Libya - civil unrest & now NATO involvement

[dylans]

You are not naive enough to imagine that the public statements of politicians accurately reflect foriegn policy.

Now you are well in the world of the conspiracy theory. Statements of the historical record are dismissed as psy ops. Concrete facts such as the supply of military hardware and the massive financing of puppet regimes are dismissed as distractions. All evidence that counters the thesis become part of the conspiracy, and by doing so it becomes impossible to argue with the conspiracy theorist precisely because the evidence that historical political analysis requires becomes coopted into the conspiracy theory itself. Its a deluded self justifying argument.

Its also very silly. It does nothing to answer the charge that the US financed and supported the Mubarak regime to the tune of one and half billion dollars per year for 30 years. Stood by for decades when the regime blatantly fixed elections and silenced all opposition with arrest and torture. The US supplied the tear gas, armoured vehicles, shotguns and plastic bullets that were used on protestors and it trained the forces that used them. It also does nothing to answer the charge that Sarkozy offered Ben Ali French riot police to help crush the uprising there. For your argument to make sense, you have to show that all that., the political, military and financial support of these repressive regimes for decades was all a huge smokescreen to cover a secret covert conspiracy to instigate revolution against these very regimes.

Even their closest middle-eastern allies were hostile to Israel. The lesson we are now seeing spelled out is that even nominal hostility to Israel is no longer acceptable

Absolute rubbish. Mubarak was a loyal and eager upholder of the siege of Gaza and a willing accomplice in the occupation. Israel is still mourning his fall.

 

[phildwyer]

Now you are well in the world of the conspiracy theory. Statements of the historical record are dismissed as psy ops. Concrete facts such as the supply of military hardware and the massive financing of puppet regimes are dismissed as distractions. All evidence that counters the thesis become part of the conspiracy, and by doing so it becomes impossible to argue with the conspiracy theorist precisely because the evidence that historical political analysis requires becomes coopted into the conspiracy theory itself. Its a deluded self justifying argument. Its also very silly. It does nothing to answer the charge that the US financed and supported the Mubarak regime to the tune of one and half billion dollars per year for 30 years. Stood by for decades when the regime blatantly fixed elections and silenced all opposition with arrest and torture. The US supplied the tear gas, armoured vehicles, shotguns and plastic bullets that were used on protestors and it trained the forces that used them. It also does nothing to answer the charge that Sarkozy offered Ben Ali French riot police to help crush the uprising there.

Well, the New York Times has just admitted that the revolutions were actively and practically encouraged by US organizations. Don't you believe them?

WASHINGTON — Even as the United States poured billions of dollars into foreign military programs and anti-terrorism campaigns, a small core of American government-financed organizations were promoting democracy in authoritarian Arab states.

The money spent on these programs was minute compared with efforts led by the Pentagon. But as American officials and others look back at the uprisings of the Arab Spring, they are seeing that the United States’ democracy-building campaigns played a bigger role in fomenting protests than was previously known, with key leaders of the movements having been trained by the Americans in campaigning, organizing through new media tools and monitoring elections.

A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington, according to interviews in recent weeks and American diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks.

The work of these groups often provoked tensions between the United States and many Middle Eastern leaders, who frequently complained that their leadership was being undermined, according to the cables."

 

[dylans]

Well, the New York Times has just admitted that the revolutions were actively and practically encouraged by US organizations. Don't you believe them?

I think you are reading into that article what you want to read and dismissing its real implications. That the US sought to control and manipulate the uprisings. Uprisings that emerged as a direct response to the very repressive regimes that the US supported for decades. To control and manipulate and undermine genuine regime change and to forestall any movements that threaten US policy in the region. This is no secret or surprise at all and it is certainly no conspiracy to organise revolution. I have been arguing from the beginning of the Egyptian uprising that the US will seek to thwart any attempt at genuine representational government and that it will use the Egyptian military to do so.

This is not the same however as an overarching grand master plan to create revolution in these countries. To claim otherwise is a massive insult to the Egyptian people and a dismissal of the legitimacy of their grievances. It reduces them to mere puppets to be manipulated and denies them the very capacity for self determination that they are fighting for. In effect this argument is no different from the Orientalist narrative that sees the people of the Arab wold as incapable of exercising self governance or self organisation. Incapable of independent thought or action outside of that imposed by Western agency. It is in the end no different to the old colonial mentality that sees Arabs as children, passive, manipulable, thoughtless and incapable of autonomous agency. "Of course its a US plot. Arabs couldn't possibly revolt against their own regimes out of an expression of their own desires. They don't have their own desires. They certainly don't have democratic desires. It's not in their culture" Merely those that are imposed on them by those more capable than themselves." This is classic Orientalism. "There is only outside agency. There is no internal dynamic to the Arab psychology".

Don't you see what a massive patronising insult that is? The reason for these revolts is obvious. Unrepresentative and repressive government and regime brutality and state enforced disregard and hopelessness is the cause of the events sweeping the region not some US inspired conspiracy plot.

 

[phildwyer]

I think you are reading into that article what you want to read and dismissing its real implications. That the US sought to control and manipulate the uprisings. Uprisings that emerged as a direct response to the very repressive regimes that the US supported for decades. To control and manipulate and undermine genuine regime change and to forestall any movements that threaten US policy in the region. This is no secret or surprise at all and it is certainly no conspiracy to organise revolution. I have been arguing from the beginning of the Egyptian uprising that the US will seek to thwart any attempt at genuine representational government and that it will use the Egyptian military to do so.

This is not the same however as an overarching grand master plan to create revolution in these countries. To claim otherwise is a massive insult to the Egyptian people and a dismissal of the legitimacy of their grievances. It reduces them to mere puppets to be manipulated and denies them the very capacity for self determination that they are fighting for. In effect this argument is no different from the Orientalist narrative that sees the people of the Arab wold as incapable of exercising self governance or self organisation. Incapable of independent thought or action outside of that imposed by Western agency. It is in the end no different to the old colonial mentality that sees Arabs as children, passive, manipulable, thoughtless and incapable of autonomous agency. "Of course its a US plot. Arabs couldn't possibly revolt against their own regimes out of an expression of their own desires. They don't have their own desires. They certainly don't have democratic desires. It's not in their culture" Merely those that are imposed on them by those more capable than themselves." This is classic Orientalism. "There is only outside agency. There is no internal dynamic to the Arab psychology".

Don't you see what a massive patronising insult that is? The reason for these revolts is obvious. Unrepresentative and repressive government and regime brutality and state enforced disregard and hopelessness is the cause of the events sweeping the region not some US inspired conspiracy plot.

I'm not denying that Arab citizens are genuinely in revolt against their governments, and you're not denying that the USA is exploiting those revolts.

Maybe our differences arise over individual cases. For example, I'm completely convinced that Ahmadinajad was the genuine victor in the last Iranian election, and that the rebellion against him was largely Western-inspired. But I agree that the Egyptian rebellion was a popular revolt. The Libyan business looks like a CIA plot to me. Each case is of course different.

It is true, though, that the neo-cons in the USA have been openly discussing the need to restructure the middle east for at least ten years. They'll happily use genuine popular discontent in pursuit of that aim.

 

[dylans]

A response here from the Angry Arab website. I am pasting it in full because it says it much better than I could

And now the dumb theories about the Arab uprisings

This is one of the most dumb theories about the Arab uprising: and it has to be seen as part of propaganda--nay, psychological operations--promoted by the US government to influence and lower the self-confidence of the Arab people.

It also aims at winning over the Arab youth in order to steer the revolts in the direction of peace with Israel. But who will those articles fool? There were millions of people who participated in revolts in Egypt: they were all trained by Freedom House?

And what is to train? You need to train people to inform them that they are repressed and oppressed? How dumb is that, really. Look at this: "The money spent on these programs was minute compared with efforts led by the Pentagon. But as American officials and others look back at the uprisings of the Arab Spring, they are seeing that the United States’ democracy-building campaigns played a bigger role in fomenting protests than was previously known, with key leaders of the movements having been trained by the Americans in campaigning, organizing through new media tools and monitoring elections."

Propaganda interests of the US government drips from every word of the sentences. And then this: "Some Egyptian youth leaders attended a 2008 technology meeting in New York, where they were taught to use social networking and mobile technologies to promote democracy. Among those sponsoring the meeting were Facebook, Google, MTV, Columbia Law School and the State Department."

I mean, millions of Arabs know how to use phones, twitter and Facebook, and are in a position to teach technology skills to many reporters of the New York Times, and you think that they needed to be trained to use this technology? How dumb is that?

Wait: can somebody from Freedom House train me in the use of Microwave and blenders? I am an Arab and I don't know how to use technology. Please train me as soon as possible.

Oh, and I also need a Freedom House expert to tell me: am I oppressed or am I free? Also, what about those those countries (like Syria or Libya or Saudi Arabia or Oman) where American foundations did not run programs and where protests took place? Thanks for your attention. (thanks Ahmet)

 

[weltweit]

I was listenning to someone earlier who said we should be dusting off our Harriers as they are ideally suited for ground attack. Since the yanks have stepped back there seems a shortage of ground attack, expecially as, in stepping back they have taken their A-10 and AC-130 back with them, tools that could be very useful in Misrata right now.

And that person also thought we could or should be arming and training the Libyan rebels as part of UNSC Resolution 1970 ..

 

[MellySingsDoom]

David Cameron confirms that "regime change" is the plan for Libya: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/17/gaddafi-exit-cameron

Disco Dave modestly claims the mantle to be world spokesperson:

Dismissing suggestions that the anti-Gaddafi coalition had changed its war aims, the prime minister said that when he joined the presidents of the US and France in publishing a joint article saying that Gaddafi would have to go, the three leaders were merely expressing world opinion.

 

[Casually Red]

I wish these people would stay in Libya and organise a rebellion in their own ranks rather than defecting

looks more like they got the bums rush , despite your wishful thinking .

 

[Casually Red]

For your argument to make sense, you have to show that all that., the political, military and financial support of these repressive regimes for decades was all a huge smokescreen to cover a secret covert conspiracy to instigate revolution against these very regimes.

no he doesnt . For a start they certainly werent spending billions propping up either Syria or Libya . And they most certainly were working with opposition groups inside and outside these countries for many years . The unrest in the region isnt a monolith and neither is the western response to it. They propped up the Shah for a long time in Iran but dropped him like a hot potato overnight and sought to reposition themselves. Is that a conspiracy theory too ? It must be according to your logic .

As you point out France offered to put down the revolt in Tunisia . While in Libya they immediately recognised the monarchists as the legitimate government and have done everything possible short of an invasion - thus far- to install them into power . The unrest in the region isnt a monolith and neither is the response to it . They have numerous assets in the region as well as opponents . They arent all allies , they arent all enemies . Your portrayal of it though is monolithic in order to shoehorn it all into Trot theory .

Theyve been talking about reshaping the entire middle east for years now in a serious fashion . Their dictators such as Mubarak had clearly passed their sell by date ,old age alone would have taken care of him . The wests interests dictate they have to reposition themselves with whatever will come along to replace their old assets in one case or to continue propping them up in another . Or to ensure change occurs in other instances and assets are encouraged to deliver it .

One need only look at what happened in Ireland to see what type of confusing alliances and assets emerge. A repressive orange state was propped up for 50 years . Overnight it was screwed over and denounced when the lid finally blew off it. Almost from the outset they began working with the "opposition" while still assisting the other side , repressing the oppositon one minute , empowering them the next . By the time it was over theyd worked with everyone from fundamentalist preachers to IRA stalinists to the provos themselves. Propping up hardline orangemen , SDLP . ultra leftist former IRA and then jettisoning them for new allies without a second thought to arrive at a point where their interests are best looked after , by the former Provisional IRA. The middle east will be and is no different to that scenario .

 

[Casually Red]

David Cameron confirms that "regime change" is the plan for Libya: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/17/gaddafi-exit-cameron

Disco Dave modestly claims the mantle to be world spokesperson:

completely illegal under international law . And so the great game continues merrily along.

 

[dylans]

no he doesnt . For a start they certainly werent spending billions propping up either Syria or Libya . And they most certainly were working with opposition groups inside and outside these countries for many years . The unrest in the region isnt a monolith and neither is the western response to it. They propped up the Shah for a long time in Iran but dropped him like a hot potato overnight and sought to reposition themselves. Is that a conspiracy theory too ? It must be according to your logic .

As you point out France offered to put down the revolt in Tunisia . While in Libya they immediately recognised the monarchists as the legitimate government and have done everything possible short of an invasion - thus far- to install them into power . The unrest in the region isnt a monolith and neither is the response to it . They have numerous assets in the region as well as opponents . They arent all allies , they arent all enemies . Your portrayal of it though is monolithic in order to shoehorn it all into Trot theory .

Theyve been talking about reshaping the entire middle east for years now in a serious fashion . Their dictators such as Mubarak had clearly passed their sell by date ,old age alone would have taken care of him . The wests interests dictate they have to reposition themselves with whatever will come along to replace their old assets in one case or to continue propping them up in another . Or to ensure change occurs in other instances and assets are encouraged to deliver it .

One need only look at what happened in Ireland to see what type of confusing alliances and assets emerge. A repressive orange state was propped up for 50 years . Overnight it was screwed over and denounced when the lid finally blew off it. Almost from the outset they began working with the "opposition" while still assisting the other side , repressing the oppositon one minute , empowering them the next . By the time it was over theyd worked with everyone from fundamentalist preachers to IRA stalinists to the provos themselves. Propping up hardline orangemen , SDLP . ultra leftist former IRA and then jettisoning them for new allies without a second thought to arrive at a point where their interests are best looked after , by the former Provisional IRA. The middle east will be and is no different to that scenario .

I don't disagree with much of that. The US certainly did and is repositioning itself in regard to Egypt. They moved against Mubarak fairly quckly but only once the uprising began to look unstoppable. In many ways watching the behaviour of the military is gives a good indication of US maneuvering on Egypt. To save its interests it wrapped itself in the language and symbolism of the revolution acceded to its demands only so far as its own interests were not challenged and moved quickly to crush any direct challenges to its own. The difference between us is over the question of whether the uprising itself was genuine and popular and frankly I find it bizarre that leftists can dismiss such inspirational events as we watched live on our TVs as somehow stage managed or manipulated. It wasn't. It was the result of decades of repression and a direct consequence of the events in neighbouring Tunisia. It was a genuine and popular expression of the Egyptian will and Mubarak fought tooth and nail to stop it. Initially with US support.

 

[Divisive Cotton]

More escapees:

2.33pm: Tunisa's TAP news agency is reporting that a boat carrying a Libyan interior ministry colonel and 19 other people arrived in a southern Tunisian port today. A ministry captain and soldier were also on board. Last Friday, two small boats with five Libyan army officers and 13 other people arrived in the same Tunisian port, El Ketf.

 

[weltweit]

I feel sorry for the people and fighters of Misrata.

They have been holding out alone for a long time now and they must be running short of supplies.

 

[Lock&Light]

I feel sorry for the people and fighters of Misrata.

They have been holding out alone for a long time now and they must be running short of supplies.

You have a great way of telling the obvious.

 

[weltweit]

You have a great way of telling the obvious.

Thank you, I pride myself on it

 

[dylans]

No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground.

Oh. What a fucking surprise!

Libya conflict: EU awaits UN approval for deployment of ground troops
The EU has drawn up a "concept of operations" for the deployment of military forces in Libya,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/18/libya-conflict-eu-deployment-ground-troops

 

[weltweit]

No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. No boots on the ground.

Oh. What a fucking surprise!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/18/libya-conflict-eu-deployment-ground-troops

That is not clever.. I am against it..

And I bet if lawyers have written the terms, the military will have a hand tied behind their backs!

 

[dylans]

That is not clever.. I am against it..

And I bet if lawyers have written the terms, the military will have a hand tied behind their backs!

You have to admit. Those of us who opposed the initial "no fly zone" predicted this would be the next step. Believe me, I take no pleasure in saying "told you so" but.....

 

[binka]

You have to admit. Those of us who opposed the initial "no fly zone" predicted this would be the next step. Believe me, I take no pleasure in saying "told you so" but.....

bollocks. you love saying 'i told you so'

 

[dylans]

bollocks. you love saying 'i told you so'

No. not in the case, because we all know what comes next. Full on invasion and regime change and a repeat of Iraq. No pleasure in that at all

 

[Casually Red]

I don't disagree with much of that. The US certainly did and is repositioning itself in regard to Egypt. They moved against Mubarak fairly quckly but only once the uprising began to look unstoppable. In many ways watching the behaviour of the military is gives a good indication of US maneuvering on Egypt. To save its interests it wrapped itself in the language and symbolism of the revolution acceded to its demands only so far as its own interests were not challenged and moved quickly to crush any direct challenges to its own. The difference between us is over the question of whether the uprising itself was genuine and popular and frankly I find it bizarre that leftists can dismiss such inspirational events as we watched live on our TVs as somehow stage managed or manipulated. It wasn't. It was the result of decades of repression and a direct consequence of the events in neighbouring Tunisia. It was a genuine and popular expression of the Egyptian will and Mubarak fought tooth and nail to stop it. Initially with US support.

I agree fully with you as regards egypt . At a grass roots level it was certainly the genuine article and I supported it . Still do . Not so Libya .

 

[dylans]

I agree fully with you as regards egypt . At a grass roots level it was certainly the genuine article and I supported it . Still do . Not so Libya .

There is something odd going on with our quotes. when i quote you, my name appears in your quote and when you quote me your name appears in my quote. Very strange

 

[Casually Red]

There is something odd going on with our quotes. when i quote you, my name appears in your quote and when you quote me your name appears in my quote. Very strange

sounds a bit gay

 

[elbows]

I have a problem with the whole 'repeat of Iraq' thing. Its too simple, every invasion and the resistance to it has many differences as well as similarities. We should be able to argue against invasion by focussing on specific points, using IRaq as an example where appropriate without just using the word Iraq as a dirty horror shame gore word.

Plus the biggest problem I have with the use of Iraq in this way is that actually we dont have a terribly deep understanding of all the important details about exactly what has happened behind the scenes with Iraq after the invasion, what the actual difference makers were in causing the picture on the ground to change a fair bit over the years since the invasion. We know more than enough about all the horrors, mistakes, lies etc that occurred before, during and immediately after the bombing and invasion. But as time went on it became some what harder for us to judge exactly which forces were most influencing events in Iraq, which factors were most relevant in the eventual reduction in violence that has ben seen there. Iraq is still a failed mess so Im not trying to suggest that its all ok now, but I am annoyed that there was a marked reduction in people, especially who opposed the war, shouting about Iraq once the violence started to reduce somewhat. In terms of the external forces that made the post-invasion Iraq mess worse, there were phases where there was much government & media shouting about the likes of Syria, and then suddenly the shouting stopped, suggesting some sort of arrangement may have been reached. The same happened with Iran. And Muqtadr al-Sadr had his moments in the heat and other phases where he vanished from the radar for what seemed like years.

In any case if they put boots on the ground in Libya then there are many risks and possibilities, I wont try to predict them. But I would not be surprised if it went down a bit differently to Iraq, although there are bound to be some alarming similarities.

At this stage Im not sure whether we will actually send in troops or not. I doubt we want to, but its so stalled in various ways right now that they may feel they have little other choice. Other possibilities are that they are just seeing how the threat of this option goes down with the regime, or something to do with the alternative protection for Misrata that the UN could provide if the regime honour their promise to let them in.

 

[Casually Red]

That is not clever.. I am against it..

And I bet if lawyers have written the terms, the military will have a hand tied behind their backs!

you bet me 3 pages back it would never happen in the first place when I predicted

Their invasion to prop up this failed coup is imminent . NATO will go in under the guise of EU humanitarianism, changing its hat for the occasion .

I was right , you were wrong . And as they can bomb houses including Ghadaffis for a no fly zone then its unlikely the military wil have any more hands tied than their air force . It'll be a blank cheque .

 

[Casually Red]

In any case if they put boots on the ground in Libya then there are many risks and possibilities, I wont try to predict them. But I would not be surprised if it went down a bit differently to Iraq, although there are bound to be some alarming similarities.

At this stage Im not sure whether we will actually send in troops or not. I doubt we want to, but its so stalled in various ways right now that they may feel they have little other choice. Other possibilities are that they are just seeing how the threat of this option goes down with the regime, or something to do with the alternative protection for Misrata that the UN could provide if the regime honour their promise to let them in.

the fact its an illegal act of brazen imperialism obviously doesnt trouble you a jot . Rule Brittania . Lets give Johnny foreigner and the fuzzy wuzzies a bunch of fives . They dont like it up em .

 

[weltweit]

you bet me 3 pages back it would never happen in the first place when I predicted

Well I will certainly be surprised if it does happen, and with German troops as well ... after their positioning so far it does seem quite unlikely.

As for Britain, I think it would be foolhardy getting boots on the ground when we are still in Afghanistan after this length of time.

I would like to know what these terms are that have been drawn up, I bet they are unoperable!

 

[elbows]

the fact its an illegal act of brazen imperialism obviously doesnt trouble you a jot . Rule Brittania . Lets give Johnny foreigner and the fuzzy wuzzies a bunch of fives . They dont like it up em .

My posts are not the best guide to everything that troubles me, for I have a tendency to rant about certain details so much that I dont have time to talk about other issues. I probably also assume that some things almost go without saying, and that as the internet does not generally feel like being on a rally, I will save the slogans for elsewhere.

I am not impressed with our meddling, but nor do I like what I have seen of the regime during these last few months either. I would not have wished either upon the people of Libya. I still retain a little hope that eventually the Libyan people will end up better off as a result of the events of 2011, for whilst there are numerous reasons why this seems laughable and unlikely, I refuse to make large assumptions when there is so little quality information about the will of the vast bulk of Libyans right now. For sure you have got some stuff right but you've also been as keen as the regime and the rebels to seize on anything possible for propaganda purposes. Hell I think you may have repeated what I told you about the 'bodies kept in freezers' bullshit more times than the original bullshitters did.

Anyways, does anybody know how normal life in Tripoli is for the many right now? How are they doing for supplies of essential goods, how many people are going to work, school etc?

 

[Casually Red]

As far as can be ascertained from BBC reports the people seem cheerful enough , despite being bombed , resilient and fervently loyal to the Brother leader who they love . As I do also .

All being well this messing about will be over in a month or 2 . France in particular doesnt seem too keen on the masses of refugess pouring in , much less Italy at not being able to get rid of them . Theyd also better hope Ghadaffi doesnt have any revengeful infiltrators among them . Or that the salafists theyre supporting dont take this burqa banning business too seriously .

A recipe for disaster all round , time wiser heads prevailed .

One issue that needs comprehensively cleared up - the supposed grounds for intervention in the first place - is the issue of whether or not Ghdaffi actually bombed his own people . We were told he was committing genocide in Tripoli from the sea and from the air. I'll just refresh peoples memory as to the justification for the no fly zone .

These were the eyewitness reports that were taken as gospel by the western media and Al Jazeera , and then in turn used by the western powers as justification for a no fly zone .

Adel Mohamed Saleh, who called himself a political activist in Tripoli, said the aerial bombing had initially targeted a funeral procession.
"What we are witnessing today is unimaginable. Warplanes and helicopters are indiscriminately bombing one area after another. There are many, many dead," Saleh told al Jazeera television in a live broadcast.
"Our people are dying. It is the policy of scorched earth." he said. "Every 20 minutes they are bombing."
Asked if the attacks were still happening he said: "It is continuing, it is continuing. Anyone who moves, even if they are in their car they will hit you."

another London based rebel activist claimed

We have just heard that the military ships are bombing an area in Tripoli and many people have been killed although we don't know how many at the moment because people have just called to tell us it is happening.

Gnan said the navy appeared to be bombing a residential area outside the city centre as part of a desperate crackdown by Gaddafi's troops.
He is even turning the ships on his people now. His plan is to use absolutely everything he can to stop what is happening.

If any of this had happened , scorched earth and genocide fromland , sa and air on a heavily populated capital city we might expect it to be filmed by someone . But that never happened . We might expect numerous witnesses to it . But that never happened . But if all else failed at the very least we might expect that western satellite imagery could point to it happening . Afterall the city was being obliterated . But not a word of that either . Perhaps western satellites dont regard that part of the world as in any manner interesting , who knows . The UN under Ban Ki Moon though seemingly didnt think such investigation in any manner necessary before authorising force and these dubious reports were accepted as gospel instead from rebel sources

Russia though was pointing out that its satellite intel , which certainly does keep a close eye on that part of the world observed no such activity in Tripoli . Bear in mind these satellites can easily pick out individuals , much less a city being bombarded into submission by an apparent genocidal madman .

In short it never happened . There is absolutely no justification for this no fly zone which means bomb anything that moves in Libya including houses . Its a dirty western lie , and a dirty western mess that will only get worse as it proceeds and a massive crime against Libya . Anyone thinking that th Libyan people will welcome western troops with open arms are just as deluded as they were listening to hoax reports of Ghadaffis vengeance on Tripli , hoax reports about him being finished and relying on mercenaries , hoax reports of him fleeing to Venezuela , planting bodies and all the rest .

This will end in disaster if its not called off ASAP .

 

[Casually Red]

Further good news for the Brother Leader .Looks like he may well have pre-empted the invasion plan for now . He's negotiated a deal with the UN permitting them a safe corridor to evacuate stranded migrant workers and other refugees from the city as well as letting humanitarian aid in . In return the UN will heavily increase its presence in Tripoli were Gadaffi has been demanding they properly investigate the bogus claims of air and naval assaults on the population as well as investigating the targets of NATO bombing .

Look like the boots on the ground brigade will have to wait a while to manufacture another excuse for invasion . Times not on their side though . And if he successfully replicates this formula in other rebel held districts , effecively nneutralising their humanitarian appeals, he may yet win out .