… is it a really just implementing a no fly zone or is it simply regime change by another name?

both 😉

So illegal then?

no not really illegal, they’ll just do enough damage to weaken the pro government forces sufficiently enough for the anti government forces to win thus implementing regime change without taking the blame and keeping costs and life losses to a minimum. but it amounts to the same thing.

A very widely written resolution – short of an invasion and occupation any methods can be used that will protect the civilians from attack.

So if a major, general or perhaps even a colonel is the cause of suffering he can be taken out ( though they don’t seem to have targeted a specific colonel at the moment ).

Those forces retreating West from Sirte will almost certainly be identified as being a threat to civilians in Misurata.

I just hope the rebels don’t turn out to be a threat to civilians if/when they take over.

undoubtedly regime change

is it just me or do the condems seem to be making all the same mistakes as newlabrador

I noticed that they started taking out loyalist weapons near Tripoli, to soften they up for an expected rebel advance.How does that protect civilians?

Funny how in some conflicts they are called civilians yet in others they are called insurgents.

Suppose it all depends on the motives of the people doing the name calling.

Funny how in some conflicts they are called civilians yet in others they are called insurgents.

Shirley you’ve confused that for rebels. Civilians have always been civilians (or perhaps collateral damage), whereas rebels are now typically referred to as insurgents. An exception is in the case of Libya, where they need to be known as rebels as they are effectively on the same side as coalition forces.

Looks like Gaddaffi’s thugs are dug in to put up a last stand. Won’t be so easy for the rebels now, even with air cover. I wonder how the stretched supply lines will hold up.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Video-Libya-Rebel-Advance-Stalled-Outside-Sirte-As-Rebel-Claim-Captured-Gaddafis-Home-Town/Article/200909415961263?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15961263_Video%3A_Libya_Rebel_Advance_Stalled_Outside_Sirte%2C_As_Rebel_Claim_Captured_Gaddafis_Home_Town

If they are protecting civilians, why are they not taking out rebel military convoys too? After all, the rebels are also killing civilians, albeit gaddaffi supporters according to many reports (none of which are western!!!!)

its all about getting gadaffi out, the spice must flow…

Shirley you’ve confused that for rebels.

Ah, maybe, but I was sure that they were civilians to start with and now have strangely morphed into rebels as the civil uprising has continued.

What about those unarmed civilians who actually support Gaddafi (their right to support whoever they want, after all)? What happens to them if/when the rebels take control? Will the UN be protecting them equally? How will they do so?

Fingers crossed Libyan rebels aren’t insane

They have apparently been bombing barracks, supply lines, and individual tanks – according to an interview I heard with a rebel leader. I fail to see how any of that relates to a no fly zone.

you might need to re read the UN resolution, it might be titled No Fly Zone, but that is possibly a misnomer

Yeah I am aware that the remit is pretty wide, but that’s my point – referring to it as a No Fly Zone is very misleading imo.

Of course, we could always look at it a different way – if Gadaffi hadn’t kept on killing his own people, the UN wouldn’t have implemented the NFZ.

Just the other view there.

I’m certainly no fan of Ghaddafi and I’m in two minds about military intervention including regime change.

But there’s lots of other countries ‘killing their own people’ – and ultimately how would any world leader react to an armed uprising in their country?

if Gadaffi hadn’t kept on killing his own people

How many has he killed just out of interest? Figures are pretty hazy and certainly don’t seem to be an order of magnitude more than Egypt.

What about those unarmed civilians who actually support Gaddafi (their right to support whoever they want, after all)? What happens to them if/when the rebels take control? Will the UN be protecting them equally? How will they do so?

the only thing that matters to the coalition is libya’s oil – its nothing to do with people’s welfare, otherwise gadaffodil would be enjoying the same freedom as mugabe still is after putting oil-less Zim and it’s people though the grinder.

call him what you want BUT!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk2u-pvOpcc

You have to say George Galloway makes some very good points (and is a very good speaker).

I usually think George is a prick but this time its hard to disagree with him

I love Gorgeous George. We need more like him who are willing to say it as it is, as it is we just move from clique to clique of middle management whiners who routinely take it in the arse from whoever pays the most.

otherwise gadaffodil would be enjoying the same freedom as mugabe still is after putting oil-less Zim and it’s people though the grinder

Did Mugabe actually bomb his own people tho?

Did Mugabe actually bomb his own people tho?

No he used bulldozers, gangs of thugs armed with machetes and mass starvation as his chosen tools of oppression.

EDIT Torminalis types faster!

Did Mugabe actually bomb his own people tho?

The preference was for gangs with machetes, I believe.

I wish we had many more like George Galloway.

call him what you want BUT!

Galloway has always had a tendency to talk a lot of common-sense, however much it might appear to be at odds with the officially perceived “truth”. It is precisely that quality which, compared to your average run-of-the-mill politician, makes him so shocking and intolerable to so many.

He compounds the problem by being an exceptionally good speaker ……. I thought his description of Blair’s “grisly embrace” of Gaddafi was classic Galloway.

Unfortunately the reason we don’t have more politicians like him is because it tends to lead to political oblivion, as official parties shun and ostracise them, and the press engages in character assassinations. It’s not the path which any career minded politician wants to follow.

Galloway’s point concerning the Arab League themselves sorting out the problem was particularly poignant imo. The US, Britain, and France, has for decades been pouring some of the most advanced and sophisticated weapons available into these western backed dictatorship. Not only that, but they have also trained their armed forces in their use, and in other military matters.

What a waste of money. Now a country like Saudi Arabia which is armed to the teeth with western technology is demanding that NATO fight a battle in the Middle East which they claim is vital, and yet which they insist they are not going to get involved in. Well if anyone should get involved then I reckon it should include Saudi airman and warplanes – they have definitely got both. As Galloway says, Libya is not in the North Atlantic.

Plus he does a great pussy cat impression.

I was trying to forget that IanMunro ………..thanks 😐

Yes, Galloway talks a hellva lot of common-sense and is exceptionally eloquent.

Occasionally he has a day off and acts like a ****.

George gave an object lesson in dealing with US Congress that wotsisname-BP-nonentity should have watched and learned from!

the only thing that matters to the coalition is libya’s oil – its nothing to do with people’s welfare, otherwise gadaffodil would be enjoying the same freedom as mugabe still is after putting oil-less Zim and it’s people though the grinder.

Thats the part I don’t understand. Two months ago we wee all over Gadaffi like a rash !! All The oil we wanted, trade aggrements you name it. What have we got to gain supporting rebels who might just give us a big f@%4k of pill when its all done and dusted. ( assuming they win )

we will put another puppet president/dictator in who’s more “compliant” than gadaffodil, its just how it works (for us anyways)… look what we did with Mohammad Mosaddegh!