Uprising in Libya

[Koolaidkirby]

It is telling that he could not hold on to his birthplace - especially in a tribal society.

He hasn't lost Sirte quite yet. The initial reports seem to have been based on rebel scouts encountering little resistance at first. But now actual battle has begun there.

Yep, there's fighting on the road to the city. The city itself, surprisingly, is reported to be empty, so propably most of the residents, which are known to be fanatically pro-Gaddafi, realized that their city is near the front and moved to Tripoli.

In other news, parts of the army in the Kurfa region have defected to the Rebels.

Which is good news for the rebels, its showing that some would be defectors still haven't defected simply because they thought Gadaffi had all the tanks + planes. and with the UN backing the rebels it looks like they're looking to switch to the "winning side"

[Sea Skimmer]

He hasn't lost Sirte quite yet. The initial reports seem to have been based on rebel scouts encountering little resistance at first. But now actual battle has begun there.

No battle, it doesn't look like rebels are anywhere within 100km of Sirte,

[Tribun]

The battle seems to be raging around 60km outside of Sirte. According to reports, Gaddafi's men actually have little armour and instead hide in the trees, meaning it is a bloody one-on-one battle.

[Edward Yee]

Talk of attempts to negotiate a "safe exit" for Gaddafi:

A senior American official signalled that a solution in which Gaddafi flee to a country beyond the reach of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is investigating war crimes charges against him, would be acceptable to Washington, pointing out that Barack Obama had repeatedly called on Gaddafi to leave.

"I can't say I know of active efforts to find him a place to go, but I would not say it has been ruled out," the official said. "The ICC has said it will ready to pursue the case, but there are also the rules of the ICC," he added, pointing out that some countries do not recognise the court's jurisdiction.

British officials said they would rather see Gaddafi face trial, but if his escape was the price of a peaceful settlement they would be able to live with that.

The article mentions Italy's attempts to negotiate something as well.

[Tribun]

Reporters who'd been in Sirte report that Gaddafi's pulling away all heavy armour from the city, most likely to Tripoli. Also they say the city indeed is almost frightingly empty. This indicates that perhaps he's not expecting to be able to hold it forever and already prepares to fortify Tripoli for when things go down the dump for him.

[MKSheppard]

2003:
9:34 p.m., March 19 EST -- Bombing of Iraq Begins.
10:15 p.m., March 19 EST -- Bush Addresses the Nation.

2011:
19 March: Bombing of Libya Begins.
28 March: Obama Addresses the Nation.

Aren't you glad we got rid of that warmongerer who spoke to us an hour after combat operations began, in favor of someone who speaks to us a week after combat operations have begun?

[Zed]

Or, alternatively, aren't we glad we got rid of that warmongerer who invaded a country without a U.N. mandate, in favor of someone who bombed a country after receiving a U.N. mandate?

[TheHammer]

2003:
9:34 p.m., March 19 EST -- Bombing of Iraq Begins.
10:15 p.m., March 19 EST -- Bush Addresses the Nation.

2011:
19 March: Bombing of Libya Begins.
28 March: Obama Addresses the Nation.

Aren't you glad we got rid of that warmongerer who spoke to us an hour after combat operations began, in favor of someone who speaks to us a week after combat operations have begun?

I think the American people care more about how quickly and cheaply the operation itself is wrapped up, not how soon after it started we were talked to.

I'll also point out that Bush was in a position of dictating the time and place of attack. Obama was forced to move more quickly given the agressiveness of Qadaffi's forces.

[Sea Skimmer]

Reporters who'd been in Sirte report that Gaddafi's pulling away all heavy armour from the city, most likely to Tripoli. Also they say the city indeed is almost frightingly empty. This indicates that perhaps he's not expecting to be able to hold it forever and already prepares to fortify Tripoli for when things go down the dump for him.

Sirte can be outflanked and isolated by the rebels, if they bring up enough people to fight. The coastal highway runs about 1 mile south of the fringes of the city, and a dirt roads outflank it and the air field via the deep desert. Qaddafi wants it as a delaying point, but its just not that great a place to defend nor can his supply of front line battle ready tanks be looking too good.

It turns out the retreat was bombed, the BBC found a pair of empty but burned out tank transporters and the coalition confirmed they had been hit. So overtly military, and parked at the time, explains how that happened.

[Knife]

Sorry Shep, nobody gives a shit, besides political hacks, that it took him two weeks to make a official statement on TV. What the plan is, and how and when we get out are more important.

[TC Pilot]

Well, that, plus there's a rather slight difference between a limited air campaign and a full-scale ground invasion involving hundreds of thousands of troops.

[Thanas]

2003:
9:34 p.m., March 19 EST -- Bombing of Iraq Begins.
10:15 p.m., March 19 EST -- Bush Addresses the Nation.

2011:
19 March: Bombing of Libya Begins.
28 March: Obama Addresses the Nation.

Aren't you glad we got rid of that warmongerer who spoke to us an hour after combat operations began, in favor of someone who speaks to us a week after combat operations have begun?

Shep, I have already asked you to stop this tangent. Any more of this and I will moderate you.

[mingo]

2003:
9:34 p.m., March 19 EST -- Bombing of Iraq Begins.
10:15 p.m., March 19 EST -- Bush Addresses the Nation.

2011:
19 March: Bombing of Libya Begins.
28 March: Obama Addresses the Nation.

Aren't you glad we got rid of that warmongerer who spoke to us an hour after combat operations began, in favor of someone who speaks to us a week after combat operations have begun?

In a word, YES!

[Lonestar]

Well, that, plus there's a rather slight difference between a limited air campaign and a full-scale ground invasion involving hundreds of thousands of troops.

Good point, a better analogy would be Clinton and Desert Fox.


HMMMM...

Bombing Starts: December 16 1998
Address to Nation: The evening of December 16 1998.

[K. A. Pital]

Why do people get obsessed with when the president adresses the nation? That is a minor issue compared to, well, wars themselves. I concur with Thanas, any more of this and mod action will be taken.

[Julhelm]

So Sweden is sending 8 fighters to Libya to uphold the no fly zone, but they are "not to take part in combat". Our pussy politicians want to eat their cake and keep it.

[TheHammer]

So Sweden is sending 8 fighters to Libya to uphold the no fly zone, but they are "not to take part in combat". Our pussy politicians want to eat their cake and keep it.

Honestly, I can't think of a more worthless contribution. WTF is the point of sending "fighters" if you aren't willing to take part in combat? That's the only fucking thing fighters are good for. If you don't have the stomach for actual fighting, then send logistical support, or just contribute money to the countries willing to do the job.

[Crown]

2003:
9:34 p.m., March 19 EST -- Bombing of Iraq Begins.
10:15 p.m., March 19 EST -- Bush Addresses the Nation.

2011:
19 March: Bombing of Libya Begins.
28 March: Obama Addresses the Nation.

Aren't you glad we got rid of that warmongerer who spoke to us an hour after combat operations began, in favor of someone who speaks to us a week after combat operations have begun?

How eloquently this post demonstrates your complete and utter inability for rational cognitive thought is as astounding as it is impressive. Well done!

[TimothyC]

So Sweden is sending 8 fighters to Libya to uphold the no fly zone, but they are "not to take part in combat". Our pussy politicians want to eat their cake and keep it.

Honestly, I can't think of a more worthless contribution. WTF is the point of sending "fighters" if you aren't willing to take part in combat? That's the only fucking thing fighters are good for. If you don't have the stomach for actual fighting, then send logistical support, or just contribute money to the countries willing to do the job.

It's funny because they only do this after the Libyan Air Force ceased to exist.

[salm]

Wouldn´t fighters also be useful for reconnaissance?

[Zaune]

Honestly, I can't think of a more worthless contribution. WTF is the point of sending "fighters" if you aren't willing to take part in combat? That's the only fucking thing fighters are good for. If you don't have the stomach for actual fighting, then send logistical support, or just contribute money to the countries willing to do the job.

They probably mean combat air patrols only, no ground attacks.

[TheHammer]

Wouldn´t fighters also be useful for reconnaissance?

If you've got nothing else maybe, but I expect the US has leveraged superior resources in that regard. I'd put recon under one of the "unique capabilities" that the US brings to the table.

They could go up for a "show of force", but if they're not willing to actually enforce the no fly zone then what do they do if the Libyan's challenge them on it? I suppose its possible that the word on them "not participating in combat" isn't completely true, but if it is I'd reject their assistance on principle. If they want to do air shows they can do it somewhere else.

[Block]

Wouldn´t fighters also be useful for reconnaissance?

If you've got nothing else maybe, but I expect the US has leveraged superior resources in that regard. I'd put recon under one of the "unique capabilities" that the US brings to the table.

They could go up for a "show of force", but if they're not willing to actually enforce the no fly zone then what do they do if the Libyan's challenge them on it? I suppose its possible that the word on them "not participating in combat" isn't completely true, but if it is I'd reject their assistance on principle. If they want to do air shows they can do it somewhere else.

Yeah, drones and purpose built aircraft that can linger on station are far far more effective in this role than fighters would be.

[Lord Woodlouse]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12892798

Apparently the Loyalists have launched a full counter-offensive and the Rebels are now in retreat again.

[MKSheppard]

So apparently AC-130s and A-10s are now flying at relatively low altitudes to attack shit [source Washington Post readthrough].

Danger Room Confirms

Vice Adm. Bill Gortney confirmed in a Monday Pentagon briefing that the A-10 Warthog and the AC-130 began operations in Libya “over the weekend.” That was a busy period for the U.S.-led coalition: 286 strike missions, of which 133 were flown by U.S. pilots.

...

And the Odyssey Dawn command announced on Tuesday that the Warthog flew a mission alongside the destroyer U.S.S. Barry and a Navy P-3C patrol plane against a Libyan coast guard ships “firing indiscriminately at merchant vessels” in Misrata.

Says one security wonk of the maritime engagement, “I would give one of my children to see what the Warthog did.”