Libya’s Civilian Toll, Denied by NATO

[tabatha]

TRIPOLI, Libya — NATO’s seven-month air campaign in Libya, hailed by the alliance and many Libyans for blunting a lethal crackdown by Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi and helping to push him from power, came with an unrecognized toll: scores of civilian casualties the alliance has long refused to acknowledge or investigate.

By NATO’s telling during the war, and in statements since sorties ended on Oct. 31, the alliance-led operation was nearly flawless — a model air war that used high technology, meticulous planning and restraint to protect civilians from Colonel Qaddafi’s troops, which was the alliance’s mandate.

But an on-the-ground examination by The New York Times of airstrike sites across Libya — including interviews with survivors, doctors and witnesses, and the collection of munitions remnants, medical reports, death certificates and photographs — found credible accounts of dozens of civilians killed by NATO in many distinct attacks. The victims, including at least 29 women or children, often had been asleep in homes when the ordnance hit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/world/africa/scores-of-unintended-casualties-in-nato-war-in-libya.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1#

Also, check out the interactive:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/12/16/world/africa/nato-airstrikes-in-libya.html#page/warehouses

This is a hard-hitting, and very accurate account of the errant NATO strikes.

[tabatha]

1. Additional excerpts.

There are indications that the alliance took many steps to avoid harming civilians, and often did not damage civilian infrastructure useful to Colonel Qaddafi’s military. Elements of two American-led air campaigns in Iraq, in 1991 and 2003, appear to have been avoided, including attacks on electrical grids.

Such steps spared civilians certain hardships and risks that accompanied previous Western air-to-ground operations. NATO also said that allied forces did not use cluster munitions or ordnance containing depleted uranium, both of which pose health and environmental risks, in Libya at any time.

The alliance’s fixed-wing aircraft dropped only laser- or satellite-guided weapons, said Col. Gregory Julian, a NATO spokesman; no so-called dumb bombs were used.

While the overwhelming preponderance of strikes seemed to have hit their targets without killing noncombatants, many factors contributed to a run of fatal mistakes. These included a technically faulty bomb, poor or dated intelligence and the near absence of experienced military personnel on the ground who could help direct airstrikes.

[tabatha]

2. The gist of this article is what I have been saying all along.

Every care was taken to avoid killing civilians, and not many (any are bad) were killed, less than 100.

RT viewers, otoh, claim thousands killed by the alliance.

[TheWraith]

4. RT viewers also claim Obama was born in Kenya.

Russia Today is a pipeline of bull, basically Fox News Russia.

[ellisonz]

8. Whenever I watch an RT clip...

I'm reminded of "Wag the Dog."

[joshcryer]

3. Remember the "massive atrocious criminal bombings"?

[Puregonzo1188]

5. Was just about to post this.

Glad to see it on DU.

[jakeXT]

6. What about the unvisited sites?

NATO warplanes flew thousands of sorties that dropped 7,700 bombs or missiles; because The Times did not examine sites in several cities and towns where the air campaign was active, the casualty estimate could be low.

Is it like a bank stress test without looking at off balance sheet vehicles?

[ellisonz]

7. NATO intervention undoubtedly saved thousands of civilian lives.

NATO is going to learn from its mistakes. Considering the number of strikes, and the practices of Gaddafi forces of intermixing in civilian locations to avoid attack, that so few died is a testament to the good intentions of NATO personnel to avoid civilian casualties. I think compared to other air campaigns in the recent past this was a well-carried out mission.