Libya: Benghazi unrest, to Civil War, to a new government and Gaddafi's death. (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 02:32:33 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Libya: Benghazi unrest, to Civil War, to a new government and Gaddafi's death. (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Libya: Benghazi unrest, to Civil War, to a new government and Gaddafi's death.  (Read 184308 times)
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« on: February 21, 2011, 01:05:05 PM »

As an aside, you have to be a little amused at the obvious horror of British politicians and diplomats to the way the regime is acting. I mean, we sold them (some of) the weapons, didn't we? Does the Foreign Office believe that weapons sold to dubious regimes (or legit ones in pursuit of dubious causes; c.f. India in the context of Kashmir) are only ever used in parades?

The same basic comment can be photocopied for other uses with the names of the relevant countries (both the sellers and the buyers) altered when appropriate.

While I doubt Megrahi will go back to prison where he belongs for his role in Pan-Am 103 as a result of this, with the Gadaffis gone, it looks like the decision to send Megrahi back to Libya won't have gained BP much after all.  Heck, if BP's facilities in Libya take damage, it might even cost them.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #1 on: February 21, 2011, 02:27:19 PM »

While I doubt Megrahi will go back to prison where he belongs for his role in Pan-Am 103 as a result of this, with the Gadaffis gone, it looks like the decision to send Megrahi back to Libya won't have gained BP much after all.  Heck, if BP's facilities in Libya take damage, it might even cost them.

The decision had nothing to do with BP. It was a decision made on compassionate grounds made by the Scottish Government. In retrospect the Labour government favoured it (though they seem to have forgotten to tell their leader in Scotland...) but the British government had no jurisdiction over devolved matters pertaining to Scots Law.

Whether it was because of pressure due to trade or because of doubts about whether Megrahi had been fairly convicted, it is quite clear MacAskill chose to bend over backwards in making his determination over Megrahi's probable life expectancy.  To use a Lincoln metaphor, when a number of people bring timbers together that form the frame of a house, it is difficult to believe that they were not working to a common plan.  Megrahi's release involved a number of small decisions that only collectively allowed him to return to Libya.  All one can say positively about the Scottish Government's role in the matter was they chose not to look too critically at whether what they had been told about Megrahi's chance of survival was correct.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2011, 09:44:25 PM »

He's clearly done now, the point being how long will it take, and what will it take. For the flee, not sure he would have a lot of choices of destination with what just happened.

I think he's burned too many bridges for the Saudis to accept him.  At this point, he's likely limited to Zimbabwe, and even then it likely wouldn't be something publicly acknowledged.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2011, 07:34:28 PM »

Is the use of the old royal tricolor an indication that the as-Senussi line could hope to return to the throne (presumably as constitutional monarchs) or just that it is the old pre-Ghadaffi flag?
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2011, 10:18:19 PM »

I had thought that by those who care about such things, Muhammad was widely regarded as the true pretender and Idris as a scalawag and a con artist.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #5 on: February 28, 2011, 04:13:02 PM »

No - they are and they love him, it's just that they've been drugged by bin Laden so they don't realize it.
Has he announce an embargo on Nescafé yet?
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #6 on: March 04, 2011, 04:26:33 PM »

Government forces are within 1 mile of the central square in Zawiya, and the top rebel commander in the town has been killed. Although I'm not sure what would be worse: the government reprisals against rebels after they re-take the town, or the humanitarian crisis that would have played out in a long drawn-out siege with food supplies not being allowed in. Probably the latter.

I was somewhat surprised this hadn't happened sooner.  That it didn't was likely due in part to that IIRC the rebels in Zawiya had indicated that they were opposed to foreign intervention.  If the pro-Gaddafi side is moving in, they've either decided they aren't going to retake the east anytime soon and/or Zawiya is no longer useful in dissuading foreign help to the rebels.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #7 on: March 08, 2011, 04:28:21 PM »

At this point, I think the only kind of outside support the opposition is likely to get is logistical, i.e., we supply them with ammo and better weapons.  Can you say, Stinger?
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #8 on: March 19, 2011, 08:52:17 PM »

Forcing a cease-fire? Would be splendid.

Separating two fighting sides? Would be great.

Supporting one side against other in Arab tribal war? Insane.

The way the geography of Libya is, a divide back into Tripolitania and Cyrenaica is quite plausible.  About the only thing the two really had in common pre-Independence was being Italian colonies.  Uniting them made as much sense as uniting Algeria and Tunisia would have.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #9 on: March 19, 2011, 08:54:49 PM »

So they finally acted, after an entire day buying into Gaddafi's "ceasefire" and allowing him to almost entirely wipe out the rebels.

I don't think anyone bought into the ceasefire, just that it took time to get assets into place.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #10 on: March 19, 2011, 08:57:22 PM »

As an aside, the LA Times has this picture of Hillary Clinton and Sarkozy, in which Clinton looks like she's been possessed by aliens:




Wouldn't you if your arm was being held by Sarkozy? Wink
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #11 on: March 20, 2011, 01:26:23 PM »

I don't think the 'We should stop the natives from being slaughtered' line of thinking held much sway with the American public in 1891, actually. And Opebo, please realize that you of all people should refrain from commentin on what you perceive to be a 'colonial' mindset. If anyone's living the good old colonial life, it's you.

Actually, that line of reasoning was a contributing factor to us becoming involved in Cuba in 1898.  The reason the USS Maine was in place to be remembered was precisely because of our press sensationalizing the atrocities the Spanish were committing against the Cubans who were fighting for independence (and had been since 1895).

However, despite what opebo said, what happened in Hawaii was a pure naked power grab.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #12 on: March 20, 2011, 05:36:16 PM »

I am probably premature in asking this question, but nonetheless it needs to be asked:

In the event that Gaddafi is deposed and either executed by his people or exiled to Venezuela, what is the likelihood that Libya will be divided back into its precolonial parts: Tripolitania and Cyrenaica? 

I only see that likely if there is a long civil war in Libya, which in turn is dependent upon the circumstances at the time Gaddafi is removed from the scene.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #13 on: March 20, 2011, 08:47:26 PM »

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.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #14 on: March 21, 2011, 07:22:57 PM »

J.J., for all your gloom and doom here, the fact is that air power has forced Gadaffi to go largely on the defensive.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #15 on: March 22, 2011, 03:14:27 PM »
« Edited: March 22, 2011, 03:41:50 PM by True Federalist »

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.

Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #16 on: March 22, 2011, 03:47:57 PM »

What's 'TNC'?  'The New Colonials'?

So I got the preferred order in English wrong. NTC for National Transitional Council or TNC for Transitional National Council.  (i.e., the Rebel Alliance fighting the Emperor Gaddafi.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #17 on: March 22, 2011, 06:17:34 PM »

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.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #18 on: March 22, 2011, 09:43:19 PM »

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.

J.J., that fighting has been going for days.  Wikipedia has a fairly good and well-cited summary of what has been going on in Misurata for the past month. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Misurata
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #19 on: March 28, 2011, 11:27:08 AM »

Remind me the U.S.' vital interest there again?  Oh, wait, OIL!!!!!!!

Damn that Bush Obama for getting us into a fight over oil.

If our only interest was in the oil, the sensible thing would have been to support Gaddafi early so that he could continue selling it as he had been.  Whatever else this has been, it hasn't been a war about oil.  What it could easily turn into is a war for water, especially if Gaddaffi decides to pull a Samson in the temple and smash the Great Man-Made River before he dies.  Libya's population has grown so much, and the coastal aquifiers have become so salinized that if it were knocked out, there would be a serious water shortage in Libya.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #20 on: March 28, 2011, 12:17:40 PM »

Ernest, was I dreaming when the Libyans were threatening to destroy oil wells?  Keeping oil flowing out of Libya is our only "vital interest".

It's Italy's vital interest because Libya has been their primary source of crude.  Libya has been supplying only 2% of world oil production.  Interruption of that flow has caused some short term problems, but is hardly a vital interest of the United States.  The spike in oil prices has been more about concerns that the Gulf states (including the Saudis) might go up in flames than the effects of interruptions in Libyan oil.

If our primary concern had been oil, the sensible thing to do would have been to support Mubarak and Gaddafi from the start so as to avoid large scale disruptions in the oil supply.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #21 on: April 10, 2011, 03:15:59 PM »
« Edited: April 10, 2011, 03:17:47 PM by True Federalist »

Intervening in Libya was a big mistake, but I think it's way too simplistic to just pin all the blame on Obama. Most of the impetus for this mission came from Europe, which reading the posts on this forum also makes clear. Of course Obama should have pulled a Chirac an Eisenhower and told France and UK to go it alone.  

fixed it for you sbane
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #22 on: April 30, 2011, 08:42:30 PM »

I'll take anything said about Saif Al-Arab by the Gaddafi regime with a large side order of salt until they show the bodies.  I don't think he has been seen in weeks, and there were unconfirmed reports two months ago that he had joined the rebels of all things.  While I don't think he has joined the rebels, it is not at all implausible that he left Libya sometime ago with whatever portable wealth he could lay his hands on.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #23 on: August 16, 2011, 09:22:32 PM »

The rebels are now willing to say that Qaddafi can stay in Libya unprosecuted if he steps down. 

Good old Gaddafi is too smart to believe anything these people say, Mikado.

 

No reason to prosecute a corpse opebo.  If Qaddafi stays in Libya without being in charge, it will not be long before he is killed.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


« Reply #24 on: September 22, 2011, 12:49:06 PM »

Sabha has fallen. Bani Walid and Sirte are the last remaining Gaddafi holdouts.

Will you be attending the victory parade?

If the price (of gold) is right.

Since when has J.J. started to hack other people's accounts? Wink
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.052 seconds with 12 queries.