Libyan War : Political and strategic aspects

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 05 Jun 2011 05:33

^^ They are still involved in clashes but its off and on. NATO imagery specialists are having trouble locating his artillery units as they keep moving. Aircraft are having to land to refuel whilst waiting to be assigned targets. He is getting support from mercenaries who are still coming in. He's got Algiers backing him at the moment. Gaddafi is only fighting at around 1/5th of his capacity.

This is the military angle. The political angle - They've been able to get a lot of intel from some defectors recently.

Italian intel has got several high ranking Libyan officials out via Tunis to Rome. Italy wants to develop the NTC security set up. West reckons eventually Gaddafi will seek exile in Algeria or Serbia.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Jun 2011 07:33

not much heli gunship muscle. UK which spends $50b annum on defence mustering up all of 4 helis for the attack and france cant be fielding more than 10. the tiger heli seen did not have any mast mounted radar, but could be using its superior sensor to guide the gazelles.

a single cat-1 division like 1st airborne of Khan would be entering the fray with say 50 apaches and 150 ch47/blackhawks....and its not on paper they actually did this in GW2 over a city in western iraq (karbala I think), to permit heavy armour on ground to pass through a 15km "karbala gap" (between city and a lake) enroute baghdad. results were not great it was reported - a lot of apaches were shot up and landed back needing repairs.

so what 15 gunships can do in a place like libya quickly is not so clear.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Jun 2011 08:26

The UK is deployed in Afghanistan, and is in the middle of a sweeping defence as well overall budget cuts to reduce the deficit. Given all of that, defence chiefs are keen on keeping the mil commitment to Libya to the absolute minimum. Minimising operational costs are the only way to prevent deeper cuts in procurement and personnel funds.

The air campaign is doing just enough to keep Qadafi off balance, and retreating one small step at a time - its the Arab states, especially the Qataris job to give the rebels enough of a punch to let them beat Qadafi on the field.

Not only does that match the limited European interest in spending blood and treasure, but it also reduces Arab anxieties.

The problem is that Libyan opposition army is professionalising but needs a lot of weapons, ammunition, and equipment, and they aren't getting it fast enough. This means they can not push as fast as the Tripoli govt retreats.

As Shyam D has said, a major element is using intelligence agencies to chip away at Qadafi's forces through desertion, which is again picking up pace.

Eventually a lot of governments, especially in the West are probably going to turn over the frozen funds of Qadafi's state to the Benghazi based transitional government.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 05 Jun 2011 08:34

The problem that NATO has is that Libyan rebels are a rag-tag bunch who are basically fighting for western elites. Other than the deluded Al Qaeda types amongst them, it is difficult to motivate them to die.

Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs Lost 98% of Libya’s $1.3B Sovereign Wealth Fund Investment - http://blogs.forbes.com/afontevecchia/2 ... nvestment/

Shows how deluded Gaddhafi was, to keep the Libyan people's money with the crooks who are bombing him today.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Jun 2011 08:51

Pranav,

Actually the initial problem with the Libyan rebels is the exact opposite - suicidal courage, and not much else.

http://gardenserf.files.wordpress.com/2 ... rebels.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/03/ ... 34x441.jpg

That was the rebel response to airstrikes by Qadafi's planes on advancing columns in the east.

The rebels are disproportionately dominated by the students and careerists from the professions - engineering, medicine, etc. These were the classes that were the most frustrated by Qadafi's rule. Maslow's hierarchy of needs....

Qadafi like the GCC states sent tens thousands of young people abroad to study - almost all of the men have returned to volunteer on the side of the rebels, rather than claim asylum. This is despite the fact that most universities here have made special provisions for Libyan students to continue their studies even after the Libyan government accounts that paid for them were frozen.

There's been nothing like this in the Arab world in terms of mass volunteerism and ideas of collective action and citizenship since the FLN/ALN was formed to fight the French in Algeria. Only the Palestinian intifada of the 1980s comes close.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 05 Jun 2011 09:25

There are grassroots level forces that we miss when we view everything from a top-down prism, i.e. assuming actions are the result of high-level players directing chess pieces.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 05 Jun 2011 09:36

So is the rest of the GCC vulnerable to the same 'Returnee' problem. I remember reading that 40%+ of the volunteers in Benghazi were foreign returned. I personally know of a 50 year old 20 year US resident who has left his family and children here to return to somewhere in West Libya, probably the mountains.

The Saudi's in particular send them by the boat load but most use the the US for R&R (Esp. Adult activities) then return for cushy life.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 05 Jun 2011 10:05

The 21st century has begun kind of like the 18th century.

With european countries looting Africa of its resources.

They are looking for an easy way out of their economic troubles and believe good old fashioned robbery may well be the answer.

Asia is a bit too difficult to loot now having wisened up and gunned up.

If there's one lesson to learn from this Libya invasion fiasco, its never trust Europeans and don't stray too far from your bandook.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 05 Jun 2011 10:23

Africa was mostly looted late 19th early 20th century. "Scramble for Africa"- last area to get plundered. Mostly because it was thought to be largely worthless continent before that.

However let's see the actual long term effects. For example many claims were made that Americans would drain Afghan of mineral wealth- but it seems the biggest beneficiaries are Chini and Russian firms! So there may be opportunities for India in post-op Libya as things don't always go per plan. Worth looking out for.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Jun 2011 10:35

Theo_Fidel wrote:So is the rest of the GCC vulnerable to the same 'Returnee' problem. I remember reading that 40%+ of the volunteers in Benghazi were foreign returned. I personally know of a 50 year old 20 year US resident who has left his family and children here to return to somewhere in West Libya, probably the mountains.

The Saudi's in particular send them by the boat load but most use the the US for R&R (Esp. Adult activities) then return for cushy life.

Hi Theo,

The story you've quoted is pretty typical. I've seen some astonishing transformations myself - especially people who were hopeful about Saif-ul-Islam as moderate reformist. When he made that speech threatening blood and fire, coupled with the first Libyan air force strikes it was like some sort of chemical event. One woman I know - timid, cautious, but proud of her work with Saif ul-Islam became overnight someone who now says she would be proud if her son, a medical student now in the Tripoli underground dies defending the Libyan people.

So far most Sunni Gulfies are nowhere as angry with their governments....on the whole the Sunni majority monarchies have done much better than the republics. But people's expectations keep rising with education, so they can't take that sort of thing for granted.

I know the Saudis have launched a massive higher education initiative in the last few years - Abdallah is determined to produce a globally competitive managerial class instead of the usual slew of work-shy Islamic studies majors who want a paycheque for doing nothing, and cant stand working under infidels or women. If it fails, problems - if it succeeds, problems. On the whole the GCC is going to have to gradually move away from absolute monarchy towards some kind of constitutional monarchy if they dont want the same thing to happen.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 05 Jun 2011 18:00

Libya, Iraq, Pakistan and North Korea

The way the west has behaved and is behaving these countries shows the way the to deal with them. They did not launch the attack on Iraq and Libya until they were COMPLETELY sure that these countries were purges of WMDs. In Iraq, the UN was used to sanction and defang the country. Libya gave up the weapons 'voluntarily'. Pakistan and NK have a modicum of nuke capability and the west (and US in particular) is always ready to grease up and bend over for them.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 05 Jun 2011 20:38

^^^

based on that model, the fate of Iran is clear if they "give up" nukes. they probably realize this as well. now that they've come this far, Iran will need some kind of an operational capability if they don't want to get Shahidized by Western imperialists...

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 06 Jun 2011 13:44

Group of hackers who recently hacked FBI site claim to have uncovered an cyber warfare operation targeting Libyan cyber infrastructure, emails correspondence regarding this matter has been released and can be found in less travelled parts of internet

This may turn to be bigger than Wikileaks

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 11 Jun 2011 19:55

Both East and West and South of Tripoli now. At some point they are going to be close enough to smuggle arms into Tripoli. It will end quickly at that point.

http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOil ... 6820110611

Fighting between Libyan troops loyal to Muammar Gaddafi and rebels broke out in the town of Zawiyah on Saturday, a resident said, shutting the coastal highway that links the capital Tripoli with Tunisia.

"The situation is very bad in Zawiyah. There's been fierce fighting since the morning between the Gaddafi forces and the rebels," said the resident, who gave only his first name, Mohammed, fearing reprisals.

http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews ... 11?sp=true

Sporadic clashes between Gaddafi's forces and the rebels continued in Zlitan, a rebel spokesman said, after the rebels took control of some parts of it. He said the situation was calmer than on Friday and the toll remained 22 rebels killed.

"Zlitan is still surrounded by Gaddafi troops and they are threatening the residents to surrender or have their women raped by mercenaries," spokesman Ahmed Bani said.

It was not possible to independently verify the rebels' claim. There was no immediate comment from Gaddafi's government.

Zlitan is one of three towns that are largely government controlled between the rebel-held Misrata and the capital. Were it to fall, it could allow the anti-Gaddafi uprising to spread from Misrata, the biggest rebel outpost in western Libya, to Gaddafi's stronghold in Tripoli.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 11 Jun 2011 21:21

Meanwhile...

Take a look at minute 1:56 in this video. That guy in the gray shirt in the background. He quickly puts his hat on and turns away. This in the Nafusa mountains. Boots are thick on the ground.

http://english.aljazeera.net/video/afri ... 48429.html

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 11 Jun 2011 23:04

^^ Yup there was another AJ video 2 weeks ago, showing the westerners on the front line. As soon as they found out the media was present they jumped back in their jeeps and drove off.

British have deployed SAS. French have deployed DGSE Special operations forces (the same that were attached to Northern Alliance for many years).

Meanwhile NATO is turning over senior ministers and sending them straight to Benghazi to support the rebels. Gaddafi is down to his last circle of friends now. Noose is slowly being tied. Saadi Gaddafi is now been promoted to general, so he'll be playing a bigger role.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 11 Jun 2011 23:32

^^^
the guy is not even trying to be subtle. he puts on his cap, and then he is startled and surprised. it clearly shows in his movements. his cover is blown. he's probably already in the databases of various intel agencies across the world as a possible employee of one of the agencies deployed in Libya. next time his face shows in any airport or surveillance, he'll immediately be tagged and watched.

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 12 Jun 2011 02:26

Rebel gains spark fierce battle for west of Libya, as Gaddafi regime under pressure from all sides
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/desti ... sides.html

The West should send into Tripoli and particularly the places where Gaddafi is living the armed Libyans to remove him and then make the army to give up their fighting. Gaddafi should be removed soon either he goes off or arrested soon so that this fight comes to an end quickly

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 12 Jun 2011 10:46

I don't know if anyone is keeping track of the rebel weaponry but a lot if seemed relatively advanced and very suited/adapted to their light/fast technicals style of fighting. There is of course the odd assortment of Soviet cobbled together weaponry. But then there are the surprising rebel weapons I've seen so far.

- M-40 Recoil-less rifle. Tonnes of then. US Military. Not usually seen in the black market.
- Some kind of fin stabilized scary looking anti tank weapon.
- Tonnes of brand new FN-FAL rifles.

Anyone keeping track?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Jun 2011 03:34

Britain canot sustain the Libyn campaign due to def. cut,esp. Harriers and carriers ,says Navy chief.It now cannot retake the Falklands if the Argies send in a fishing fleet invasion too!

link

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 15 Jun 2011 04:34

Fools Rush into Tripoli

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Jun 2011 16:20

"It's all about oil",Iraq all over again! The "A" in NATO now stands for Africa,Asia,Afghanistan et al!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ution.html

Libya: Jacob Zuma accuses Nato of not sticking to UN resolution
South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma has accused Nato of pursuing regime change and political assassinations in Libya instead of sticking to a United Nations resolution to protect civilians.

Mr Zuma told South Africa’s parliament that Nato had overstepped the resolution which was passed at the UN to avert a massacre in Benghazi in March.

“We have spoken out against the misuse of the good intentions in Resolution 1973,” he said. “We strongly believe that the resolution is being abused for regime change, political assassinations and foreign military occupation.”

Nato leaders have repeatedly called for Muammar Gaddafi to go and air strikes have reportedly killed one of his sons, although western leaders have ruled out the possibility of a land invasion or occupation.

Mr Zuma has visited Libya twice since March on behalf of the African Union (AU) seeking a solution to the civil war. In April the Libyan government backed the AU’s plan for a ceasefire to end the war, but rebels based in Benghazi rejected it saying the plan would allow Gaddafi to cling on to power. The AU plan involved an end to Nato air strikes, and a process which would eventually lead to elections.

Mr Zuma has emerged as one of the few allies of the internationally-isolated Libyan government, whose officials have argued that Nato’s war is really about getting rid of Gaddafi’s regime so western powers can get their hands on Libyan oil.

The baby killer leaders of NATO should be put on trial at the Hague, alongside Milosevic and Karadic if real justice is to be done.The excamations of horror of alleged Lankan war crimes by certain British entities rings very hollow when Britain merrily bombs Libya flouting UN resolutions as Zuma says.This hypocrisy underlines the inescapable truth that despite a century of war,the WWs and the Cold War proxy wars,the end of imperialism,there is one rule for white nations and another for the non-whites.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 15 Jun 2011 17:54

What the Arican and developing world leaders should do is to file a case in the Hague against the French shrimp, the British limp, and the American himp (Hillary) for instigating a totally unnecessary war against a helpless population. It is imperative that we put the fear of God (in this case, rule of law) in the hearts of this criminal gang.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 16 Jun 2011 10:16

Stand strong Colonel Gaddafi.

Colonel Obama may get himself unelected in 2012.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 18 Jun 2011 03:47

Noose firmly around Gaddafi's kneck. Tunis and Algiers (only source of supplies) are close to deciding to drop Gaddafi. Tunis got pissed off becaus of repeated incursions by Gaddafi forces and refugee situation. Tunis will recognis the NTC, as will mauritania. So Algeria feels under pressure too. Qatari's funding wheat purchases and are providing LoC's. UAE and others were able to convince tunisia to cut off support to Gaddafi.

Due to NATO strikes, the NTC has been able to import more petrol and fuel via greek companies. Supply lines to Benghazi improving. But NTC mood is still not great as Gaddafi is able to fund terror strikes in Benghazi.

Gaddafi’s aim is to safeguard the cities of Sirte and Sebha as well as the interests of his last loyal supporters.

I think things will be over soon unless Gaddafi can secure supplies from somewherer else - which looks unlikely. He'll travel to Serbia or Algiers maybe n exile. French law firm has already tried to approach him.

Post Gaddafi Libya:

The first hurdle to overcome will be to make Libya a member of the Euromed partnership. But Libya is also eligible for money linked to the European Neighborhood Policy. In the short term, EU wants to fund museums EU Cultural centre's in Tripoli for revolution and other aid programs. Send money to the civil society.

Obama will visit Tunis.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 18 Jun 2011 09:48

a lot of the news we get comes from western presses.

we really need news from Indian news services on foreign wars, issues, conflicts with reporters visiting these warzones and reporting on it first hand.

Otherwise there's a danger of swallowing a load of foreign news propaganda and not even knowing it.

Anyway, the colonel is standing his ground..

----

Libyan leader Gadhafi says NATO will not win

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110617/ap_ ... a/ml_libya

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 18 Jun 2011 10:33

Just a reminder for some of those extolling the dear colonel as some martyr to imperialism:

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... k-pakistan
His father colonel Gaddafi had bankrolled Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme in the 1970s and 80s to the tune of half a billion dollars in response to Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's quest for an "Islamic bomb'' .

http://www.pircenter.org/kosdata/page_doc/p1813_2.pdf
The major difference from any other Libyan nuclear cooperation projects was drastic. Unlike previous attempts, Libya was not acquiring its own weapons – on the contrary, it helped Pakistan to develop nuclear weapons and provided the country with $100–500 million for that purpose.
Beside financial aid, Libya exported over 2,000 tons of uranium concentrate to Pakistan. According to the 2004 IAEA report, in 1978–1981 Libya imported from Niger 2,263 tons of uranium concentrate. But since the safeguards agreement with the IAEA was signed in 1980, the Libyan leadership declared only the amount purchased after 1980. Previous purchases of uranium were not reported to the Agency, so Libya could freely provide assistance to Pakistan in its nuclear weapon program.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/pakistan-04c.html
Mohammed Beg, former European Director for Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) and Bhutto confidante later revealed that Libyan dictator Colonel Muammar Qaddafi personally supervised transfers of suitcases filled with US Dollars to Pakistan on PIA flights, sometimes up to $100 million in a single flight.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 18 Jun 2011 22:32

I'd be doing the same thing if I was Libya. The irony is US and Europe sweet talked Libya into giving up its fledgling nuke program - and then invaded.

Poor Africa!

No sooner has any African country clawed its way to middle income category like Libya, then a band of THIEVES from Europe decend on them to begin a robbery scheme. Its no wonder Africa is poor.

If this robbery is happening in the broad daylight, just imagine what's ripoffs are going on behind the scenes!

Moral of the story is - never trust these lieing European thieves. They are professional goondas and that's their main economic strategy to stay wealthy. Also don't leave any large sums of money in foreign countries or accumulate vast amounts of their worthless fiat currency as 'reserves' like China - you are liable to get ripped off and the only thing you will be reserving is toilet paper.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 19 Jun 2011 01:18

Also remember the Indian casualties from Lockerbie. That's is what the apologists mean to Gaddafi.

Libya should be a extremely wealth nation. On the lines of UAE. The reason it is not is the Colonel. It is a canard that if Gaddafi had the bomb the west would not attack him. Next door to us TSP gets bombed on a regular basis. An entire platoon swooped in and took out OBL. Their nuclear status was not even considered.

Let us also remember that when Iraq was invaded both times, it was thought that Saddam had radioactive material enough for an explosion of two. Definitely thought he would deploy 'dirty bombs'.

What really doomed Gaddafi was his treat of turning on the illegal immigrant fire hose against Europe after/before he won. Very very stupid on his part.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 19 Jun 2011 04:12

How do we even know Lockerbe was conducted by Libyans. Its a US claim.

Corporate media tows their respective govt's line and the govt's are lieing their ar$e$ off as they are right now about this war. Nothing from that source is impartial or trustworthy. Remember the Kashmir human rights fiascos in the 90s levelled against India while terrorists were bombing away?

Back in the 80s there was no Internet for info exchange & fact checking (well not for the public anyways). The corporate news media & govt was the only source of info.

Nobody is stupid enough to believe France's intention is to protect civilians. Everybody is aware its a war to rip off a small country's resources and expropriate its wealth. That fact is hard to conceal with the Internet around. But you'll never see that reported in the mainstream media obvious as it may be. They are still spinning the 'protecting civilians' yarn which goes to show that even in 'free' societies, the news media can be a failure.

Thankfully the Internet has put limits on the amount of lieing govts & corporations can get away with.

While we're at it, lets also remember the casulties India suffered as a result of US & Europe funding terrorism via the back door against India by propping up you know who. I'd be willing to wager US & Europe has killed FAR more Indians with their money & weapons & real politik than Libya ever has or will - if they even have to begin with.

With Europe looking for new sources of wealth to sustain its living standard & pay off debt, lots of civilian protecting will be happening in the years ahead. Without the flow of wealth from the civilian protected countries, its a ski ride down the other side of mt. everest financially speaking.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 19 Jun 2011 06:01

These grand claims like "wealth expropriation from civilian protected countries" miss the point so entirely. Yes, the claims of "civilian protection" are so much hot air. Yet it does not follow, ipso facto, that somehow gobs of wealth are flowing out of the ground from Libya into the arms of France and Britain. I wager they will spend a good deal more- far more, in fact- than they ever see in return.

Just like the incompetent and ill-advised invasion of Iraq.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 19 Jun 2011 21:17

Common sense will tell you nobody spends far more invading a place than they plan to get out of it.

With oil averaging close to $100 for years, the capture of Iraq has been a great asset for America. They would not be hanging onto it if it wasn't. France & UK would not be hoping to capture their own Iraq in the form of Libya if it wasn't.

All US does now is print up the money as payment for Iraqi oil which then comes right back to the US as payment for Iraq's occupation. Contracts for goods & services are only open to US firms as are oil fields no matter what they claim. Libya is to be robbed likewise.

Broad daylight robbery is the only economic stimulus plan european countries can come up with these days.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 19 Jun 2011 22:24

http://www.guidechem.com/news/2011/05/17/13888.html

Nazars presentation showed a breakdown of expected exports by SOMO in 2011 to its main export markets, with Asian sales again accounting for the highest volume and sales to the US edging up slightly.

Iraq expects to export an estimated 2.672 million b/d in 2011, with 1.463 million b/d going to the Asian market, 633,000 b/d to the US and 576,000 b/d to Europe. The higher export figure is contingent on completion later this year of the first phase of Iraqs export capacity expansion project from southern terminals.

The 2011 projected export figures compare with an average 2.235 million b/d exported in 2010, of which 1.113 million b/d went to the Asian market, 605,000 b/d to the US and 517,000 b/d to Europe.

Nazar said that US sales accounted for 24% of exports in 2010, dismissing accusations that Washington had benefited from its 2003 invasion of Iraq by getting preferential oil deals. He noted that in 2004 the US accounted for over 50% of total Iraqi oil exports.

The layman in the street says most of the oil goes to America, said Amri. But we are not selling to countries, but to companies, based on the market.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-1 ... -says.html

Iraq was to have signed the Akkas gas-field agreement with Korea Gas Corp. and Kazakhstan’s KazMunaiGaz National Co. on Nov. 14. Iraq delayed the signing to clear up a “misunderstanding” over the planned use of fuel from the deposit, Abdul Kareem al-Luaibi, an Oil Ministry deputy, said at the time.

“We have invited the companies to come to Iraq and sign the contract as soon as possible,” Shahristani said yesterday.

The minister added that negotiations were continuing with Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Mitsubishi Corp. about a project to capture associated gas at oil fields in southern Iraq.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Jun 2011 02:05

The staying power of the EU/NATO forces in an era of economic decline,financial crises of EU partners,other conflicts,is in question,thislatest conflict stretching the resources of the two principal nations involved,Britain and France.The "quickfix" desperate attempts to assassinate Ghaddafi (regime change and military operations against Libya never sanctioned by the UN) to bring about a swift end to the war ,are now seeing the familiar trend of the NATO "babykillers" in action,as collateral dmage increases.This is bound to increase opposition in their own backyards just as it was with Iraq.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... laims.html

Nato investigates Libya civilian death claims
Nato was investigating claims that a bomb smashed into a residential street in the Libyan capital early on Sunday, killing a family in their home and several passers-by.

Foreign journalists were taken by the Gaddafi regime to see the wreckage of a three-storey building in Tripoli where officials said civilians had been "murdered". The concrete rubble was strewn with clothes and possessions including toys, and people claiming to be neighbours angrily condemned the Western alliance.

Nine people, including a mother and father and at least two toddlers died in the bombing, government officials said. Journalists saw the body of a woman being removed from the rubble in the early hours of Sunday, and were afterwards taken to see the bodies of casualties at a hospital.

Nato said it was investigating the Libyan claims. A spokesman said aircraft had been attacking a "legitimate military target" in the city.

"Nato deeply regrets any civilian loss of life during this operation and would be very sorry if the review of this incident concluded it to be a Nato weapon," he added.

The Libyan government pounced on the opportunity to score a major success in its propaganda war.

"Basically, this is another night of murder, terror and horror in Tripoli caused by Nato," said Mussa Ibrahim, the government spokesman. He accused Nato of "deliberately targeting civilians," insisting there were no military targets anywhere near the residential street that was hit.

Nato planes have struck thousands of targets throughout Libya, and although the government claims 800 civilians have died they have been able to show little evidence to back up that claim. Many ordinary Libyans believe the claims of state television that hundreds of civilians have been killed by what they call "crusader bombs".

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 20 Jun 2011 02:51

Neshant wrote:How do we even know Lockerbe was conducted by Libyans. Its a US claim...

....While we're at it, lets also remember the casulties India suffered as a result of US & Europe funding terrorism via the back door against India by propping up you know who. I'd be willing to wager US & Europe has killed FAR more Indians with their money & weapons & real politik than Libya ever has or will - if they even have to begin with.

Neshant,

What kind of garbage is this. Gaddafi himself has admitted to this operation in a round about way and paid restitution. Don't try to be more loyal than the king. There is an argument to be made on what the West has cost us in lives. Go post in that thread.

Next you will be going on a conspiracy rant about 911 or IC814 was by the Jews or the Jews have killed more Indians than the Taliban. All irrelevant. Take this elsewhere please. Your rants are getting pointlessly crazy. This is a reality based forum.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 20 Jun 2011 05:51

Theo_Fidel wrote:Gaddafi himself has admitted to this operation in a round about way .

No he hasn't. Don't make stuff up. Libya got arm twisted into putting 2 guys up on charges of terrorism in a scottish court. Even legal experts there admitted the case was weak.

Gaddafi to give Lockerbie 'evidence'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1152550.stm

In any court, the credibility of the witness comes into question. Now given the countries bombing up Libya to rob it of its resources under bogus pretences are lieing away, their credibility is zero. Of course that is quickly brushed under the carpet. You say don't be more loyal than the king, then why are you pushing the agenda of these kings?

Anyway lets get back on track here with a statement we can all hopefully agree on :

"The countries invading Libya are doing so to steal its resources and expropriate its wealth."

Is there any disagreement on your part that this act of thievery/terrorism is taking place? Also would you agree/disagree that their leaders should stand trial for war crimes.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 20 Jun 2011 07:22

Neshant wrote:Common sense will tell you nobody spends far more invading a place than they plan to get out of it.

With oil averaging close to $100 for years, the capture of Iraq has been a great asset for America.

It's pretty obvious the nations that have benefited by far the most from the Iraq invasion are the Iranians and the Chinese. Must be a brilliant wealth-extraction Chankian move by the US i'm sure. Americans have not even begun to recoup the blood & treasure they sunk into this incompetent imperial exercise, and no, they really aren't "hanging onto it" in any meaningful sense. (of course this is all just maya onlee, so forgive my piddling reality-based ideas).

Common sense will also tell us that the bolded portion is the most incredible nonsense. You may but I do not remember all the "wealth globs" sitting around on the ground in Vietnam where the imperialistic pigs swooped down and scooped up the "wealth globs" into their "wealthmobiles", but feel free to link to any number of Geocities web pages listing the manner in which the "secret wealthmobiles" operated in a super-Chankian manner. And how all the apparent damage done to imperial interests and the apparent failure was really just a ruse to cover up such a super-Chankian success.

And let us also examine the USSR in Afghanistan or the Chinese invasion of Vietnam to find evidence of this.

Or maybe it will turn out that empires carry out their geostrategic actions with a more complex, and often flawed, calculus

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 20 Jun 2011 07:59

Americans have not even begun to recoup the blood & treasure they sunk into this incompetent imperial exercise

The return on invasion investment in Iraq is a wind fall. Why do you think Europeans are now looking to replicate the heist in Libya? To lose money perhaps? Use common sense.

Its a great scam to print up money, exchange it for a strategic resources and have that money returned back by getting the said nation to buy your country's goods & services exclusively.

What does Vietnam have to do with anything other than trying to put up a feeble strawman argument. Make sense man!

Getting back to the subject :

"The countries invading Libya are doing so to steal its resources and expropriate its wealth."

Anyone dispute the above statement ?

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 20 Jun 2011 08:10

UBanerjee wrote:
Neshant wrote:Common sense will tell you nobody spends far more invading a place than they plan to get out of it.

With oil averaging close to $100 for years, the capture of Iraq has been a great asset for America.
It's pretty obvious the nations that have benefited by far the most from the Iraq invasion are the Iranians and the Chinese. Must be a brilliant wealth-extraction Chankian move by the US i'm sure. Americans have not even begun to recoup the blood & treasure they sunk into this incompetent imperial exercise, and no, they really aren't "hanging onto it" in any meaningful sense. (of course this is all just maya onlee, so forgive my piddling reality-based ideas).

Common sense will also tell us that the bolded portion is the most incredible nonsense. You may but I do not remember all the "wealth globs" sitting around on the ground in Vietnam where the imperialistic pigs swooped down and scooped up the "wealth globs" into their "wealthmobiles", but feel free to link to any number of Geocities web pages listing the manner in which the "secret wealthmobiles" operated in a super-Chankian manner. And how all the apparent damage done to imperial interests and the apparent failure was really just a ruse to cover up such a super-Chankian success.

And let us also examine the USSR in Afghanistan or the Chinese invasion of Vietnam to find evidence of this.

Or maybe it will turn out that empires carry out their geostrategic actions with a more complex, and often flawed, calculus

in my short time on BRF, I've come to notice that unwittingly we divide ourselves into two camps: 1. Americans are all knowing geniuses with Superhuman abilities. 2. they are dumb idiots who make one blunder after another in various military campaigns without any purpose/strategy behind them.

both camps are wrong, if taken to the extreme. on the contrary, both camps are right if the each stream of thought is carefully moderated and evidence from the "other" camp is considered by each camp.

Iraq is showed as an example of America's colossal mistake. the one Imperial project which has started American decline. I personally think this is a load of bulls***. people act as if American intervention in Iraq has played itself out, and all the consequence of this intervention have come out in the open. this is the most dubious argument. I would argue that it will be a long time before a clear picture emerges which shows the full extent of the consequences of this war. the "Arab Spring" is partially a response to this intervention. the re-emergence of Shia aspirations is a direct consequence of American intervention in Iraq.

In the Sunni-Shia divide, there has long been a "peace" b/c the Shias were in no position to counter the Anglo-Sunni alliance. now, situation is ripe again for a "clash of civilizations" in ME. who is to say that America won't have rich opportunities to exploit this newly emerging battlefield? who is to say America will permanently be an enemy of Iran? remember Nixon-Mao "reconciliation?" remember FDR-"Uncle Joe" bonhomie. It is very likely that a Sunni-Shia power clash will become very advantageous for the US. they can play the role that they like best: power broker which maintains Balance of Power.

and as for Afghanistan, partly it served a genuine strategic objective. and partly, it was an inevitable response for 9/11. there was no way US would let 9/11 go without some blood letting. that is what Afghanistan was, though Pakistan messed up US calculations on this one, and this is where US has shown a remarkable ability to blind itself purposefully. but even this can be explained by the fact that they consider Pakistan a bulwark against Indian domination of the Subcontinent. this is *evidence* which shows that maintaining Balance of Power in Jambudveepam is much more important that killing off Al-qaeda and terrorists. in the long term, this strategy might fail; but long term failure doesn't repudiate the fact that India is effectively neutered b/c it can't get access to Pakistan. an India that doesn't dominate the Indus all the way up to the Hindu-Kush mountains is an India whose frontiers are unsecured. this is more important to America than killing off Jihadism.

and those who say that I am being cynical, what exactly have we learned in the past 10 years? have we not had the most cynical of our ideas being validated as the truth, by US actions on various occasions?

at the end of the day, the facts are easy for all to see: the US has been able to shape the agenda and history of Turko-Persian and Persian-Indian civilizations by getting a foothold in the transit areas in the middle of these two geopolitical arenas. Iraq sits right in the middle of Turkey and Iran. and Afghanistan sits right in the middle of Iran and India (Pak is the unprotected deracinated frontier of India). within a matter of a few years, US has paved the way for decades ahead in the entire region from ME(NA?) to Jambudvipa (up to Amaravati, and perhaps even beyond?). mark my words, the consequences of US intervention in the 2000's are not fully known yet. the endgame and the resulting consequences will take years to play out. give it another 10 years and see how the emerging picture will influence global power politics. let us not prematurely conclude Iraq and Afghanistan as "blunders" commited by "dumb idiots."

having said all that, the flip side in all this is that American arrogance made American intervention *almost* doomed. it is only sheer "will" that "flexibility" that allowed them to reconfigure themselves in Iraq and set the agenda. the overconfidence which led them to underestimate the insurgency in Iraq was the biggest blunder. but lets remember that it was in NO way an *inevitable* blunder. had Colin Powell gotten his way, there would have been 300,000 US troops in Iraq, not 150,000. my conclusion is that America might have committed blunders, but I see no proof yet that the blunders became so huge that the "advantages" have been voided. the situation is still very fluid, and the full picture is yet to emerge.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Jun 2011 08:19

I agree,in Libya,as it was in Iraq,it was "all about oil".The lies and falsehoods that justiied going into war have now been revealed to the entire world with wikileaks,UK inquiry,etc.The UK Telegraph paper frontpaged a report that for two yars the CIA was plotting Mubarak's downfall.The "Jasmine revolution" will one day stand exposed as was the "Orange revolution" in the former east bloc.This is NOT to say that the Arab world is not ruled in the main by despots,tyrants and dictators,benign or ruthless! Manipulating local opposition and steering it into a driection that would place these nations once again under the thrall of foreign powers is a worse evil.NATO has admitted its latest war crime.It had no UN sanction to go to war against Libya.yet you can place a million-1 bet on not a single NATO leader ever being tried at the Hague!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -coup.html

Libya: Nato admits civilian deaths as Gaddafi regime claims propaganda coup
The fragile alliance targeting Col Muammar Gaddafi is under strain after Nato on Sunday admitted that its bombers had missed a military target to kill a number of civilians in Tripoli.

By Nick Meo, Tripoli, Bruno Waterfield, Brussels Correspondent and Thomas Harding
19 Jun 2011

The Gaddafi regime has seized on the casualties, said to be nine people, including a mother and father and at least two young children, to score propaganda points against Nato and to bolster Libya's embattled dictator.

The deaths are the first acknowledged civilian casualties caused by the alliance in what has so far been an accurate three-month bombing campaign and come at a time when fatigue is growing among many alliance members for a conflict that many believed would be over by the summer.