They will have intel on the purpose of that building and will have deemed it a viable target, because we don't have access to that intel or whether or not that intel was accurate is immaterial, it is fine under the UN resolution.
Poll: DELETED_74993
- Thread starter DELETED_74993
- Start date
- Status
They will have intel on the purpose of that building and will have deemed it a viable target, because we don't have access to that intel or whether or not that intel was accurate is immaterial, it is fine under the UN resolution.
I was just told it was an 'administration building'. Unless it had an anti-aircraft battery on its roof, I don't see how it is a legitimate target. Perhaps you can give an example of how it could be.
I'm glad you said that because I cba.
Fed up looking like a dog with a bone.
I see from your posts in this thread that we do agree on some things
Would it?
The east and west seem pretty divided as it is.
I don't think it is going to be particularly easy even if he does go tomorrow, there are enough of his family to take his place and prolong this.
I see from your posts in this thread that we do agree on some things
Hmmmmmmmm.
Careful now.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 32,250
- Location
- Leafy Cheshire
Command and control, communications these are just two options.
Both of which we are allowed to attack.
What are you talking about? a council emerged as the head of the rebellion and that has been recognized internationally, they will be those who take charge should this end in their favour. How exactly is that an engineered puppet of the USA?
No fly zone.
Gaddafi had little in the way of planes.
A palace or residential place has little to do with airfields normally.
This is turning into regime change very quickly.
I think they need to explain and justify why they are bombing civilian buildings. Never mind what you think the resolution justifies, it is clear that the spirit if not the actual wording of the resolution is being broken by the coalition - at least some of those who voted for it, or who abstained (eg. Russia) did not expect the coalition forces to behave the way they are doing.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 32,250
- Location
- Leafy Cheshire
A no fly zone which also extends to anything that can attack nato / us jets in the air or civilians and rebels on the ground.
Setting up a no fly zone doesn't mean flying over his country and shooting down any of his jets which take off.
As far as I am aware the UK government does not recognise the rebels, it recognises states.
The same goes for a lot of other countries.
It is still a civil war.
Watch this space, it will soon end up beyond a NFZ.
That is all out war then.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 32,250
- Location
- Leafy Cheshire
If thats how you want to read it then so be it.
Well to be fair, anything that can fire a projectile can come under that?
Including a man with a rifle with aircraft at low level.
No point pretending it is something else dressed up.
agreed, he's the reason why I watch sky coverage.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
I'm really not sure what I think of all this. Whilst I don't beleive the tinfoil hat brigade and feel the intentions of the coalition are honourable, I'm still not sure I think the present course of action is really that sensible.
The Americans already seem to be trying to distance themselves from it, looking to hand over control already?
The Americans already seem to be trying to distance themselves from it, looking to hand over control already?
I think you're way to hung up on the terminology surrounding a 'no fly zone' especially since the vast majority of it has come from media speculation leading up to the resolution.
The resolution clearly makes ground targets viable, it has to just to clear the air defences, but again, the resolution clearly opens up other ground targets as being viable under it.
Armed conflict is war, occupation or subjugation isn't always the goal. In this case our war with the Libyan regime is as a police action against it's military to stop it murdering it's citizens.
They've got Iraq and Afghanistan to worry about, they dont want to be rebuilding a third country if they can help it.
Quite odd how the French have gone storming in though, given that they are, well... the French
Sarkozy wanting to win the election?
- Status