Poll: Rebels rolling into Tripoli

Were we right to get involved in Libya?

  • Yes

    Votes: 291 49.7%

  • No

    Votes: 294 50.3%
  • Total voters
    585
[TW]Fox;19937433 said:
Why would NATO bomb civilian water supply?

I know its cool to hate the government and all that but don't you think these conspiracies are getting a bit silly?
Click to expand...

NATO have done much worse in previous wars, hell look at what they have done to Iraq.
 
Whenever I read the title I think of the Rebel Alliance fighting the Empire and it's evil Emperor from Star Wars. :p

Go Rebel Alliance, keep on target.
 
Just saw on of the news channels hear(I think channel 4) show a whole lot of charred bodies at one military base(ATM the blame was put on Gaddafi's lot but of course we cannot say whether it was others too).

Nearby,it seems a whole lot of black African workers had been locked in a house by the rebels. They ended up pleading with the news crew saying they were not soldiers(the crew checked their ids,etc). It seems after the news crew intervened they were let go.

The problem is though if the news crew did not arrive what would have happened to the men?? It is a good chance they might have dissapeared!!

Perhaps what the Russian and Chinese media were reporting a few months ago was true. It does seem black people in Libya are scared and are being targetted:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/rebels-settle-scores-in-libyan-capital-2344671.html

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/108781

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-fighting-20110828,0,2799776.story

I really do hope the UN also looks at any war crimes done against black africans by the rebels.
 
Last edited:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14726292

Libya's interim leadership has rejected the idea of deploying any kind of international military force, the UN envoy to the country has said.

Ian Martin said the UN had considered the deployment of military observers.

Earlier, the chairman of the National Transitional Council (NTC) said the country did not need outside help to maintain security.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense to me, if the anti Gadaffi people are being targeted in revenge attacks why would they not want any help?

They were quite happy to move forward under the cover of NATO air strikes after all.
 
Moses said:
Good work on selectively quoting
icon14.gif
.

How about,
Click to expand...

How I am selectively quoting?

Earlier, the chairman of the National Transitional Council (NTC) said the country did not need outside help to maintain security.
Click to expand...

Does Ian Martin represent the NTC, he is a British National Human Rights activist, he has previously worked for the UN.
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-Tory-donor-and-a-contract-to-supply-oil.html

The deal with Vitol was said to have been masterminded by Alan Duncan, the former oil trader turned junior minister, who has close business links to the oil firm and was previously a director of one of its subsidiaries.

Mr Duncan’s private office received funding from the head of Vitol before the general election. Ian Taylor, the company’s chief executive and a friend of Mr Duncan, has given more than £200,000 to the Conservatives.

Vitol is thought to be the only oil firm to have traded with the rebels during the Libyan conflict. Oil industry sources said that other firms including BP, Shell and Glencore had not been approached over the deal. One well-placed source said this was “very surprising” because other companies would have been keen to be involved.

Last night the Coalition was under pressure to disclose details of Mr Duncan’s role in securing the deal, worth about $1billion (£618million). The firm is thought to have supplied fuel and associated products to the rebels and traded oil on their behalf.

The controversial firm has previously been fined for breaching sanctions and paid money to Arkan, the Serbian warlord, allegedly for oil contracts.

Sources at other oil firms described the situation as “highly unusual”. Companies are rushing to secure deals with the rebels in Libya, which has some of the largest oil reserves in the world. An Italian oil firm sent a tanker to Benghazi during the conflict but was forced to turn away from the port.

Mr Duncan, a minister in the Department for International Development, is reported to have arranged the setting up of a special “Libyan oil cell” which brought together officials from the Cabinet Office and Foreign Office to stop the Gaddafi regime benefiting from its control of oil reserves. The oil cell is said to have been key in paving the way for deals between Vitol and the rebels.

The Government’s exact role was shrouded in secrecy. The rebels did not have access to significant sources of finance, meaning that Vitol agreed to deals without upfront payments and is understood to only now be receiving funds. The Gaddafi regime had assets frozen in London and elsewhere and Vitol may have wanted assurances that this money would be released to the rebels in the future, as is now happening.

Sources close to the deal also said that the Government helped secure insurance for the Vitol shipments. It is thought that details of the Libyan oil cell emerged following briefings from those close to Mr Duncan. The minister is said to have described the cell as “the Duncan plan” to friends.

John Mann, a Labour MP, last night called for an inquiry and demanded to be told whether Gus O’Donnell, the Cabinet Secretary, had cleared the “extraordinary deal”. “This is the worst kind of government giving a company that paid Alan Duncan a secret deal,” he said. “It is just like the way Arab dictators behave. Or the way some of the American deals were done in Iraq after the war.”

Last night, Downing Street officials said there had been no impropriety. They confirmed that Mr Duncan had attended meetings with Vitol as part of attempts to avoid a humanitarian crisis if rebel-held areas ran out of fuel.

“The Government did not lobby on Vitol’s behalf,” a spokesman said. “The company had an existing commercial relationship with the National Transitional Council. We are confident that the correct procedures were followed.”

Vitol declined to comment. However, sources close to the firm said that, although the Government had “clearly been helpful” in facilitating the deal, the American government and others were also involved. “Many companies were asked to get involved, but no one else was prepared to step up,” said one source. “There was a payment and safety risk.”
In 2008, it emerged that Mr Duncan’s private office was being funded by donations from the chairman of Vitol.

In the 1990s, Vitol paid $1 million to Arkan, a war criminal, to act as a fixer on a business deal in Slobodan Milosevic’s Serbia that had collapsed. In 2007, the company was fined over the oil-for-food scandal for dealing with the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein. Vitol pleaded guilty to larceny in a New York court and paid $13 million to the Iraqi people in restitution.

Mr Duncan recently gave up a directorship in Arawak Energy, which was part-owned by Vitol and which he had registered with the parliamentary authorities.
Click to expand...

I wonder what will come of this revelation then?
 
How about you post your opinion on the matter first rather than link and run huh? It might make this a little more interesting rather than you just looking for an arguement as per.
 
Anybody else catch the interview with the former CIA chief on skynews yesterday?

With all the "human right watch torture rendition coverup" spin the press were giving the story it was nice to see somebody from the "business end" giving their take on things.

"Did you know people were going to be tortured if you sent them to this country...?"
"I'd have preferred it if we killed them ourselves."

Oddly enough Sky kept playing the outrage/scare info on their 15 minute loop, but i didn't see the interview again. ;)
 
#ItalianPolitics: Update #Libya. Today Italian (think!) media say Gaddafi may be between Sebha and Algeria border.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
This is not good:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14835354

SA24 SAMs!! They are supposedly the latest Russian MANPADS.

I wonder what has happened to all the MILAN antitank missiles which were sold to Libya in 2007:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14835354
Click to expand...

It isn't anything particularly more threatening than already present, say in Afghanistan for example, where there are many undiscovered caches of old soviet weapons. Again, another "no-news" piece spun up to sound like real news.
 
Captain Planet said:
It isn't anything particularly more threatening than already present, say in Afghanistan for example, where there are many undiscovered caches of old soviet weapons. Again, another "no-news" piece spun up to sound like real news.
Click to expand...

Considering many of the missiles are actually quite new I would say there is a threat. Just look at the weapons purchases by Libya in the last 5 years. A lot of those included MANPADs and anti-tank weapons such as the latest version of MILAN. The SA24 is the latest Russian MANDPADs and first entered Russian service in 2004. So far 480 are reported missing. These are not old missiles and have plenty of shelf life left and probably have much more modern electronics. Hopefully none of these will fall in the hands of the insurgents in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The SA24 is not easy to get hold off due to restrictions on sales(inter-government) whereas the SA16 and SA18 missiles are available due to the collapse of the USSR which opened up Soviet armories. The US has put pressure on Russia to not provide Iran and Venezuela with the SA24 as they fear some examples may find their way to non-governmental groups.

Afghanistan is not comparable as most of the missiles were older Stingers from the 1980s which had expired battery packs and Strelas which had the same issues.These missiles are Iglas which are much newer. The much older SA16 and SA18 Igla versions fielded during the Soviet times have been implicated in shooting and damaging many helicopters in the last 20 years. AFAIK,quite a few US helicopters in Iraq were shoot down using these missiles.
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Considering many of the missiles are actually quite new I would say there is a threat. Just look at the weapons purchases by Libya in the last 5 years. A lot of those included MANPADs and anti-tank weapons such as the latest version of MILAN. The SA24 is the latest Russian MANDPADs and first entered Russian service in 2004. So far 480 are reported missing. These are not old missiles and have plenty of shelf life left and probably have much more modern electronics. Hopefully none of these will fall in the hands of the insurgents in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The SA24 is not easy to get hold off due to restrictions on sales(inter-government) whereas the SA16 and SA18 missiles are available due to the collapse of the USSR which opened up Soviet armories. The US has put pressure on Russia to not provide Iran and Venezuela with the SA24 as they fear some examples may find their way to non-governmental groups.

Afghanistan is not comparable as most of the missiles were older Stingers from the 1980s which had expired battery packs and Strelas which had the same issues.These missiles are Iglas which are much newer. The much older SA16 and SA18 Igla versions fielded during the Soviet times have been implicated in shooting and damaging many helicopters in the last 20 years. AFAIK,quite a few US helicopters in Iraq were shoot down using these missiles.
Click to expand...
they would have used them ages ago if they were going to...
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
The SA24 is not easy to get hold off due to restrictions on sales(inter-government) whereas the SA16 and SA18 missiles are available due to the collapse of the USSR which opened up Soviet armories..
Click to expand...

So you're saying the SA-16/18 is more wide spread than the 24... yet we have not so far heard of swathes of NATO aircraft being shot down by the 16/18 across the world despite them using a not-quite-so capable IGLA system? Then there is the fact that the increased complexity of the system requires someone trained to use it (it ain't just point and shoot).

Yes, a little more threat, but hardly news worthy/shaking in my boots information. Again, it's the usual kind of no-news news I'd expect from the BBC.
 
Captain Planet said:
So you're saying the SA-16/18 is more wide spread than the 24... yet we have not so far heard of swathes of NATO aircraft being shot down by the 16/18 across the world despite them using a not-quite-so capable IGLA system? Then there is the fact that the increased complexity of the system requires someone trained to use it (it ain't just point and shoot).

Yes, a little more threat, but hardly news worthy/shaking in my boots information. Again, it's the usual kind of no-news news I'd expect from the BBC.
Click to expand...

But it helps to conjure support for the intervention. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom