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

[2952-0-0]

Quick question: what is "Nicolae Ceausescu" in Libyan Arabic?

[2952-0-0]

Yeah with an army rebellion that's who he'll have to rely on. Cut off his funds, and he'll have no means of keeping control.

Useless. You and I know that the Ghaddafis have vaults full of $100 bills, gold, and silver under the palace. It has been reported that North Koreans are among the mercenaries, and that a plane full of mercenaries left for Libya from Zimbabwe (probably a mutual pact to suppress revolts between the world's worst dictators). Once it becomes clear the regime is finished the mercenaries will vanish. Unfortunately it will take a lot of blood to make the regime finished.

[2952-0-0]

Al Jazeera says they're using fighter jets to bomb protesters in Tripoli. Holy shiat. This has never been used to crust anti-government protests anywhere. The guy's going down hard.

[2952-0-0]

I've noticed an uncanny trend between this uprising and the Romanian one in 1989:

1989: Romania is the most closed of the Eastern Bloc and no one expects Ceausescu to be toppled quickly.
2011: Libya is the most closed of the Arab World and no one expects Gaddafi to be toppled quickly.

1989: small dispute over a church minister escalates into anti-regime protests.
2011: small dispute over a human rights activist's arrest escalates into anti-regime protests.

1989: church minister is quickly released, but protests escalate further.
2011: human rights activist is quickly released, but protests escalate further.

1989: riots begin in a remote corner of Romania, and initially Ceausescu uses brute force to try to crush them.
2011: riots begin in a remote corner of Libya, and initially Gaddafi uses brute force to try to crush them.

1989: when riots spread, Ceausescu uses mercenaries and accuses the west of fomenting the unrest.
2011: when riots spread, Gaddafi uses mercenaries and accuses the west of fomenting the unrest.

1989: extremely shocking reports of violence against civilians surface in the global media, while the army starts defecting.
2011: extremely shocking reports of violence against civilians surface in the global media, while the army starts defecting.

1989: Ceausescu stages mass pro-government rally on TV, which ends in the revolt spreading into the square.
2011: Gaddafi stages mass pro-government rally on TV, which ends in a humiliating speech at the back of a car holding an umbrella.

1989: rumours of Ceausescu fleeing to Iran or China dog him during the confusion.
2011: rumours of Gaddafi fleeing to Venezuela god him during the confusion.

1989: Ceaucescu flees Bucharest hoping to drum up support in his hometown.
2011: (some reports at this stage) Gaddafi flees Triploi hoping to drum up support in his hometown.

Anything else I missed?

[2952-0-0]

We'll be talking about this "speech" in 100 years, folks.

[2952-0-0]

This has become grimly funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUe_YoDAo-8

[2952-0-0]

Ben Ali: made three speeches to TV before fleeing.

Mubarak: made three speeches to TV before fleeing.

Gaddafi: has made three bizarre and incoherent speeches.

See a pattern?

[2952-0-0]

On the Twitter account of a certain politician:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No points for correctly stating whose account this is.

[2952-0-0]

I was waiting for this to appear: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2BdL3g1kxI

[2952-0-0]

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110226/local/gaddafis-voluptuous-ukrainian-nurse-heading-home

Wow, even that Ukrainian nurse is fleeing!

[2952-0-0]

But is a western-backed No Fly Zone really useful for the rebel movement? It would prevent the rebels from using their captured air force to fly troops from Benghazi to the liberated parts of the west, and if the west makes an exemption for rebel aircraft then it does hurt the legitimacy of the rebels, and by extension the new Libyan government when it is formed. So ideally any No Fly Zone should be enforced by an Arab country with a strong air force, most likely Egypt.

[2952-0-0]

The Libyan state propaganda outlet has had about as much reliability as Baghdad Bob. Why even pay attention to them?

It isn't unusual for state propaganda to make incredibly big lies in their dying days. Even Hitler believed his own lies about his troop numbers as the Russians closed in.

[2952-0-0]

There are reports that two loyalist battalions in Sirt have defected and taken over the airport, and that an air force pilot has done a Kamikaze mission on Gaddafi's Tripoli compound. If true this is a major psychological boost for the rebels.

[2952-0-0]

http://lewesternculturel.blogs.courrierinternational.com/archive/2011/03/18/confirmation-les-avions-francais-en-vol-pour-la-libye.html

French warplanes are already in the air, and the first bombings will occur before 4 AM French Time, or less than one hour from this moment.

[2952-0-0]

From what I hear the rebels aren't exactly saints. There have been reports that former government army soldiers have been abused, and there are also reports that the rebel leadership is doing nothing while people with black skin are being accused of being mercenaries (some are undoubtedly are) and targeted.

[2952-0-0]

Anyone else think we're watching a real-life version of Mad Max?

[2952-0-0]

It's been reported that Sirte has fallen without much resistance, and that a column of military vehicles fled westwards. Don't know what to make of this, given that both sides aren't very truthful.

[2952-0-0]

This is mission creep, plain and simple. It reinforces suspicions that the intervention is a stealthy war by the west for another Arab country's oil wealth and I don't think it's possible to undo that suspicion.

In my opinion there should have been a lot more covert undermining of the Gaddafi regime, like planting computer viruses into the Libyan military intranet or stoking up dissent among the tribes. Overt military action should have been limited to an air and naval blockade as well as striking any military units approaching rebel-held towns and cities. And arming the rebels should not be contemplated, let alone openly discussed and done, since it is against the UN Security Council resolution which the west championed. Resolution 1973 should also have banned the exporting of all crude oil from all Libyan territory.

What we're seeing here is a textbook example of mission creep.

[2952-0-0]

So much for that bullshiat about the opposition being infiltrated by Al Qaeda fighters.

[2952-0-0]

Has the first Downfall parody of Gaddafi's defeat been uploaded in YouTube yet?

[2952-0-0]

It turns out that Gaddafi has a Condoleezza Rice fetish:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

At least that's by far not the most bizarre thing about Moammar.

[2952-0-0]

Well we'll see if the U.S. is better off when the rebels take total control and the MadMan is gone........I'm not so sure.  We knew what we were getting with him and he was nothing more than a pimple on our ass....

Are we better off in Egypt so far?

In mid-1990 we were also not sure what was going on in Eastern Europe. In fact there was genuine reason to fear some countries were relapsing into Milosevic-style dictatorships.

[2952-0-0]

With Qaddafi gone, now it's on to Syria...  

Too little oil.

What Syria may lack in natural resources, it makes up for in strategic importance as an ally of Iran and benefactor of Islamist terrorist organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas. 

Sooner or later, once the opposition unifies and broadens its appeal to Aleppo and Damascus, the United States -though NATO- will intervene there as well. 

I think Obama wants to get re-elected.

[2952-0-0]

No, they probably just want to keep the Golan heights. Any settlements there yet?

There are not just settlements in the Golan Heights. It's been formally annexed into Israeli territory, which isn't the case for the West Bank and Gaza.

[2952-0-0]

At least China and Russia weren't the usual pricks.

They do have juicy contracts resting on their votes. That can't be said about Cuba or Ecuador or Zambia.