Gaddafi

• Robert.roedl

  18 Aug 11, 02:27

  The Libyan Gaddafi-army fired for the first time Russian Scud-rockets against the attacking rebel-army in Tripolis. 28 rebel-soldiers were killed by this rockets.
• weasel1962

  18 Aug 11, 10:07

  Some corrections. Gaddafi forces fired one scud. It was fired from Sirte towards possibly Brega, not Tripoli which is in the other direction. It was reported to have landed near Brega and reports stated no casualties. The rebels themselves have not stated that they are in Tripoli. They are however reported to be in the towns on the outskirts eg Surman, Zawiya, Tahurnah, Garyan or nearer at Al-Aziziya per NATO 16 Aug briefing/press release (see http://nato.int). If you need a map, you can check http://maps.google.com. The casualty number may have been confused with the 25 Feb 1991 incident when an Iraqi scud hit a US barracks that killed 29 and wounded 99. They still hold annual memorials on the incident in the US on this incident.
• mancha

  18 Aug 11, 10:39

  Operation Unified Protector.

  On March 27, NATO Allies decided to take on the whole military operation in Libya under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973. The purpose of Operation Unified Protector is to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under threat of attack. NATO is implementing all military aspects of the UN Resolution.

  I am no fan of Gaddafi, but I feel this is not just.

• BadzMaro

  18 Aug 11, 11:21

  Yes... stretching the mandate. It appears that humanitarian intervention aimed at implementing the responsibility to protect is a contentious issue to date given the complexities of international law.
• weasel1962

  18 Aug 11, 16:41

  If anyone bothers to follow the press releases/NATO briefings, that person would realise that the NATO operations are very confined. Their targets are carefully selected and as the NATO commander highlights continuously, every (and they mean every) target is considered as to whether this will protect Libyan civilian lives, as opposed to supporting the rebels. If NATO wanted to remove Gaddhafi directly, it wouldn't have taken 6 months or more. Having said that, I agree there are probably instances where NATO has interpreted the mandate fairly loosely. Nevertheless, the NATO command at least bothers to explain their rationale for the strikes. imho, there is no question Gaddhafi is getting what he deserves. Matter of time before he goes. The only question is whether its feet first or as Saddam got it.
• weasel1962

  18 Aug 11, 16:44

  Just 2 days ago. http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/opinions_77212.htm "Q: Yes, there's been recently criticism of NATO, especially at the United Nations and the UN Security Council members, that NATO has overstepped its mandate because of the fact that in this current situation where the pro-Qadhafi forces are obviously on the defensive, NATO is still striking... mounting air strikes against them, although they're only aiming their fire at the attacking forces, at the attacking rebel forces. They're not endangering or threatening civilians. And that's why several countries have expressed unease with this continuing attack, which they say is biased in the sense that it's helping the rebels and working against the forces which are on the defence. Can you comment on that? (Laughs). Forgot the question. Colonel Roland Lavoie: Is it for me, or Carmen, do you want to take it, or I take it? Carmen Romero: Well, I can start by saying that NATO is not overstepping its mandate, and the mandate given to the Alliance was a mandate approved by all members... I mean, by the United Nations Security Council. And if you see the latest comments by the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, he praised actually the role, the military role that NATO is playing and what we are doing is basically implementing the United Nations Security Council mandate. I'm sure that Roland would like to add something to this. Colonel Roland Lavoie: Well, just that it is clear we take a side... it's to take the side of the people of Libya. This is essential to understand that when we strike at a tank it's because we have an understanding that this does represent a threat to the local population. Same thing for ammunition depots. You will have noticed very lately, in the last few days, we have struck a lot of field... advanced field command-and-control nodes in locations where troops were gathered in suburbs of cities. You don't do that if you don't intend to do an attack. And these are the targets we engage. Every time we engage a target this is the mental test that is in our mind, like is it a target that presents a threat to the civilian population, and if the answer is yes we will engage this threat."
• alize

  19 Aug 11, 00:06

  s y r i a
• alize

  19 Aug 11, 00:09

  Originally posted by weasel1962:

  Some corrections. Gaddafi forces fired one scud. It was fired from Sirte towards possibly Brega, not Tripoli which is in the other direction. It was reported to have landed near Brega and reports stated no casualties.

  The rebels themselves have not stated that they are in Tripoli. They are however reported to be in the towns on the outskirts eg Surman, Zawiya, Tahurnah, Garyan or nearer at Al-Aziziya per NATO 16 Aug briefing/press release (see http://nato.int). If you need a map, you can check http://maps.google.com.

  The casualty number may have been confused with the 25 Feb 1991 incident when an Iraqi scud hit a US barracks that killed 29 and wounded 99. They still hold annual memorials on the incident in the US on this incident.

  
  It was also the first scud of the war. Up till now it's only been MLRS and unguided air to surface rockets by rebels and pro Gadaffi forces alike.
• Susanteo2011

  19 Aug 11, 00:24

   

   

  forza Gaddafi...........................

   

  defeat the Zionist-NATO rebels.....................