Libyan Civil War Megathread

[Legbiter]

So now we're bombing them... to enforce a no-fly zone? Seems that we're more or less committed to removing Q/K/Gadhafi by default now.

Yeah, no point in keeping him around, hoping he won't start torching oil installations as a last defiant gesture. Take him out much like the Taliban were the first time with the Benghazis acting as the Northern Alliance. If he stays in power, he'll be an implacable enemy of the West.

[derspiess]

More like a million a pop. A few were brit ones. They had the good sense to buy tomahawks years ago.

The newer ones are cheaper.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2200&tid=1300&ct=2

[Valmy]

God fucking damnit.

[Viking]

This is very disappointing.  On the one hand, it's good that Europe is finally putting it's money where it's mouth is in terms of getting snookered by alleged 'liberal' oppositions.  On the other hand, the Libyan opposition is even worse than Qaddafi, so I'm annoyed that they're helping the wrong side.

This seems like one of those claims that require evidence.

[CountDeMoney]

This is very disappointing.  On the one hand, it's good that Europe is finally putting it's money where it's mouth is in terms of getting snookered by alleged 'liberal' oppositions.  On the other hand, the Libyan opposition is even worse than Qaddafi, so I'm annoyed that they're helping the wrong side.

This seems like one of those claims that require evidence.

Dude, it's Neil.  He has such a complex about being Canadian he'll say the sun will rise in the west tomorrow if it gives him the validation he craves.

[Legbiter]

al-Arabiya are claiming NATO planes downed by libyians. 

Meh, the Serbians on average shot down half a squadron a day for the entire Kosovo campaign back in the day. 

[citizen k]

is the sa-5 a real danger to modern NATO aircraft?

[CountDeMoney]

is the sa-5 a real danger to modern NATO aircraft?

Ducks are a real danger to modern NATO aircraft.  Anything's possible with bad luck.

[KRonn]

So now we're bombing them... to enforce a no-fly zone? Seems that we're more or less committed to removing Q/K/Gadhafi by default now.

There's nothing about a no-fly zone that's just what was talked about prior to the resolution.  The UN authorised all necessary measures short of occupation to stop attacks on the civilian population.  That's something else that concerns me, that we've gone from a no-fly zone to a full scale intervention with barely any time for public debate or consensus building on the subject

Of course knocking out air defence is necessary in a no-fly zone.

Agreed. What are the UN's plans if the no-fly zone doesn't work? Or if Ghadaffi remains in power, whether he stops attacking or not? And if Ghadaffi leaves, and/or the the Rebels take over, who are they? Are they fighting for democracy or their version of what ever authoritarian rule they have in mind?

It's a worthy goal to remove Ghadaffi, but we have to be wary of a power vacuum with different factions fighting for control. We, the West, may get sucked into this a  lot more heavily if we start stomething we don't know how to finish. Break it and we may own it.

Tough choices though. Sit back, do nothing, and wind up allowing a bloodbath to ensue as Ghadaffi's forces and goon squads take revenge upon the populace.

[DontSayBanana]

Ducks are a real danger to modern NATO aircraft.  Anything's possible with bad luck.

Then the real threats to the NATO planes should be mirrors, stepladders, and black cats, right?

[CountDeMoney]

Ducks are a real danger to modern NATO aircraft.  Anything's possible with bad luck.

Then the real threats to the NATO planes should be mirrors, stepladders, and black cats, right?

There's a reason we didn't invite the Poles.

[jimmy olsen]

[jimmy olsen]

Watching BBC world and there are reports that Qadaffi is razing Misurata to the ground with heavy shelling, and blaming it on the west.

[Martinus]

Agreed. What are the UN's plans if the no-fly zone doesn't work? Or if Ghadaffi remains in power, whether he stops attacking or not? And if Ghadaffi leaves, and/or the the Rebels take over, who are they? Are they fighting for democracy or their version of what ever authoritarian rule they have in mind?

Well I would assume NATO forces have a battle plan even if they have not broadcasted it to your and Gaddafi's benefit.

As for the rebel's goals pretty much all analytical media (such as the Economist) are plastered with reports on the political situation there but I guess we will continue following the Kronn's Principle - if information has not been posted on Languish it does not exist.

[Warspite]

Agreed. What are the UN's plans if the no-fly zone doesn't work? Or if Ghadaffi remains in power, whether he stops attacking or not? And if Ghadaffi leaves, and/or the the Rebels take over, who are they? Are they fighting for democracy or their version of what ever authoritarian rule they have in mind?

Well I would assume NATO forces have a battle plan even if they have not broadcasted it to your and Gaddafi's benefit.

As for the rebel's goals pretty much all analytical media (such as the Economist) are plastered with reports on the political situation there but I guess we will continue following the Kronn's Principle - if information has not been posted on Languish it does not exist.

Maybe the West will surprise us all but I come down on Kronn's side right now. This operation has all the hallmarks of the light-footprint, 'hoof it and hope' approach to intervention that is backed up by little in the way of political planning; even Kosovo, usually hailed as the great success of intervention, has nearly come a cropper on several occasions (and twelve years' on, no one still knows what to do with the northern Kosovo Serbs) for precisely this conspiracy of optimism. Do Something! and work out the problems later. This worked really well in: Somalia, ex-Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Congo ...

I very much doubt if any Western media outlet, even the Economist, actually has a real idea of what the rebel situation is in Libya. Foreign journalists parachuted in as a crisis begins do not suddenly become aware of decades-old currents of social division and interaction over the course of a month.

So yes, the Kronn principle of scepticism has been borne out a lot more in recent history than the Martinus position of 'The Economist leader said it should all be ok'.