So why don't the rebel forces leave Misrata and fight out in the open?
Because they would get slaughtered just like anyone would if they were to fight in open ground against a superior force. After that Gadaffi's forces would just roll right back in and brutally crack down on the populace in order to reassert control. Dying and letting the oppressor continue oppressing would be counterproductive to their goal of getting rid of the oppressor.
The rebels are not using the populace as human shields. In the case of Misrata many of the rebels are people who actually live there. They are trying to defend their homes, their families, and their neighbors against an aggressor. It's not their fault that Gadaffi's forces are firing mortars indiscriminately regardless of their actual positions in the city.
Precisely--the rebels would probably be crushed by Gadaffi if they fought out in the open. Just like Gadaffi's forces would be easily bombed by the coalition if they did the same. Staying inside the cities offers them protection, even if the civilian population suffers as a result. Why we must deny that both sides are doing it irks me.The city itself isn't what offers Gadaffi's forces protection, it's the civilians living in it - they could be out in the open with civilian hostages and it would be the same. That's why the claim is that they are using human shields. The reason it's wrong to say the rebels are using the civilians in the same manner is because they are only using the physical structure of the city as a defense, not the civilians. It's quite obvious that they'd be poor shields against Gadaffi's forces anyways since they have made it apparent that they don't care about civilian casualties, and even if the civilians weren't there the rebels' situation wouldn't be all that different. To say that the rebels are using civilians human shields is patently absurd and you're an idiot to make that claim.
If you just want to say that the people of the city suffer because of the rebel presence then fine, but even if they weren't there they'd still be suffering under Gadaffi. Life isn't fair and sometimes people die unjustly because of that, but if nobody is willing to do anything about tyrants like Gadaffi because they are worried that innocent people will get hurt then innocent people will still get hurt or killed because tyrants like Gadaffi hurt and kill people anyways. Or do you have an alternate solution for the rebels to pursue that won't get them all killed and leave their families and neighbors at the mercy of a delusional, narcissistic madman?
