, protests that only turn violent when violence is used against them. Don't try to claim Libya is about oil. Sounds good on paper, but utterly lacking in the fact department. There's something fascinating about internet warriors without an education in such affairs that inevitably results in them assuming every action ever committed by any government is part of a money-grubbing, long-term conspiracy of pure ulterior motives that transcends administration changes, personnel shifts, and extraneous factors. It suggests a continuity of thought that is fallacy in and of itself. Shockingly enough, sometimes, just sometimes, countries rarely, occasionally, and just once in a while do things without profit as the prime objective. Crazy, I know. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12877319 Airstrikes in Sirte, apparently unconfirmed whether Sirte is in rebel hands? | ||
|
BeJe77
United States377 Posts
On March 29 2011 01:24 Elegy wrote: Upset? I lol'ed, that's hardly upset, that's happy! I know this is going nowhere, but only a fool would claim Libya has no corruption. By every objective measurement, Libya ranks in the top tier(s) of the most corrupt nations in the world. And again, you fail to realize that a government loses the right to govern its people when it violently suppresses initially peaceful protests, protests that only turn violent when violence is used against them. Don't try to claim Libya is about oil. Sounds good on paper, but utterly lacking in the fact department. There's something fascinating about internet warriors without an education in such affairs that inevitably results in them assuming every action ever committed by any government is part of a money-grubbing, long-term conspiracy of pure ulterior motives that transcends administration changes, personnel shifts, and extraneous factors. It suggests a continuity of thought that is fallacy in and of itself. Shockingly enough, sometimes, just sometimes, countries rarely, occasionally, and just once in a while do things without profit as the prime objective. Crazy, I know. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12877319 Airstrikes in Sirte, apparently unconfirmed whether Sirte is in rebel hands? what are you on about? Libya is ABOUT the oil and nothing else. They were thinking that the rebels would win this civil war, but they got pushed back hard. They knew if the rebels were to lose there goes that oil supply, which by the way 60% or so of Italy depends on it and 40% of France and a couple other european nations. This is nothing about humanitarian aid or doing the right thing, it's just about keeping the oil flowing. The U.S. came in because they wanted some "good" publicity after all the negative stuff | ||
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6642 Posts
On March 29 2011 01:14 Petruccio wrote: Why being upset? For becoming an African country with the highest standards of living?. You mean South Africa and Botswana? Seriously Libya is amongst the worst places to live in Africa and that's saying something, their future looks bright though. ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/HbGmq.jpg) They're almost at Sirte! | ||
| ||
