Thread: No Fly Zone for Libya?

Now that you mention it I realise there's been no reports i've come across that speak of the actual numbers of both sides. Nobody knows. If it comes down to a war of attrition, then he's said he'd open his arms depots and it would be everybody for themselves.

Only those with the most to lose will side with him, the avg citizen isn't going to bother.

The latest reports are that Govt. forces have withdrawn from Zawiya, but it is unclear if they have been beaten or are regrouping. Other reports suggest that rebels are moving toward Sirt - Ghaddafi's home town.

Qadhaffi also still has a stockpile of mustard gas doesn't he? Are they in deliverable form? Could he use them?

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

It is obvious he represents no one but himself.

Colonel,

There have been reports scatterred throughout the media of rebels and rebel supporters wanting western support. Here is a link where the exiled Libyan Crown Prince has asked for Western airstrikes, not just a no fly zone, to resolve the conflict in favour of the rebels.

Exiled prince calls for airstrikes | The Australian

I firmly believe that he is right to ask for this help. I don't see why any foriegn countries should embroil their troops in a ground war for the sake of the Libyans, but it would be a reletively low risk operation for NATO and whatever Middle Eastern, African and other allies it could get on board to conduct an air campaign which would destroy Gaddaffi's ability to wage war on the rebels. In my view since the world community can do this with minimum casualties to foriegn military personal, it has a moral obligation to do so.

It should consist of strikes on his air defences and air force, and a strike and interdiction campaign between Tripoli and the eastern rebel strongholds. It is all open country so it would be easy to take away his ability move his forces on the offensive, by locating and destroying his armour, artillery and troop transport capabilities. Doing so would save many innocent lives, buy the rebels enough time to establish a viable alternative state in the East, and start to sell oil and build a military force which can ultimately push him out of Tripoli.

The alternative that you are proposing, let them go at it, is likely to either see a stalemate and ongoing mass casualties and suffering, or a Gaddaffi win and another pariah state on our hands. I don't know how anybody can consider that to be the smart or humane approach to this.

Originally Posted by Aussiegunner

It should consist of strikes on his air defences and air force, and a strike and interdiction campaign between Tripoli and the eastern rebel strongholds. It is all open country so it would be easy to take away his ability move his forces on the offensive, by locating and destroying his armour, artillery and troop transport capabilities. Doing so would save many innocent lives, buy the rebels enough time to establish a viable alternative state in the East, and start to sell oil and build a military force which can ultimately push him out of Tripoli.

If we ever DO initiate airstrikes on pro-Gaddaffi forces (or even Gaddaffi himself), I believe it would be in the form of either a proxy, armed UAV's, or both; I can't see the US, or even any NATO countries, openly supporting anti-Gaddaffi forces. However, I'd bet we've got Global Hawks on 24-hour patrol over Libya, with a limited drone strike capability standing by (probably MQ-9's). It's too bad the X-47 isn't already operational!

Originally Posted by Stitch

I can't see the US, or even any NATO countries, openly supporting anti-Gaddaffi forces.

Why not? The British and French have already indicated that they favour a no fly zone and they have the capability to facilitate the defeat of Gaddaffi by themselves. I can't see those mercenaries wanting to move around the desert in vehicles once a squadron of Tornados armed with a dozen Brimstone each has annihalated the column that preceeded them.

Originally Posted by Aussiegunner

Why not? The British and French have already indicated that they favour a no fly zone and they have the capability to facilitate the defeat of Gaddaffi by themselves. I can't see those mercenaries wanting to move around the desert in vehicles once a squadron of Tornados armed with a dozen Brimstone each has annihalated the column that preceeded them.

I can't speak for NATO, but the current US Administration is too squeemish to come down publicly on one side or the other until they see which side wins; we are always hedging our bets. We may publicly protest the slaughter in Libya, and chastize Gaddaffi, but we won't actually do anything about it until the dust settles; this US Administration ALWAYS wants to come out on the winning side, whichever side that is.

Well this is interesting. Proves that there's quite a range of opinions regarding foreign intervention amongst the rebels.

I'm guessing that the SAS wasn't about to shoot a bunch of rebel fighters, and that's the reason they were taken hostage so readily.

Up To Eight SAS Soldiers And British Diplomat Taken Hostage In Libya According To The Sunday Times | World News | Sky News

Libya: 'SAS Unit And Diplomat Held Hostage'

*
*
*
o Share
* Comments

Pete Norman, Sky News Online
Up to eight members of an SAS unit and a British diplomat have been detained in Libya, it has been reported.

According to the Sunday Times, the elite soldiers are believed to have been escorting the junior diplomat through a rebel-held area in the east of Libya when they were taken hostage.

It is understood that all have now been transported to the rebel-stronghold of Benghazi.

The SAS's intervention has allegedly angered Libyan opposition figures who ordered the armed and plain-clothes soldiers to be locked up on a military base.

Opponents of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's fear he could use any evidence of western military interference to rally patriotic support for his regime.

Sky News defence correspondent Niall Paterson said: "Neither the Foreign Office nor Ministry of Defence are as yet saying anything about this matter.

"But people I have spoken to give me no reason to doubt the report."

"The Sunday Times said they were there to establish diplomatic relations with the opposition movement."

Paterson added that the issue of rebel groups encouraging foreign involvement is an extremely sensitive issue in Libya.

A successful conclusion to the incident is expected to occur.

Paterson said: "The feeling in London is that the rebels who have taken the SAS members and junior diplomat are simply making a point.

"There is no feeling this will end badly."

Originally Posted by Aussiegunner

Why not? The British and French have already indicated that they favour a no fly zone and they have the capability to facilitate the defeat of Gaddaffi by themselves. I can't see those mercenaries wanting to move around the desert in vehicles once a squadron of Tornados armed with a dozen Brimstone each has annihalated the column that preceeded them.

A no fly zone would be a declaration of war on Gaddafi.

Regarding numbers here's an al-jazeera report, dated March 3



Airforce
18,000 personnel
227 fighter aircraft ( 3 lost already and air worthiness of the rest is in question)
35 attack helicopters

Navy
8,000 personnel
2 submarines (long been abandoned)

Army
50,000 soldiers
2205 battle tanks
945 APC's

Improperly maintained over years has rendered much of the army equipment useless.

Loyalists - 10,000 - 12,000 troops
Rebels - 5000 - x(?)

Originally Posted by citanon

Well this is interesting. Proves that there's quite a range of opinions regarding foreign intervention amongst the rebels.

I'm guessing that the SAS wasn't about to shoot a bunch of rebel fighters, and that's the reason they were taken hostage so readily.

An update on the situation. Sounds like the SAS showed up and said "take me to your leader". Then the reply was: OK, but only some of you can come, and you can't be armed. Hope it turns out well.

LIBYA Eight SAS Soldiers Taken Hostage By Rebels | World News | Sky News

Libya: 'SAS Unit And Diplomat Held Hostage'

Pete Norman, Sky News Online
Eight SAS soldiers have been taken hostage by rebels in Libya, according to Sky sources.

Rebel sources told Sky News that the group were being held in Libya's second city in Benghazi.

They were among a group of around 22 soldiers and one diplomat who are believed to have been dropped by helicopter in an area south of the city.

Only eight were detained and it is expected that the hostages will be released either today or tomorrow.

There is speculation it could be an attempt by the rebels to ensure the interim Libyan council receives diplomatic recognition.

The SAS's intervention has allegedly angered Libyan opposition figures who ordered the armed and plain-clothes soldiers to be locked up on a military base.

Opponents of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's fear he could use any evidence of western military interference to rally patriotic support for his regime.

Sky News defence correspondent Niall Paterson said: "The feeling in London is that the rebels who have taken the SAS members and junior diplomat are simply making a point.

"There is no feeling this will end badly."

The SAS and the MI5 agent (not a diplomat) have been released.

Libya: SAS mission that began and ended in error - Telegraph

Libya SAS rescue: Transcript of behind-the-scenes negotiations to free the detainees
As the captured diplomat and SAS forces were released, a transcript of a conversation between the British ambassador and Libyan rebel spokesman sheds light on the behind-the-scenes negotiations.
Richard Northern, right, appears on Libyan television
9:01PM GMT 06 Mar 2011

Richard Northern, British ambassador to Libya: We have been planning to send some officials to stay in Benghazi to liaise with you, with the National Council, but also to keep an eye on the humanitarian situation and also to see whether there was any medicines or food or things that we can provide for the future to help the people.

And we sent today, ahead of those officials who were coming, we sent a small group just to find if there was a hotel, if everything was working, if there was somewhere they could stay and work when we get our group organised.

And I understand that there has been a misunderstanding and they have been picked up by the security group, who are concerned about their presence and who they are.

And I hope to ask Mr Jalil if he might be able to intervene to help us clear up this misunderstanding, if there is anything we can do to help explain who they are and what they are doing - that they are just trying to help us to prepare for of our mission which we would like to send out.

Libyan rebel council spokesman: I talked to Mr Jalil about those people in Benghazi - how they are and where they find them. Actually they made a big mistake coming in a helicopter, I think, actually - coming in an open area, so, I don't know...

RN: Oh, did they? I didn't know how they were coming.

Spokesman: Yes, it was a helicopter in an open area. So the people, they note that some people were coming down, and they though...

RN: Oh, I'm not surprised - it alarmed them.

Spokesman: ... and there is an investigation going on.

Libya: inside the SAS operation that went wrong
As the diplomatic team in Libya were rescued by HMS Cumberland after their humiliating capture, the Ministry of Defence was left trying to work out what on earth went wrong.
The troops knew they were entering a volatile situation Photo: AP
By Caroline Gammell, and Nick Meo in Benghazi 8:08PM GMT 06 Mar 2011

When the helicopter touched down outside Benghazi in the early hours of Friday morning, the SAS troops on board knew they were entering a volatile situation.

Tasked with escorting a diplomat to meet rebel Libyan forces and assessing the humanitarian situation on the ground, they did not, however, expect a hostile reception.

With the British Government openly rejecting Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and already in dialogue with opposition leaders, it should have been an uncontroversial visit.

However, the manner of their arrival – in the dead of night, armed with weapons, maps and explosives while dressed in plain black clothing – did little to assuage local panic.

The contingent of seven SAS officers and one MI6 official landed about 20 miles from Benghazi, where local witnesses said warning shots were fired as they arrived. As the soldiers tried to get to a nearby compound, they were quickly surrounded by the local militia who demanded to know who they were and what they were doing.
Related Articles

They tried to bluff their way out of the increasingly tense situation, claiming they were unarmed, which was only made worse when their weapons were discovered.

Realising their cover had been blown and their supposedly discreet mission had been compromised, the soldiers put up no resistance as they were arrested.

Handcuffed and taken to a military base in Benghazi, they were well treated and allowed contact with British diplomats in the troubled country.

As the humiliating news of their arrest started to spread, the paths of diplomatic communication sprang into life.

Richard Northern, the British ambassador to Libya, was purportedly recorded having a conversation with one of the rebel leaders to try and solve the situation.

The tape, played on Libyan state television, showed him pleading for the group, claiming there had been a "misunderstanding" and asking for the opposition to intervene.

Mr Northern said the group was a small advance party of officials hoping to contact anti-Gaddafi forces and assess the humanitarian situation.

He even claimed that the group were planning to look for suitable hotels during the visit.

"I understand there has been a misunderstanding and they have been picked up by security groups who are concerned about their presence and who they are," he said.

"I hope to ask Mr Jalil (Mustafa Abdel Jalil, Col Gaddafi's former justice minister and now senior rebel leader) if he might be able to intervene and clear up this misunderstanding."

Mr Jalil's spokesman told the ambassador the British had made a major error in the manner of their arrival.

"They made a big mistake coming with a helicopter in an open area," he said.

His view was echoed by other rebels in Benghazi, who were puzzled by the way in which the British forces arrived.

Jalil Elgallal, a member of Benghazi's revolutionary media committee, said: "Nobody here was informed of their arrival; it has all been rather peculiar and we don't understand why they turned up like this."

Another rebel source said: "If this is an official delegation, why come with helicopters? Why not say 'we are coming, permission to land at the airport?' There are rules for these things."

By Sunday afternoon, a crisis had been averted as the soldiers were released and their weapons confiscated.

As they were rescued by HMS Cumberland which docked briefly in Benghazi before setting sail to Malta, the Ministry of Defence was left trying to work out what on earth went wrong.

Now,did anyone expected an actual diplomat to go in a civil war zone?

We'll the British are being pro acted. SAS Doing all the leg work, while the US idly sits by inept.

Originally Posted by Mihais

Now,did anyone expected an actual diplomat to go in a civil war zone?

No, but one wonders what they had in mind

These guys wrote the book on special ops, something does not make sense here.

Originally Posted by citanon

The SAS and the MI5 agent (not a diplomat) have been released.

MI5 = domestic intel
MI6 = foreign intel

Had to be MI6