http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12781009
Oh wait, it's not only a no-fly zone, but also millitary incursion.
Too bad it's a bit late.
No-fly Zone In Libya Enforced By UN.
No-fly zone in Libya enforced by UN.
Little slow on that one, but as long as the rebel city of Benghazi and the east part of Libya still hold out, it may do some good.
So what exactly does that mean?
Odin.Zicdeh said:
So what exactly does that mean?
It means the UN can do whatever the *** they want in Libya.
[+]
Odin.Zicdeh said:
So what exactly does that mean?
Lakshmi.Jaerik said:
Little slow on that one, but as long as the rebel city of Benghazi and the east part of Libya still hold out, it may do some good.
Reports indicate that Benghazi is about be under a decisive attack by Gadaffi's troops. However it's said, that after such a resolution, members of the UN would be ready take measures within a few hours.
Odin.Zicdeh said:
So what exactly does that mean?
In order to do this, you need to have air superiority with your own planes. But in order to keep your own planes up, you have to take out all of the ground-based anti-air defenses. And in order to do that, you need to bomb them all and/or attack them by more conventional means, and...
Etc, etc. In a nutshell, it means the international community can go after Gaddafi's forces, especially if they fight back.
Quote:
French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said if the resolution was approved, France would support military action against Gadhafi within hours. The U.S. said it was preparing for action. Several Arab nations were expected to provide backup.
Was I the only one who saw the humor in this?
France must have some kind of investments there.
Important to note is that the US only accepted this under the condition that at LEAST one Arabian participant would join, as a cover that this is not entirely a western affair.
Sylph.Beelshamen said:
Important to note is that the US only accepted this under the condition that at LEAST one Arabian participant would join, as a cover that this is not entirely a western affair.
Luckily Gaddafi is so damn nuts that it was pretty easy for other Arab states to get on board.
Bismarck.Oroborus said:
LOL France, that is all. I thought they ran from ***like this?
Libya has always been a thorn in their side, they're only doing this to get rid of Gaddafi.
Sorry but dont UN have more restrictive rules of engagement than Nato/US would have.
Arent UN forces usually brought them in as peacekeeping forces (basically policing) after the fighting is done?
Arent UN forces usually brought them in as peacekeeping forces (basically policing) after the fighting is done?
france is a major importer of lybian oil
Lakshmi.Jaerik said:
Odin.Zicdeh said:
So what exactly does that mean?
In order to do this, you need to have air superiority with your own planes. But in order to keep your own planes up, you have to take out all of the ground-based anti-air defenses. And in order to do that, you need to bomb them all and/or attack them by more conventional means, and...
Etc, etc. In a nutshell, it means the international community can go after Gaddafi's forces, especially if they fight back.
Ha, one Typhoon or Raptor is probably enough to establish Air Superiority over that backwater. They're probably still using aircraft from Gorbachev's Discount MiG Emporium, like so many of the sand-caked nations of the world.
Fenrir.Eneas said:
Sorry but dont UN have more restrictive rules of engagement than Nato/US would have.
Arent UN forces usually brought them in as peacekeeping forces (basically policing) after the fighting is done?
Arent UN forces usually brought them in as peacekeeping forces (basically policing) after the fighting is done?
The Korean War was actually waged not by the US, but by the US under the direction of the UN.
Usually though, it's hard to get the UN to agree to offensive action, so in practice it tends to be more peacekeepery stuff.
Sylph.Beelshamen said:
Important to note is that the US only accepted this under the condition that at LEAST one Arabian participant would join, as a cover that this is not entirely a western affair.
Instead this is a matter that EU should be more involved in, not just as a matter of single nations, but as a whole union, otherwise will prove once again a useless institution.
As usual though China and Russia abstained from voting.
Lakshmi.Jaerik said:
Fenrir.Eneas said:
Sorry but dont UN have more restrictive rules of engagement than Nato/US would have.
Arent UN forces usually brought them in as peacekeeping forces (basically policing) after the fighting is done?
Arent UN forces usually brought them in as peacekeeping forces (basically policing) after the fighting is done?
The Korean War was actually waged not by the US, but by the US under the direction of the UN.
Usually though, it's hard to get the UN to agree to offensive action, so in practice it tends to be more peacekeepery stuff.
just to be clear... are we talking both of the troops with the blue helmets right?
Leviathan.Chaosx said:
As usual though China and Russia abstained from voting.
They can't vote for the resolution because that would be agreeing with the US / EU, and that would never do.
Fenrir.Eneas said:
just to be clear... are we talking both of the troops with the blue helmets right?
Theoretically though, as far as I know, there's nothing preventing the UN from ordering an offensive like they did in Korea.
Leviathan.Chaosx said:
As usual though China and Russia abstained from voting.
At least they didn't veto it...that would have likely happened if the majority of the Arab League didn't request the intervention.
Leviathan.Chaosx said:
As usual though China and Russia abstained from voting.
Which is practically agreement, either one of those nations could have veto'd.
True, at least they didn't veto this time.
Fenrir.Eneas said:
Lakshmi.Jaerik said:
Fenrir.Eneas said:
Sorry but dont UN have more restrictive rules of engagement than Nato/US would have. Arent UN forces usually brought them in as peacekeeping forces (basically policing) after the fighting is done?
According to what I read, there wasn't an authorisation for an occupying force, just the no-fly zone and support for the Libyan populations. So at this time, it sounds like just air support strikes against facilities and targets.
If I recall wasn't the initial invasion of Iraq U.N. Forces pushed by the U.S.
Some countries even sent as little as 200 troops to aid.
Some countries even sent as little as 200 troops to aid.
Well you see.. its kind of shameful for me since Italian PM is a "personal" friend of Gaddafi and refused to intervene on any degree.
Fenrir.Eneas said:
Well you see.. its kind of shameful for me since Italian PM is a "personal" friend of Gaddafi and refused to intervene on any degree.
What did you expect? Berlusconi is as much of a lunatic as Gaddafi.
Fenrir.Eneas said:
Well you see.. its kind of shameful for me since Italian PM is a "personal" friend of Gaddafi and refused to intervene on any degree.
I was expecting nothing less for a 70+ years old accused of underage prostitution...
Back on topic, you can see the double standard of france in this case(which is hellbend on intervene), basically wanting to "steal" that sphere of influence off of Italy.
Actually is nice to see the ipocrisy like this that goes on on every african matter (no country excluded)
Back on topic, you can see the double standard of france in this case(which is hellbend on intervene), basically wanting to "steal" that sphere of influence off of Italy.
Actually is nice to see the ipocrisy like this that goes on on every african matter (no country excluded)
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.