Poll: DELETED_74993

Were we right to get involved in Libya?

  • Yes

    Votes: 306 50.9%

  • No

    Votes: 295 49.1%
  • Total voters
    601
Status
Not open for further replies.
Firestar_3x said:
Love that quote, so she seems to think the MOD hasn't looked at what to attack before the UN passed the no-flyzone ruling, give me a break, an initial plan for fixed targets might have been in place for years.
Click to expand...

Clearly targets are made up for all rogue coutries regardless.
 
matt_fsr said:
If it was, the Afghans would have shot one down by now - they've been after taking out a 'Mosquito' (as they call them) ever since they arrived in theatre!

Granted, the Afghans dont have ZSU-23/4 systems, but most Apache's wouldn't try and take one of those on!
Click to expand...


Yeah sorry I meant in comparison to a jet. I know apache's are no slouches though:cool:
 
If they don't get their act together and get this setup quickly there is going to be no point as Gaddafi will already have killed all of the resistance (at least enough to regain control). Then we will all just kiss and make up again. It shouldn't have even taken this long to decide, the whole thing is nearly over now anyway.
 
Firestar_3x said:
How would a Tornado take off from our aircraft carrier?

But i do agree, i'm just not sure how effective a Harrier would be if it came up against a few enemy fighters.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't :p The point I was making was that this type of operation is exactly why we need a strong aircraft carrier capability. Hopefully the government understands that now and we can get the new carriers and jets back on track.
 
The french have one carrier, and I'd be surprised if they bother using it, because its easier, safer and more effective to use Land based aircraft especially since the Italians look likely to let bases in sicily be used.

People keep bringing up our lack of an aircraft carrier, but this is exactly the situation the RAF chiefs would have been using to argue for getting rid of the aircraft carriers (and there is this kind of interservice backstabbing etc) because land based aircraft>>>>CAS harriers in this kind of situation. Now something like Sierra Leone is another matter, but holding up Libya as an argument for not getting rid of Ark Royal is wrong and counter productive. Our new carriers would possibly be a different matter, but even then it might have been worth using land based airpower anyway.
 
What a joke, no wonder we're broke and going down the toilet as a country. I think we should take a lesson of the swiss, stay neutral and keep out of everything (EU, UN Nato the lot) the result would be banks overflowing with dosh and gold bars from all around the globe, a few billion of Gaddafis will be in Zurich but possession is 10/10ths of the law there, not so cuckoo after all.
 
XRAY said:
If the mandate is to protect civilians, would Anglo-French forces be justified in airstriking Gaddafi's actual location? If he's the one giving orders, does killing him not protect the civilians?
Click to expand...

Complete hypocrasy from our government. Since when did ‘demonstrators’ who became ‘rebels’ who became ‘revolutionaries’ armed with anti-aircraft guns, light artillery and AK47s, then suddenly become defenceless civilians when Gaddafi hits back?
 
daver said:
The french have one carrier, and I'd be surprised if they bother using it, because its easier, safer and more effective to use Land based aircraft especially since the Italians look likely to let bases in sicily be used.

People keep bringing up our lack of an aircraft carrier, but this is exactly the situation the RAF chiefs would have been using to argue for getting rid of the aircraft carriers (and there is this kind of interservice backstabbing etc) because land based aircraft>>>>CAS harriers in this kind of situation. Now something like Sierra Leone is another matter, but holding up Libya as an argument for not getting rid of Ark Royal is wrong and counter productive. Our new carriers would possibly be a different matter, but even then it might have been worth using land based airpower anyway.
Click to expand...

I'll freely admit that I'm no expert on this, but according to Wikipedia the combat range of a Tornado is 870 miles. It's over 500 miles from Sicily to Libya, so unless I'm missing something that means it can't be done except by using air-to-air refuelling, which adds complexity and cost to the operation. Surely this sort of operation would be simpler, and therefore more likely to succeed if it were carrier based?
 
CaptainRAVE said:
If they don't get their act together and get this setup quickly there is going to be no point as Gaddafi will already have killed all of the resistance (at least enough to regain control). Then we will all just kiss and make up again. It shouldn't have even taken this long to decide, the whole thing is nearly over now anyway.
Click to expand...

The resistance know about the UN resolution and therefore know full well that they only have to hold Govt forces at bay for a matter of hours before they see friendly forces in the skies.

For all we know there could be dogfights in the Libyian skies/Jets taking out AA as we speak.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom