Libya: Benghazi unrest, to Civil War, to a new government and Gaddafi's death.

[J. J.]

BBC Monitoring: "'Libyan military source confirms orders were issued for the aerial bombardment of Benghazi within two hours,'" reported Al-Arabiya TV in an urgent screen caption at 1947 GMT."

Two pilots defected to Malta rather than carry out the order.

[J. J.]

BBC Monitoring: "'Libyan military source confirms orders were issued for the aerial bombardment of Benghazi within two hours,'" reported Al-Arabiya TV in an urgent screen caption at 1947 GMT."

Two pilots defected to Malta rather than carry out the order.

Unfortunately it seems some have carried out the orders if reports are correct.

Correct, but that seems to be a kind of confirmation.

[J. J.]

     It was a stupid suggestion in reaction to another dubious suggestion. A no-fly zone seems like something that likewise would require more intervention than just, I don't know, giving the rebels superior arms?

I doubt if you could get enough in and I'd know that the rebels could use them.

[J. J.]

Great news, though I worry it might be too little too late.

This.

[J. J.]

US Tomahawk in the air now, presumably aimed at AA defenses.

[J. J.]

According to MSNBC: "U.S. has launched military strikes inside Libya - NBC"

Beet you by 13 minutes. 

US Tomahawk in the air now, presumably aimed at AA defenses.

[J. J.]

a terrestrial operation will be necessary. The no-fly-zone is no longer sufficient by now.

There is a gap between a no-fly-zone and a terrestrial operation. That has been all the sense of the French resolution: No Ground forces. That's the sense of this operation and an important conditions for Libyans. That is not our war. We help them. All of this is why it is not Iraq or Afghanistan. And that's why France insisted in its resolution on something further than a no-fly-zone, while making clear that it wouldn't use ground forces. Now, if it comes to be necessary and only if a Libyan representation ask for it, it might have to be reexamined, but we're far from this tonight.

But do we really have an alternative ? With the rebels almost anihilated, the only thing a no-fly-zone will do is allowing the rebels to maybe keep Benghazi, and allowing Gaddafi to hold everything else, rebuild his legitimacy etc...
Which means it will be a masquerade for the West, a trauma for the Libyan people, a worrying sign for other Arab countries and a humiliation for human rights diplomacy.

There may be no alternative.  In looking at how well "no fly zones" have worked in the past, I doubt that Qaddafi will find it too much of an impediment.

[J. J.]

BBC America is rerunning "The Best of Both Worlds."  Appropriate nostalgia. 

[J. J.]

Oh yes, and how about Gaddafi's letter to Obama?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/To-my-Dear-Obama-our-son-says-Gaddafi-defending-attack-on-rebels/articleshow/7743954.cms

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's deliberately trying to paint Obama as Muslim.  Qaddafi is quite calculated.

[J. J.]

Is Gaddafi a birther?

He's playing to them.

[J. J.]

Is Gaddafi a birther?

Win.

Gaddafi is pretty soon going to say how Muslim Kenyan born Obama is helping those druggie Al Qaeda foreigner rebels. Pretty much straight out of Fox News.

Gaddafi may find that the French have a bit more resolve than Fox News portrays them as having.

You probably could write the press release for that.  It isn't true, obviously, but Qaddafi is trying to play to the birthers. 

[J. J.]

Qaddafi was just on, stating he would resist.

[J. J.]

Looks like the US is now stepping to the forefront.  3 B2's attacked an airfield and now the F-15 and F-16's based in Italy are attacking Qaddafi's ground forces.  We probably should have already had a carrier positioned but apparently one is en route.

I am somewhat skeptical of the effects of air power on ground politics.

[J. J.]

I'm glad that for once we share the same feelings, Franzl.

Germany almost always acts like this. Must be in most Germans' blood, I imagine.

Blood and irony?

[J. J.]

One of the worst things Bush did is to discredit military intervention for humanitarian reasons. It will unfortunately take a while for the American left to support it again, even when done by a Democratic president.

GHW Bush, going back to Somalia.

[J. J.]

Here is the military breakdown on Libya: 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/libya/army-equip.htm

I think it will be difficult to win this, or protect the rebels, from the air.

Also, Qaddafi has a decentralized command; there can be independent functioning.

[J. J.]

Here is the military breakdown on Libya: 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/libya/army-equip.htm

I think it will be difficult to win this, or protect the rebels, from the air.

Also, Qaddafi has a decentralized command; there can be independent functioning.

He likely hoped to excuse his breaking of the ceasefire on rogue commanders.

As for Gaddafi's forces, Saddam had more than that.  The sole fly in the ointment might be the T-90's with their reactive armor, but I have to wonder if Libya has gotten them yet, as they were just ordered last year.  Even so, I don't think that by themselves, they will help Gaddafi that much now that he has lost control of the skies.  Air power can't take territory by itself, but it sure can destroy the opponent's ability to so do.

This could still turn into an ugly little guerrilla war, but the territory held by the TNC is safe from being overrun.

Some, like the T-62's might have been retrofitted with reactive armor.  Saddam had more, in 1991, but it wasn't retro-fitted and nothing as advanced the T-90's.  The coalition also had more aircraft and 6 weeks of bombing.

Do the French/British have any ground attach aircraft like the A-10?

[J. J.]

Here is the military breakdown on Libya: 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/libya/army-equip.htm

I think it will be difficult to win this, or protect the rebels, from the air.

Also, Qaddafi has a decentralized command; there can be independent functioning.

He likely hoped to excuse his breaking of the ceasefire on rogue commanders.

As for Gaddafi's forces, Saddam had more than that.  The sole fly in the ointment might be the T-90's with their reactive armor, but I have to wonder if Libya has gotten them yet, as they were just ordered last year.  Even so, I don't think that by themselves, they will help Gaddafi that much now that he has lost control of the skies.  Air power can't take territory by itself, but it sure can destroy the opponent's ability to so do.

This could still turn into an ugly little guerrilla war, but the territory held by the TNC is safe from being overrun.

Some, like the T-62's might have been retrofitted with reactive armor.  Saddam had more, in 1991, but it wasn't retro-fitted and nothing as advanced the T-90's.  The coalition also had more aircraft and 6 weeks of bombing.

Do the French/British have any ground attach aircraft like the A-10?

Reactive armor isnt much help against a JDAM.

It is, if you miss it, or don't target it, from the air.  The second one is the key.

[J. J.]

^I haven't seen anyone suggest that we send in ground troops. If Qaddafi's forces tried to make a massive movement of armored assets they would be annihilated from the air.

Easier said than done, and it wouldn't have to be a mass movement.

[J. J.]

^I haven't seen anyone suggest that we send in ground troops. If Qaddafi's forces tried to make a massive movement of armored assets they would be annihilated from the air.

Easier said than done, and it wouldn't have to be a mass movement.

Looks like the French Air Force had a fairly easy job of it.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday#p/u/4/iK4XCLc9O18

One tank, 979 operational.  1-2 SP guns, 448-9 operational.  36 hours of attacks.  Not a good ratio.

[J. J.]

^I haven't seen anyone suggest that we send in ground troops. If Qaddafi's forces tried to make a massive movement of armored assets they would be annihilated from the air.

Easier said than done, and it wouldn't have to be a mass movement.

Looks like the French Air Force had a fairly easy job of it.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday#p/u/4/iK4XCLc9O18

One tank, 979 operational.  1-2 SP guns, 448-9 operational.  36 hours of attacks.  Not a good ratio.

JJ, please.  If they bring their forces out in the open and the coalition has the will, they will be wiped out piecemeal. If we want to destroy their military it would only be a matter of how long.  It is true that you can't hold any ground with air power, but you can knock out assets that aren't hidden, buried or put among civilians.

Not with what the coalition has and not in enough numbers to stop them.  Sure in 1991, the US destroyed a large number of Saddam's tanks, with more aircraft and a longer period of time.  Sure, the coalition could take out the tanks in months, but by that time, Qaddafi is sipping tea in Benghazi.

[J. J.]

J.J., for all your gloom and doom here, the fact is that air power has forced Gadaffi to go largely on the defensive.

Actually neither is correct.  Qaddafi is not on the defensive, and it isn't a question of gloom and doom.

As for the tanks, the video showed one, and 1-2 SP guns.

There is no question that the coalition can (and has) shut down Libyan air operations (and the F-16 seems to have gone down due to a mechanical problem).  It can stop any major sea operations.  The coalition can slow ground forces via air power; it can weaken ground forces via air power.  It cannot stop ground forces via air power.

[J. J.]

J.J., for all your gloom and doom here, the fact is that air power has forced Gadaffi to go largely on the defensive.

Actually neither is correct.  Qaddafi is not on the defensive, and it isn't a question of gloom and doom.

I said largely, not completely.  He may well be able to complete his efforts against the remaining pockets of resistance in the west, but he has been forced to go on the defensive in the east which is where the NTC is concentrated.  Once a buffer zone with no major civilian concentrations present is establishe between the two sides, I expect the front will stabilize for a while.  Allied air power and NTC ground power should be able to keep Gaddafi from advancing, but NTC ground power will have a hard time advancing on its own against Gaddafi ground power.

He is no where near a defensive in the east and the "NTC forces" are a group of guys with guns that are not even close to a military force.

As of an hour ago, the Guardian reported Zintan still being shelled and continued Libyan attacks.  http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/22/libya-ajdabiya-gaddafi-forces-rebels

[J. J.]

Apparently Qadaffi forced have entered the town of Misrata.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/22/gaddafi-attacks-misrata

The air assault has slowed the advance, but not stopped it.

[J. J.]

J.J., take a look at a map.  Both Zirtan and Misurata are in the west and Gaddafi's forces had already entered Misurata by the time the air campaign began. Where Gaddafi has been forced to retreat is in the east.

They just entered Misrata today.  The people were celebrating, then the shelling started.  Later, tanks entered the city.  I just saw it on the BBC.