Libya conflict escalates as (UK) ministers admit it could drag on for months

[alp227]

Source: The Guardian

Libya conflict escalates as ministers admit it could drag on for months

Ministers have agreed to step up the scale and intensity of military action against Libya while privately admitting there is now a danger the conflict could drag on for months, well-placed Whitehall officials have told the Guardian.

As British aircraft joined the heaviest bombardment so far of the Libyan capital Tripoli and HMS Ocean prepared to head for the country's coastal waters with Apache attack helicopters on board, officials said the coalition was attempting to apply psychological pressure on the Gaddafi regime as well as depriving it of equipment.

Government sources made clear the Apaches were being sent to Libya, and the intention was to use them, despite Nick Harvey, the armed forces minister, insisting in the Commons that no final decision had yet been taken.

The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, told a London news conference on Monday night that the opposition had organised a legitimate and credible interim council that was committed to democracy. The US has invited the council to set up an office in Washington. "Their military forces are improving and when Gaddafi inevitably leaves, a new Libya stands ready to move forward," she said.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/24/libya-conflict-steps-up-ministers

[xchrom]

1. Recommend

[Bosonic]

2. Quelle surprise

[Fuddnik]

3. "How do we spell Quagmire", kiddies?

The Empire is going to go down, quickly, with a loud THUD.

[Badsam]

4. When was the Libyan national election?

When did the Libyan people select this new government with offices in Washington. Can you puppet oppressive regime for western benefits.

[Fool Count]

5. If they were "commited to democracy" they would accept a

ceasefire and internationally monitored democratic elections offered to them on
many occasions already. Of course, they would lose such elections to pro-Qaddafi
candidates very handily and they know it. That's why their only hope of coming
to power is full-scale occupation of Libya by their NATO allies. NATO will have
to go in either way, they are just trying to scare Qaddafi off into abdication
before they do it to simplify the task.

[al bupp]

6. I am sorry, sir, but I think that is a ludicrous assertion

If Gaddafi could win an election then he wouldn't have to abduct and shoot people in order to suppress dissent. Maybe w/in the context of existing Libyan law where it is illegal to speak out against the government or form independent associations and the people have been terrorized into supporting him, and w/o any actual opponent, then he could "win", but after 42 years of dictatorship, I think that's about the only way.

[Fool Count]

8. Then, I guess, any free and democratic election

should be an easy slam dunk for the rebels. Why refuse it then? Qaddafi seems to be all for it.

As if the rebels did not abduct and shoot people to suppress dissent, even NYT wrote about it.

If out of two sides, one agrees to hold an election under UN supervision and another one flatly
rejects any proposal short of complete and unconditional surrender of their opponents, I wonder,
who do you suggest I should support? That's a tough one.

[al bupp]

10. A free election would be impossible, sir, w/ Gaddafi in power

Anyone can see that. The "ceasefires" that Gaddafi has offered have all been for propaganda value only, always offered while continuing to drop cluster bombs and fire Grad missiles at civilian populations.

I would like to see the NYT article you refer to, because I do not think that the rebellion has suppressed dissent, abducted people, used rape as a weapon of war or placed snipers to shoot randomly as has the government.

The opposition, up until now, has insisted that the Gaddafi clan relinquish power before ending hostilities. This seems to me to be a reasonable demand given his long rule and the current situation. The latest indications from NATO are that there may be some softening of this condition possible.

[Fool Count]

11. That is nonsense, sir. Of course, free elections are possible

with Qaddafi in power, why wouldn't they be with full UN administration and supervision?
In any case, Qaddafi's power now extends only to Tripoli and the West with the rebels
controlling a significant part of the country. If free elections are possible in the rebel-held
territory, they are surely possible anywhere in Libya. In fact, quite the opposite is true -
a free election is impossible without participation of Qaddafi and pro-Qaddafi candidates.
All indications are that a large fraction of Libyan population is still loyal to him and
would vote for him freely if given a chance. Depriving them of such a chance will automatically
make any election non-free.

Here is the NYT article I was referring to: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/11/world/africa/11benghazi.html?_r=1&scp=24&sq=Libya&st=cse&gwh=E4FD4DFFB58C88EB8ACBFA1BCBDC1746

How in the world the opposition's demand for Qaddafi's complete surrender and exile is a "reasonable" one?
Isn't it their ultimate goal and the maximum success they can achieve? Is that their idea of negotiating?
Do they really believe they can take Tripoli without help from NATO ground troops? Then they are just a bunch
of delusional fantasists who should have no business in running a country.

[al bupp]

12. You, sir, seem to accept Gaddafi propaganda at face value

It is the Gaddafi government which is delusional and has consistently reported as "facts" the most fanciful and clearly fabricated lies. This has been shown time & again. For instance, the idea that the rebellion is composed primarily of drug-crazed, al Qaida-led armed gangs has been thoroughly debunked by reporters in rebel-held areas. The NYT article indicates that the killings in Benghazi appear to be isolated and are being duly investigated by the authorities. There also seems to be an element of possible revenge involved.

Some elements of the rebel security forces have contributed to the discomfort. Mr. Benour, the justice coordinator, said that his office was investigating abuses, including thefts, by the Force for the Protection of the Feb. 17th Revolution, which has official responsibility for arresting Qaddafi loyalists. He said the leader of the force had been suspended.

He said there was no evidence that rebel security forces were implicated in the killings, but admitted the crimes were still a mystery. Salah al-Hami, who was tortured by Colonel Qaddafi’s security agents in the 1990s, said friends had told him he was suspected in the murders of the former Qaddafi officials. Years ago, members of the Hami family were repeatedly jailed as security agents searched for Mr. Hami’s brother Mohamed, a leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group in the 1990s. An uncle and three of his brothers, including Mohamed, were killed by the security services or died in Colonel Qaddafi’s prisons, he said.

These are nothing like the wide-spread abductions of youth which have reportedly taken place in Tripoli and elsewhere Gaddafi's forces are in control. These have been hard to document in Gaddafi controlled areas because reporters are not allowed to travel freely w/o minders. Some estimates place the numbers in the thousands. Under those conditions, as well as under existing Libyan law, there can be no legal opposition parties. How could there be a fair election under such circumstances?

The condition for Gaddafi's surrender is reasonable because his state rule is based on thuggery and intimidation. By all accounts the initial protests in Tripoli were indeed popular and widespread until the government cracked down on them in February. I have seen nothing to indicate that Gaddafi has the active support of anything but a small fraction of the Libyan population.

I do think that the rebellion will succeed w/o the need for NATO ground troops. I think the tide has turned on Gaddafi, and it's not a question of if he'll go, but when.

[Fool Count]

13. You, sir, are as delusional as your Benghazi pals.

Spare me all the warmongering lies and propaganda. No reasonable critically thinking person believes that made-up crap.
If Qaddafi had only support of a small fraction of population, NATO would have UN monitors all over the country administering
the elections long times ago or, even more likely, the rebels would be in Tripoli by now. The fact that the rebels can't get out of Benghazi
and their NATO allies stubbornly refuse the peaceful resolution and continue to bomb the country into submission tells me all I need to
know about true veracity and intentions of the two sides in this conflict. All the oft-repeated lies you so diligently cite are just that -
self-serving inventions of delusional fantasists.

[al bupp]

14. OK, I see that we will have to agree to disagree

You take the word of the long-time Stalinist dictator, that doesn't seem like critical thinking to me, and strange position, perhaps for a self-identified progressive to take.

[EFerrari]

7. Shocking.

[joshcryer]

9. I said it'd be six months minimum.

That's how long it took the Ivory Coast.