[Updated] Allied Forces taking Immediate military action in Libya - Page 9

**Hugh** · 20-03-2011, 08:28

He has stated that is not an option, and the UN resolution does not include that.

PeteLockwood · 20-03-2011, 08:30

yes hugh, i am aware, however, the CURRENT UN resolution does not include that... you never know what will happen until it does, hopefully it will not happen at all... but like i said... you never know

DocDutch · 20-03-2011, 08:40

it wouldnt surprise me when the UN will change this to full UN Blues on the ground but then it'll be an international force not like Afghanistan or Iraq which where American led.

It'll depend on what the mad man is going to do as he does have stores or chem and bio weapons available and has used them before on his own people and neighboring Chad (hmm doesnt that sound a bit like Saddam)

PeteLockwood · 20-03-2011, 08:42

dutch that's what im afrraid of a ground occupation! he has just said on libyan state tv that "all my people are now armed, i have opened up my arms depots for the country to take advantage of"

this guy is clearly insane, as are the people that choose to "take advantage" of these arms depots...

Pierre · 20-03-2011, 08:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

He has stated that is not an option, and the UN resolution does not include that.

I thought the resolution was "my any means necessary" or words to that effect?

PeteLockwood · 20-03-2011, 08:48

pierre, you are both correct... it is by whatever means, authorizes almost everything except ground occupation and toppling the regime tho

Kymmy · 20-03-2011, 08:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre

I thought the resolution was "my any means necessary" or words to that effect?

The full paragraph reads

Quote:

4. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory, and requests the Member States concerned to inform the Secretary-General immediately of the measures they take pursuant to the authorization conferred by this paragraph which shall be immediately reported to the Security Council;

Full resolution at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12783819

DocDutch · 20-03-2011, 09:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

The full paragraph reads

Full resolution at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12783819

But Kymmy, those resolutions can change....at Kosovo it was mainly a no fly zone and after a month or so ground troops had to go in.

Kymmy · 20-03-2011, 09:10

Yep, but I was answering Pierre's reading of the current resolution..

If the resolution changes then I think that after the Iraq war the UN will be just as careful in the wording..

Osem · 20-03-2011, 09:18

Have we really got any troops to send in? I for one will be delighted if our guys get a break for a change. Having said that, I seem to recall that in Bosnia, the allies were led a merry dance and that air power didn't do the trick against an opposition which was mobile, resourceful and imaginative. Sadly, I think some form of ground force in Libya is almost inevitable and I wouldn't be surprised if there were significant problems there for years to come and God only knows what new terrorist threats we'll face.

Sirius · 20-03-2011, 09:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem

Have we really got any troops to send in?

That's my concern, The lads in the forces at the moment are stretched. If this escalates and a ground presence is needed i feel we should not be the ones to supply that force.

Kymmy · 20-03-2011, 09:54

Is Gaddafi getting senile in his old age?? Last night he called the the attacks a Zionist action and now he's saying that they're a new form of Hitlerism

papa smurf · 20-03-2011, 09:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Is Gaddafi getting senile in his old age?? Last night he called the the attacks a Zionist action and now he's saying that they're a new form of Hitlerism

just add it to the list of things wrong with him .

mertle · 20-03-2011, 09:58

Should not intervene in what was essence a civil war.

Lets take away libya past hijackings, lockerbie and hatred to gadaffe which clouds all our judgement whether it right or wrong. When you look at it makes no moral sense whatsoever especially when we ignored others. Did we help the townships in AFRICA nope we let the murdering whites kill them. Have we even bothered to help bahrain/yemen nope.

Have we helped other nations civil unrest nope. Did we protect palistinian people from rape, murder and steeling of homes from jews.

We simply cant take moral high ground if we or the un turn blind eye to ather situations.

US,French and britain dont give flying .... to the common libian while the got blood lust of oportunity to kill a hated man. Lets make no bones is there truly any difference to iraq situation whether we got the green light or not this nothing to do with protecting people.

Cameron two faced will he abandon cuts while he wastes money on another War. How can he defend national cuts while wasting billions in actions.

He moaned about labour wasting money in iraq/afghanistan. Will he help financially Japan like labour correctly helped tsunami victims. No doubt he would done the same helping his banking buddies in the banking collapse.

So lets not forget how our debt racked up in the firstplace.

Complete two faced is cameron.

Arthurgray50@blu · 20-03-2011, 10:07

Am l not wrong in saying that Tony Blair was heavilly critised for going to war on Iraq, ISN'T this war against Libya involving BRITISH forces. And yet Cameron has ordered our troops into another war.

We are making British forces redundant in defence cuts, and yet sending them to a bloody war. What about the defence of our country.