Libya's Protests and Civil War

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby folkhero » Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:23 pm UTC

Glass Fractal wrote:I'm wondering if this is this a "police action" or did Congress voted to send the military in.

Obama's a Nobel Peace Prize winner, he doesn't have to ask congress's permission to kill people and blow stuff up.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

Glass Fractal
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 2:53 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Glass Fractal » Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:56 pm UTC

folkhero wrote:
Glass Fractal wrote:I'm wondering if this is this a "police action" or did Congress voted to send the military in.

Obama's a Nobel Peace Prize winner, he doesn't have to ask congress's permission to kill people and blow stuff up.


Heh. Actually *quick google search* it looks like his justification is that the US is providing support to other countries, not leading a war effort.

Dark Avorian
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 10:48 pm UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Dark Avorian » Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:07 pm UTC

The UN Security council was established in the UN Charter which is an international treaty. It has broad powers under the terms of the charter and because the US has already signed onto the UN it has a responsibility to abide by the treaty. It needs no "excuse"
The 62-foot tall statue of Jesus constructed out of styrofoam, wood and fiberglass resin caught on fire after the right hand of the statue was struck by lightning.


meatyochre wrote:And yea, verily the forums crowd spake: "Teehee!"

Glass Fractal
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 2:53 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Glass Fractal » Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:14 pm UTC

Dark Avorian wrote:The UN Security council was established in the UN Charter which is an international treaty. It has broad powers under the terms of the charter and because the US has already signed onto the UN it has a responsibility to abide by the treaty. It needs no "excuse"


Where the US is concerned the Constitution comes before the UN. The fact that the UN has made a decision to send aid could be counted as an excuse, though.

Dark Avorian
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 10:48 pm UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Dark Avorian » Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:25 pm UTC

Admittedly it was a while ago, but the creation of the UN is treaty and is covered by Article 2 Section 2 which describes the president's power over the military. Same reason the Korean War was legal is the one this one is... (god the pain of ambiguity).

Also, Article 6

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
The 62-foot tall statue of Jesus constructed out of styrofoam, wood and fiberglass resin caught on fire after the right hand of the statue was struck by lightning.


meatyochre wrote:And yea, verily the forums crowd spake: "Teehee!"

PeterCai
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:09 pm UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby PeterCai » Sun Mar 20, 2011 1:45 am UTC

This is starting to feel more and more like a massive PR campaign than any real effort to support revolutions...still no news on Yemen?

Numquam
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:13 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Numquam » Sun Mar 20, 2011 4:45 am UTC

Dark Avorian wrote:Admittedly it was a while ago, but the creation of the UN is treaty and is covered by Article 2 Section 2 which describes the president's power over the military. Same reason the Korean War was legal is the one this one is... (god the pain of ambiguity).

Also, Article 6

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."



Actually, that's false. Constitutional restrictions override international treaties.

In the decision of Reid v. Covert Justice Black explained why.1


Justice Black wrote:It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights -- let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition -- to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power under an international agreement without observing constitutional prohibitions. In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government, and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and the Senate combined.
There is nothing new or unique about what we say here. This Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty. For example, in Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258, 267, it declared: The treaty power, as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments, and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States.



1. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/h ... 01_ZO.html
admiror, o internet, te non cecidisse (ruinis)
qui tot scriptorum taedia sustineas

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Iulus Cofield » Sun Mar 20, 2011 5:42 am UTC

I'm assuming Congress approved the UN Charter, although this is bafflingly hard to find in a Google search. So it doesn't matter if treaties don't supersede the Constitution, because Congress already approved this 66 years ago:

UN Charter, Article 25 wrote:The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter.


Edit: Yep, I was right.

User avatar
mmmcannibalism
Posts: 2150
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:16 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby mmmcannibalism » Sun Mar 20, 2011 5:48 am UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:I'm assuming Congress approved the UN Charter, although this is bafflingly hard to find in a Google search. So it doesn't matter if treaties don't supersede the Constitution, because Congress already approved this 66 years ago:

UN Charter, Article 25 wrote:The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter.


Edit: Yep, I was right.


If I'm reading your post right, the point is that a treaty that violated the constitution would be unconstitutional. For instance, a treaty banning all guns would be held as unconstitutional.
Izawwlgood wrote:I for one would happily live on an island as a fuzzy seal-human.

Oregonaut wrote:Damn fetuses and their terroist plots.

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Iulus Cofield » Sun Mar 20, 2011 5:56 am UTC

Sure, because the UN Charter or any other treaty doesn't have the power to amend the constitution. But going to war doesn't require a Constitutional Amendment, only the approval of Congress. When Congress approved the UN Charter, it approved any future military action ordered by the UN Security Council. Ergo, Congress does not need to approve any military action ordered by the UNSC, because it already has.

++$_
Mo' Money
Posts: 2370
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:06 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby ++$_ » Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:21 am UTC

PeterCai wrote:This is starting to feel more and more like a massive PR campaign than any real effort to support revolutions...still no news on Yemen?
And how do you propose we intervene in Yemen? The situation there is soldiers shooting protesters with rifles -- this is a situation that we can't deal with unless we put "boots on the ground" (and, as we should have known already before we invaded Iraq, but certainly learned there if we didn't already know it, we can't deal with it even if we do).

In Libya, you have soldiers driving tanks and flying aircraft over miles of open desert in order to slaughter civilians in distant cities. That is a situation we can do something about.

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Qaanol » Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:41 am UTC

Watching CNN now, they’ve got a translation of Gadhafi speaking on Libyan state TV. Predictable diatribe, but one quote deserved to be repeated.

Gadhafi sez, “It is the people of Libya against the neo-Nazis. You tyrants, your people will bring you down.”

And of course he adds, “All tyrants fall under the pressure of the masses.”
wee free kings

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Diadem » Sun Mar 20, 2011 11:24 am UTC

Qaanol wrote:And of course he adds, “All tyrants fall under the pressure of the masses.”

People like Gaddafi have long ago lost the ability to see the irony in statements like this. Double ironic is that in his case it's even false. He's going to fall by steel-clad NATO boots, not a popular uprising. Though the popular uprising came very close, and certainly brought the NATO into this.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6817
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby sardia » Sun Mar 20, 2011 1:48 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
Qaanol wrote:And of course he adds, “All tyrants fall under the pressure of the masses.”

People like Gaddafi have long ago lost the ability to see the irony in statements like this. Double ironic is that in his case it's even false. He's going to fall by steel-clad NATO boots, not a popular uprising. Though the popular uprising came very close, and certainly brought the NATO into this.

Actually, the west is hoping that after attacking Libya, the rebels can regroup and force an end to the situation. Endings can include Gaddafi leaving the country because he panicked, to rebels storming Tripoli. At worst, Gaddafi kills the rebels anyway because the rebels suck at fighting.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby KnightExemplar » Sun Mar 20, 2011 2:28 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
Diadem wrote:
Qaanol wrote:And of course he adds, “All tyrants fall under the pressure of the masses.”

People like Gaddafi have long ago lost the ability to see the irony in statements like this. Double ironic is that in his case it's even false. He's going to fall by steel-clad NATO boots, not a popular uprising. Though the popular uprising came very close, and certainly brought the NATO into this.

Actually, the west is hoping that after attacking Libya, the rebels can regroup and force an end to the situation. Endings can include Gaddafi leaving the country because he panicked, to rebels storming Tripoli. At worst, Gaddafi kills the rebels anyway because the rebels suck at fighting.


Realistically, I think that this will be dragged out for many years, with the UN Countries refusing to dedicate any real resources to overthrowing Gaddafi. I'm thinking that the best case scenario might be Libya getting fractured into two countries. The Rebels will be safe if they stick in Benghazi, I see little reason why they'll want to push an offensive against superior military might. If they stay on the defensive, the UN will carpet bomb Gaddafi's tanks (ie: protect the civilians).

Politically speaking, I can't imagine UN Forces helping in an offensive push. The resolution explicitly mentions the protection of civilians, and such a move will have civilian casualties. So I can't see the UN bombing Tripoli to help out the rebels. Basically, without ground troops, the chances of actually overthrowing Gaddafi are limited. Still, the goal of the no-fly-zone is NOT to install a new puppet government, but instead to prevent further loss of life. By every account, this scenario would be a success. True, its a stalemate between Rebels and Gaddafi.

I'm thinking something like North / South Korea. A line will be drawn, a ceasefire agreed upon, and 50 years from now, Gaddafi's sons will have their artillery aimed at a Democratic East Libya, holding them hostage because the delusional West Libya dictator thinks its a good idea. And yes, I argue this is the best case for this situation. (I can imagine many worse cases...) Well, actually, with the "no fly zone", if Gaddafi starts to move artillery closer to Benghazi, UN Forces would be authorized to bomb them... so think North Korea / South Korea, without the artillery.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Glass Fractal
Posts: 497
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 2:53 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Glass Fractal » Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:01 am UTC

Seems like the coalition isn't even pretending this is just a no-fly zone. When they saw mechanized infantry moving toward Bengazi forced were ordered to attack them.

User avatar
Antimony-120
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:16 am UTC
Location: Wherever you can look - wherever there's a fight, so hungry people can eat.

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Antimony-120 » Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:38 am UTC

Glass Fractal wrote:Seems like the coalition isn't even pretending this is just a no-fly zone. When they saw mechanized infantry moving toward Bengazi forced were ordered to attack them.


I think they're treating it as an enforced cease-fire, which is of course what the Arab league is pissed about.
Wolydarg wrote:That was like a roller coaster of mathematical reasoning. Problems! Solutions! More problems!


****************Signature Dehosted, New Signature Under Construction************************

Mittagessen
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:21 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Mittagessen » Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:24 am UTC

Antimony-120 wrote:
Glass Fractal wrote:Seems like the coalition isn't even pretending this is just a no-fly zone. When they saw mechanized infantry moving toward Bengazi forced were ordered to attack them.


I think they're treating it as an enforced cease-fire, which is of course what the Arab league is pissed about.


Which is exactly what the UN resolution is calling for. The no-fly zone is all but a small part of the actions legitimized by resolution 1970/1973.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6817
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby sardia » Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:00 am UTC

Mittagessen wrote:
Antimony-120 wrote:
Glass Fractal wrote:Seems like the coalition isn't even pretending this is just a no-fly zone. When they saw mechanized infantry moving toward Bengazi forced were ordered to attack them.


I think they're treating it as an enforced cease-fire, which is of course what the Arab league is pissed about.


Which is exactly what the UN resolution is calling for. The no-fly zone is all but a small part of the actions legitimized by resolution 1970/1973.

The arab league only called for a no fly zone, which is some muddled version of shooting down planes, maybe some bases and air defenses. The UN decided on protecting civilians in general. A lot more things can kill civilians than just planes. So the western powers are bombing everything that threatens civilians as opposed to just the above listed stuff.

anna james
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 12:47 pm UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby anna james » Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:27 pm UTC

The news in from the Libya is that Col Gaddafi is ready for a long with all the collation forces of US, UK, and Canada....... Hope Libya can stand up this attack as to their is no way one could go in and defeat the super powers of the world.....

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby The Reaper » Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:16 pm UTC

anna james wrote:The news in from the Libya is that Col Gaddafi is ready for a long with all the collation forces of US, UK, and Canada....... Hope Libya can stand up this attack as to their is no way one could go in and defeat the super powers of the world.....

Depends which Libya to which you're referring. If we count the rebels as Libya, and the entrenched dictator as not Libya, you can see we're merely helping Libya with some police actions against heavily armed criminals. I think Libya shall come out on top of this situation. :]

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6817
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby sardia » Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:00 pm UTC

anna james wrote:The news in from the Libya is that Col Gaddafi is ready for a long with all the collation forces of US, UK, and Canada....... Hope Libya can stand up this attack as to their is no way one could go in and defeat the super powers of the world.....

Guerrilla warfare>advanced armies. Unless you do what the russians do and just kill everyone, but even they don't have the balls to shoot every single person in the opposing country.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:33 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
anna james wrote:The news in from the Libya is that Col Gaddafi is ready for a long with all the collation forces of US, UK, and Canada....... Hope Libya can stand up this attack as to their is no way one could go in and defeat the super powers of the world.....

Guerrilla warfare>advanced armies. Unless you do what the russians do and just kill everyone, but even they don't have the balls to shoot every single person in the opposing country.


Can you name some examples of Guerrilla warfare fought in deserts? Mostly, they seem to be fought in cities or in forest/jungle/mountains, where it's ridiculously easy to hide. I suppose if the US/UN/whatever captures Tripoli, there would be Guerrillas, but if the UN/US decides to just conquer everything but the cities (blockading ports and destroying the farms), the cities themselves will starve to death.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Dauric » Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:40 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
sardia wrote:
anna james wrote:The news in from the Libya is that Col Gaddafi is ready for a long with all the collation forces of US, UK, and Canada....... Hope Libya can stand up this attack as to their is no way one could go in and defeat the super powers of the world.....

Guerrilla warfare>advanced armies. Unless you do what the russians do and just kill everyone, but even they don't have the balls to shoot every single person in the opposing country.


Can you name some examples of Guerrilla warfare fought in deserts? Mostly, they seem to be fought in cities or in forest/jungle/mountains, where it's ridiculously easy to hide. I suppose if the US/UN/whatever captures Tripoli, there would be Guerrillas, but if the UN/US decides to just conquer everything but the cities (blockading ports and destroying the farms), the cities themselves will starve to death.


Yeah, and that causes devastation amongst civilians. Militarily effective, perhaps, but disastrous as foreign policy both in domestic and foreign opinion.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Oregonaut » Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:01 pm UTC

Not to mention illegal.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Iulus Cofield » Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:58 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
sardia wrote:
anna james wrote:The news in from the Libya is that Col Gaddafi is ready for a long with all the collation forces of US, UK, and Canada....... Hope Libya can stand up this attack as to their is no way one could go in and defeat the super powers of the world.....

Guerrilla warfare>advanced armies. Unless you do what the russians do and just kill everyone, but even they don't have the balls to shoot every single person in the opposing country.


Can you name some examples of Guerrilla warfare fought in deserts? Mostly, they seem to be fought in cities or in forest/jungle/mountains, where it's ridiculously easy to hide. I suppose if the US/UN/whatever captures Tripoli, there would be Guerrillas, but if the UN/US decides to just conquer everything but the cities (blockading ports and destroying the farms), the cities themselves will starve to death.


Have you seen Laurence of Arabia?

IcedT
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:34 pm UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby IcedT » Tue Mar 22, 2011 5:01 am UTC

sardia wrote:Guerrilla warfare>advanced armies.
As long as the guerrillas have the logistical skill, numbers, and local support to effectively bleed the advanced army's resources. You don't just say "we're guerrillas now!" and turn deadly. An insurgency of Qaddafi, ten of his buddies and a Jeep isn't going to disrupt anything.

User avatar
jules.LT
Posts: 1539
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:20 pm UTC
Location: Paris, France, Europe

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby jules.LT » Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:26 pm UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:Have you seen Laurence of Arabia?

I was going to say that with satellite observation and bombers against him he wouldn't have stood a chance, but it's true that Bin Laden could hide in caves for ages...

The coalition will take care of Gaddafi's heavy weapons and logistics, but then the rebels will have to do the ground work of taking the cities back.
Last edited by jules.LT on Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:33 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Bertrand Russell wrote:Not to be absolutely certain is, I think, one of the essential things in rationality.
Richard Feynman & many others wrote:Keep an open mind – but not so open that your brain falls out

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Oregonaut » Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:38 pm UTC

I was pleased to hear this morning after an F-15 experienced mechanical failure that the pilot and EWS officer ejected safely and were recovered. I was even happier to hear that the EWS officer landed in a sheep field, was surrounded by friendlies (civilian style) who all wanted to say "Hi" and "Thank you" and shake his hand.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby podbaydoor » Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:48 pm UTC

I bet the sheep weren't pleased.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Oregonaut » Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:53 pm UTC

Well, you can't please everyone. Sheep are notoriously fickle creatures.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
Triangle_Man
WINNING
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 8:41 pm UTC
Location: CANADA

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Triangle_Man » Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:59 pm UTC

Oregonaut wrote:Well, you can't please everyone. Sheep are notoriously fickle creatures.


Don't they all just do whatever their leader tells them too?
I really should be working right now, but somehow I don't have the energy.

The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:My moral system allows me to bitch slap you for typing that.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Oregonaut » Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:00 pm UTC

Unless their leader is telling them to calm the froak down. They don't do that well at all.

Also, sheep have to decide that they will follow that leader. Then they'll do whatever. But establishing leadership over sheep can be hard.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7606
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Zamfir » Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:08 pm UTC

IcedT wrote:
sardia wrote:Guerrilla warfare>advanced armies.
As long as the guerrillas have the logistical skill, numbers, and local support to effectively bleed the advanced army's resources. You don't just say "we're guerrillas now!" and turn deadly. An insurgency of Qaddafi, ten of his buddies and a Jeep isn't going to disrupt anything.

But aren't the guerillas the other side? Gadafi is the guy with the organized army, his opponents are amateurs with weapons from Ebay. Apparently, there are also former regular units of Gadafi on the rebel side, but we're not hearing from them yet. Perhaps the rebels don't trust them, or the regular soldiers were smart enough to wait for foreign support.

I'd say Gadafi might actually be in an attractive position. Each air strike makes it look more like a regular war against Lybia, helping him to regain support in the rest of the country. While the rebels still don't have the ground forces to threaten him directly.

IcedT
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:34 pm UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby IcedT » Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:24 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:
IcedT wrote:
sardia wrote:Guerrilla warfare>advanced armies.
As long as the guerrillas have the logistical skill, numbers, and local support to effectively bleed the advanced army's resources. You don't just say "we're guerrillas now!" and turn deadly. An insurgency of Qaddafi, ten of his buddies and a Jeep isn't going to disrupt anything.

But aren't the guerillas the other side? Gadafi is the guy with the organized army, his opponents are amateurs with weapons from Ebay. Apparently, there are also former regular units of Gadafi on the rebel side, but we're not hearing from them yet. Perhaps the rebels don't trust them, or the regular soldiers were smart enough to wait for foreign support.

I'd say Gadafi might actually be in an attractive position. Each air strike makes it look more like a regular war against Lybia, helping him to regain support in the rest of the country. While the rebels still don't have the ground forces to threaten him directly.
I was just speaking generally because this particular piece of conventional wisdom is absurd and useless for any kind of actual military decision-making, and Sardia's comment was in response to a hypothetical western/US occupation of Libya and a resultant pro-Qaddafi insurgency. In the present situation the rebels are not quite guerillas (they engage in formal military operations and have a clear intent to take and hold territory), but they're definitely the less professional of the two forces, even if they are stiffened by former regulars.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Dream » Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:16 am UTC

Oregonaut wrote:I was pleased to hear this morning after an F-15 experienced mechanical failure that the pilot and EWS officer ejected safely and were recovered. I was even happier to hear that the EWS officer landed in a sheep field, was surrounded by friendlies (civilian style) who all wanted to say "Hi" and "Thank you" and shake his hand.

Sadly, some locals were injured during the pickup.
US forces sent into Libya to rescue two downed American airmen botched the mission by shooting and wounding friendly villagers who had come to help, witnesses have said.

Libyans who went to investigate the US warplane's crash site said that a US helicopter had come in with guns firing, creating panic and wounding onlookers, some of whom had to be taken to hospital; one 20-year-old man is expected to have his leg amputated.

The villagers said they had been searching for the plane's missing airmen to welcome them and help them.

A member of the Libyan rebel forces at the site of the crash, Omar Sayid, a colonel of the military police, told Channel Four News: "We are disturbed about the shooting, because if they'd given us a chance we would have handed over both pilots. This shooting created panic."

The airmen ejected from their F-15E at 10.30am local time on Monday after what the Pentagon described as "equipment malfunction"; it had not been shot down. The airmen's parachutes opened and they landed at separate locations in rebel territory, near Bu Mariem, 24 miles east of Benghazi.

One hid in a sheep pen before being found by rebel forces, hugged, given juice and food, and taken to Benghazi. The other was picked up by US marines. Both are back in US hands, with only minor injuries.
Among them was Hamad Abdul Ati, 43, who had bullet and shrapnel wounds. He said he was puzzled rather than angry, and did not understand why the Americans had been so aggressive in their rescue mission.

"We consider that whoever is shot down or a prisoner of war, we should save him and hand him over," he told Hilsum from his hospital bed. "But another plane shot at me and Hamdy, my son. I have shrapnel in my hand."Hospital staff said that Hamdy, aged 20, wa s having an operation to amputate his leg.

"Why did this happen? My car is destroyed, my home is damaged. We would have just picked the second pilot up and put him wherever he wanted in a safe place. Even the other one, we had a celebration for him," Abdul Ati said.

Reporters said the villagers had showed no animosity after the incident; instead, they expressed gratitude for the US-led coalition, which they said had saved them from massacre by Gaddafi's forces.

It seems the actual rescue, effected by a pair of Ospreys, resulted in no casualties. Unfortunately a helicopter flying as part of the same mission, but not collecting any US personnel, fired on civilians wounding six.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Oregonaut » Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:39 am UTC

Osprey = Marines.

<facepalm>

Seriously guys? Can we stop the trigger happy?
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Mar 23, 2011 1:25 am UTC

Oregonaut wrote:Osprey = Marines.

<facepalm>

Seriously guys? Can we stop the trigger happy?


But last I heard, its the new way of greeting people. You know, friendly wave, followed by friendly fire, and then a friendly hug.

Anyway, I hope to see where the investigation of this is going to go... do our forces really "Shoot first ask later?" I'd expect a bit more intelligence out of them. Either way, thank goodness we aren't putting any ground forces in there, lest we fuck things up again.

Heh, the less action we do, the better our international standing. The US has already "led the charge" to some degree, and we're already preoccupied from the other wars...

EDIT: Also, my friend told me about this...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... kucin.html

Impeachment? What? That seems a bit extreme, right? I thought that people were saying that Obama hasn't done enough in this conflict...
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby Iulus Cofield » Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:36 am UTC

That's stupid. As someone entirely unversed in Constitutional law, it took me all of five minutes googling to figure out Congress already authorized all military action through the UN security council. Then again, Ralph Nader's popularity couldn't exactly get lower.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6817
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Libya's Protests and Civil War

Postby sardia » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:11 am UTC

I wonder how the situation in Libya is going to proceed. Does anyone think the rebels will actually push back the armed forces under Qaddafi? The rebels suck so much at fighting, because they lack training, equipment, and well, everything except enthusiasm.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests