Libya: Benghazi unrest, to Civil War, to a new government and Gaddafi's death.

[patrick1]

Al Jazeera says they're using fighter jets to bomb protesters in Tripoli. Holy shiat. This has never been used to crust anti-government protests anywhere. The guy's going down hard.

What a fycking crazy regime.

Yeah, some very gory images coming out.  They have been using heavy munitions. Hopefully the rest of the military turns on the regime and this can end ASAP.

[patrick1]

But Gadaffi was the IRA's best friend in the 70s and 80s.

Not really a friend, more a sugar daddy. And you know better than to conflate the IRA with the Irish Government...

No obviously he does not know. I doubt he knows that Sinn Fein reps and IRA statements were not even allowed to be mentioned on RTE for decades.  And of course the armed campaign of PIRA has been over for 15 years now.  There are plenty of Western nations (Italy) and corporations who have played ball with Qadaffi and a lot more recently/presently.  

[patrick1]

Al Jazeera says they're using fighter jets to bomb protesters in Tripoli. Holy shiat. This has never been used to crust anti-government protests anywhere. The guy's going down hard.

What a fycking crazy regime.

Yeah, some very gory images coming out.  They have been using heavy munitions. Hopefully the rest of the military turns on the regime and this can end ASAP.

It isn't really that simple in Libya.  The ultimate question is going to be, if the Gaddafi's lose control of Tripoli (we ain't there yet), is where the tribes end up and whether Gaddafi's tribe will give up its position or rather choose to fight.  The only guarantee, as I posted last night, is that it will be bloody and oil will shoot the moon.

Yeah, it never is that simple, however, having the Air Force and Army refuse to bomb protesters will be a key step in resolving this.  Ive been watching some of the videos leaking out and they have really been just mowing people down.

[patrick1]

Qaddafi is on state television again. He should post straight to goldmine.  He is blaming Bin Laden for giving the kids drugs and is comparing himself to Queen Elizabeth II.

[patrick1]

He sounds drunk or high in any language.

[patrick1]

Looks like the US is now stepping to the forefront.  3 B2's attacked an airfield and now the F-15 and F-16's based in Italy are attacking Qaddafi's ground forces.  We probably should have already had a carrier positioned but apparently one is en route.

[patrick1]

We probably should have already had a carrier positioned but apparently one is en route.

Yes, the Charles de Gaulle.

Ha, indeed.  Something the British have let go. The US carriers do have a larger aircraft complement. Once the coalitions has taken down their anti aircraft capabilities, it is much better/economical to have a carrier on hand than to launch million dollar cruise missile or send a stealth bombers from Missouri.

[patrick1]

Looks like the US is now stepping to the forefront.  3 B2's attacked an airfield and now the F-15 and F-16's based in Italy are attacking Qaddafi's ground forces.  We probably should have already had a carrier positioned but apparently one is en route.

I am somewhat skeptical of the effects of air power on ground politics.

It isnt a silver bullet for sure, but it does level the playing field/prevent bloodbath on side of rebels if they dont have to contend with concentrated armor.

[patrick1]

We probably should have already had a carrier positioned but apparently one is en route.

Yes, the Charles de Gaulle.

Ha, indeed.  Something the British have let go. The US carriers do have a larger aircraft complement. Once the coalitions has taken down their anti aircraft capabilities, it is much better/economical to have a carrier on hand than to launch million dollar cruise missile or send a stealth bombers from Missouri.

To be fair, there is almost a natural aircraft-carrier there, Sicilia, several bases are on it, including an American one. And it takes 1 hour for French planes to reach Libya from our southern Corsican base of Solenzara, but yes, with the Charles de Gaulle our planes would be at 10 mins from Libya, I don't know if their would be a big difference in time with Sicilia.

Ah, and, this morning some Emirati planes were planed to land on a Sardinian base, with the last statements of Arab League, dunno if it will be confirmed. Though, the fact that Qatar and UAE are the ones in might also be due to the fact that they would have big defense cooperations with France.

Yeah, Sigonella. My cousin was stationed there for several years. I really don't know what the capacity of the base is though.  I am probably overstating the need for the number of planes here.

It will interesting to see how this all play out.  I hope the pressure from this makes his loyalists turn against him and this gets resolved soon- not too optimistic of that happening though.

[patrick1]

Here is the military breakdown on Libya: 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/libya/army-equip.htm

I think it will be difficult to win this, or protect the rebels, from the air.

Also, Qaddafi has a decentralized command; there can be independent functioning.

He likely hoped to excuse his breaking of the ceasefire on rogue commanders.

As for Gaddafi's forces, Saddam had more than that.  The sole fly in the ointment might be the T-90's with their reactive armor, but I have to wonder if Libya has gotten them yet, as they were just ordered last year.  Even so, I don't think that by themselves, they will help Gaddafi that much now that he has lost control of the skies.  Air power can't take territory by itself, but it sure can destroy the opponent's ability to so do.

This could still turn into an ugly little guerrilla war, but the territory held by the TNC is safe from being overrun.

Some, like the T-62's might have been retrofitted with reactive armor.  Saddam had more, in 1991, but it wasn't retro-fitted and nothing as advanced the T-90's.  The coalition also had more aircraft and 6 weeks of bombing.

Do the French/British have any ground attach aircraft like the A-10?

Reactive armor isnt much help against a JDAM.

[patrick1]

^I haven't seen anyone suggest that we send in ground troops. If Qaddafi's forces tried to make a massive movement of armored assets they would be annihilated from the air.

[patrick1]

^I haven't seen anyone suggest that we send in ground troops. If Qaddafi's forces tried to make a massive movement of armored assets they would be annihilated from the air.

Easier said than done, and it wouldn't have to be a mass movement.

Looks like the French Air Force had a fairly easy job of it.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday#p/u/4/iK4XCLc9O18

[patrick1]

^I haven't seen anyone suggest that we send in ground troops. If Qaddafi's forces tried to make a massive movement of armored assets they would be annihilated from the air.

Easier said than done, and it wouldn't have to be a mass movement.

Looks like the French Air Force had a fairly easy job of it.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday#p/u/4/iK4XCLc9O18

One tank, 979 operational.  1-2 SP guns, 448-9 operational.  36 hours of attacks.  Not a good ratio.

JJ, please.  If they bring their forces out in the open and the coalition has the will, they will be wiped out piecemeal. If we want to destroy their military it would only be a matter of how long.  It is true that you can't hold any ground with air power, but you can knock out assets that aren't hidden, buried or put among civilians.

[patrick1]

The fact is that, at this point in the conflict, without serious actual ground forces by other countries being placed in Libya, Gaddafi will remain in control of a certain amount of Libya irregardless.  Absent that, we're just talking about whether there's a separate rebel-held part or he retakes it all.  Maybe serious aerial attacks can stop the latter, but I wonder.  A no-fly alone zone will not.

(sigh)

I lack knowledge of what's specifically going on "on the ground" right now, but my best guess is Gaddafi has figured out that if he can stay in close quarters the air strikes won’t happen.  After all, in terms of ground forces, he has a major advantage.  So, the rebels are now retreating and this time the government forces are right behind them.  The rebels keep trying to open the gap, the government keeps closing it.  Or something like that.  The rebels, become, in essence, human shields for the government forces.

Therefore, Gaddafi will wait to actually fight until he is in a town where he can use the population for protection against air strikes.  All this becomes more problematic, of course, when he gets to Benghazi or points further east where the population is less friendly and can utilize guerrilla attacks and what not.

If this is correct, the air strike, no-fly-zone policy is dead and will not work.  Arming the rebels is not a bad idea, but unless these are major armaments, you're going to have to play the guerrilla strategy, which may well take forever.  Otherwise, ground troops will be required to get rid of Gaddafi, or probably even hold the stalemate.  I guarantee it.

Btw, students of military history will know that this strategy was effectively used by the Soviets at Stalingrad against the German blitzkrieg.

Close air support has advanced quite a bit since Stalingrad.  The problem is that you need good communication and air controllers to avoid blue on blue. From what Ive seen of the rebels they look unprofessional and unorganized.  Embedding controllers with their forces is also politically dodgy. It doesnt help that I don't think the Obama admin really knows what they want to accomplish either.

[patrick1]

I can't help but think that the current strategy in Libya will only lead to a prolonged status quo and ultimately more bloodshed. If the coalition backed the opposition fully or just tried to decapitate the leadership, I think this might be over sooner. (o/c this violates international laws). Right now there are a whole lot of war crimes going on from both sides and people with little to gain being the victims.

[patrick1]

I can't help but think that the current strategy in Libya will only lead to a prolonged status quo and ultimately more bloodshed. If the coalition backed the opposition fully or just tried to decapitate the leadership, I think this might be over sooner. (o/c this violates international laws). Right now there are a whole lot of war crimes going on from both sides and people with little to gain being the victims.

Not to make blind defense of rebel forces but I'm not sure how much war crimes they can actually commit, unless I missed some reports they don't persecute people in the area they control, and the only people they would be fighting would be Gaddafi soldiers, hard to make war crimes against soldiers, especially since they apparently didn't even made one prisoner.

Ive seen the videos first hand. If you can stomach seeing people being murdered (after they surrendered), Ill send you the link(s).  There weren't any prisoners because those captured were executed and then strapped to hoods of Toyota pickups like a prize buck.

-That is not to say that Qaddafi's forces are not committing equally and even worse acts. My point is there seems to be little care on either side for rules of engagement and there are summary executions being committed. This is not rare in war and pretty much every army or insurgent force has done this to vastly varying degrees.  Rather than go on further into a whataboutery and moral equivalencies- Ill just say the rebels have plenty of people among their ranks who aren't sprouting halos anytime soon.

[patrick1]

So, as Gaddafi closes back in on Adjabiya and soon Benghazi, it looks like once again China and Russia have outsmarted the West (except for Germany) and the US.  Now it's either boots on the ground, or the rebels will lose.  You can't play for stalemate, and now that you've gotten involved, you'll look incredibly weak when the rebs go down.

Yeah, the rebels have shown themselves a pretty poor fighting force and retreated en masse after making contact with the enemy- granted they don't have the arms to really make any head way.

I think last week or longer we were talking about the use of air power. I mentioned crappy command and control to call in air strikes as a problem.  Good example of this here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKtuegVouaI&feature=relmfu

Pretty crazy how you can clearly see the GBU in the air before impact.  RIP.

[patrick1]

Maybe the second shooter from Norway will emerge to help Gaddafi out.  However, the real question is whether this is a realigning revolution....

[patrick1]

Somewhat amusingly, there's a picture already.

Yeah, I saw that.  If real, they didn't look too concerned with tending his wounds.  I would think the NTC feels it would be better for stability to let him just bleed out and die rather than a potentially drawn out trial process.

Sadly, you can count on dozens more innocents dying with the celebratory gunfire.

[patrick1]

I'm npwhere near hypocritical enough to pretend this outcome wasn't the best one possible as far as I'm concerned. What would have been the use of a trial for crimes against humanity? Those things are at best just edified lynching parties, at worst they mean the war criminal gets to die an easy death in a The Hague mini-appartment . Also, when a dictator of multiple decades falls, exterminating all possibility of a restoration is the way to go.

Thank you You speak the truth.

Unfortunately, a lot of German media I've seen is doing the usual show. Not quite as bad as with Bin Laden, of course (but then I guess it's not as bad if America doesn't do it).

Yeah, it is always interesting to see how the respective medias handle a news story.  I was down in Chile when Bin Laden got plugged and they kept saying he was assassinated. That irked me.

Now about the tact of celebrating someone's death, I must admit that Ive been pleased at several recent deaths.  Had Bin Laden been planted on terra firma I would have been more than happy to dance a jig all over his grave.