Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai General Chat

UN Resolution 1973 No-Fly Zone in Libyan Airspace

10 For - France, UK, Lebanon, US, South Africa, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Colombia, Portugal, Nigeria, Gabon
0 Against
5 Abstentions - China, Russia, Brazil, India, Germany

So, here we go again, the involvement of an international committee to prolong the suffering of another ME nation or will it really help the rebels?

I certainly hope so, for if Gaddafi regains power in Libya I don't think he'll waste any time in letting the rebels and his critics know just exactly how he feels about them!

What do you mean 'if' Gaddafi will easily restore power.

They only want to be on speaking terms with Gaddafi after the dust settles.

I had to laugh though, when I heard that the rebles will fly the American flag in return for American military support.

Dave's first war! How marvellous. That won't do his memoirs any harm, will it? I do hope we have a plan for afterwards this time.

So it would appear that the resolution goes a little further than just a No-Fly Zone;

“The Council authorized Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, including Benghazi.”

So I guess Dave will be free to 'all necessary measures' against 'any threat' to civilians?

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10200.doc.htm

It was a necessary resolution. A lot is invested in this on the behalf of UK, France. Europe usually is late in taking similar decisions. This time there are not just obvious humanitarian interests but there is a lot of business behind the scenes and mostly some past dirt to cover up fast. Gaddafi was well involved involved in European business. This only according to the data available for public. The conflict must and. I personally hope strongly that in the best interest of libyan people.

French planes are in the sky over Libya, enforcing the 'No Fly' zone. British planes are being armed and are expected to join the French shortly, as reported on the BBC. Dave was being interviewed and very serious he looked too!

I am glad my country men kicked Gadhafi' @ss, French fighter jets fired upon Lybian forces.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110319/ap_ ... f/af_libya

And we're doing this, why?

herve wrote:I am glad my country men kicked Gadhafi' @ss, French fighter jets fired upon Lybian forces.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110319/ap_ ... f/af_libya

About the only arse they could kick these days.

-- Sun Mar 20, 2011 12:41 am --

event horizon wrote:And we're doing this, why?

I agree eh, Imposing democracy on a nation where one half of the population hates the other half is not a good idea.

benwj wrote:

event horizon wrote:And we're doing this, why?

I agree eh, Imposing democracy on a nation where one half of the population hates the other half is not a good idea.

No-one is imposing democracy on anyone Ben, the UN resolution is quite specific in demanding an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current attacks against civilians, furthermore The Council authorized Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, including Benghazi.

Resolution 1973 is designed, with the support of the Arab League and innocent Libyan civilians, to protect civilians from Libya's armed forces. No imposition of democracy or any other western values and No ground forces will enter Libya.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10200.doc.htm

personally I wish it was Arabs troops, but its not a secret... Arab nations are a joke these days...
Qaddafi is crazy, and his reactions needs to be studied before the UN go further...

I'd like to see one of those Cruise missiles programmed with the Colonel's current location and an inscription on the side reading 'This one's for Lockerbie'.

And let's not forget PC Yvonne Fletcher in 1984?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/date ... 488369.stm

Dillon wrote:And let's not forget PC Yvonne Fletcher in 1984?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/date ... 488369.stm

I still find the sight of all those Libyan 'diplomats' being allowed to file out of the Libyan Embassy and head home after the shooting of PC Yvonne Fletcher, particularly hard to stomach. I can't imagine what that poor girls parents thought.

Well, there's nothing like doing favors for a people who hate our guts.

Ooh I think we'll all be looking for some kind of payment when the dust settles won't we? I think this goes beyond friendly regard?

I haven't seen the news since this morning but it looked like the Arab League was getting cold feet. There was talk of the Qataris sending four planes, more the gesture than the fire power and talk that the UAE were sending some planes too. I didn't even realise the Emiratis had an Air Force. What nationalities are the pilots?

The Colonel seemed to building up some sort of human shieled thingy. Bring out the wives and bairns!

Bethsmum wrote:I haven't seen the news since this morning but it looked like the Arab League was getting cold feet. There was talk of the Qataris sending four planes, more the gesture than the fire power and talk that the UAE were sending some planes too. I didn't even realise the Emiratis had an Air Force. What nationalities are the pilots?

The Colonel seemed to building up some sort of human shieled thingy. Bring out the wives and bairns!

Have a look at this site for the UAE Air Force:

http://www.scramble.nl/ae.htm

sage & onion wrote:

Bethsmum wrote:I haven't seen the news since this morning but it looked like the Arab League was getting cold feet. There was talk of the Qataris sending four planes, more the gesture than the fire power and talk that the UAE were sending some planes too. I didn't even realise the Emiratis had an Air Force. What nationalities are the pilots?

The Colonel seemed to building up some sort of human shieled thingy. Bring out the wives and bairns!

Have a look at this site for the UAE Air Force:

http://www.scramble.nl/ae.htm

Wow, I'm impressed! I wonder if they join in?

And once again the UK set's out to create a mess of everything. If my history serves me right, wasn't it the Brits, backed by the holier than thou "BBC" who kick-started the campaign to oust the Shah of Iran? Which they successfully achieved and the results are before us, for all to see.

Once again part of me believes that they'll make a mess with Libya too. Unless they finish this campaign soon, the only possible outcome is a split Libya, with two separate governments (old habits die hard). That no doubt would be catastrophic.
Not that intervention in Libya is a bad thing, but if u gonna intervene, go the whole hog. Eventually NATO will need to deploy ground forces (assuming that the air strikes dnt achieve their purpose) and something tells me there is no way they're gonna do that.

It's not in the UN resolution to send ground forces in MCL.

It's not the UK who passed the resolution but the United Nations, the UK being only a member of the UN. What about France, the US and other nations that are taking part?

Well BM it's not like UK and France did'nt publicly and actively lobby for the no-fly zone.

From what I've seen on the news White House seems bent on getting out of this ASAP. So that leaves whom? UK, France and Italy right (?) apart from a few other itsy-bitsy countries, unless you expect the Arab League to send in troops(!!!!!)

I mean it's great that someone is doing something, but mere in-the-sky bombings aren't gonna stop civilians from being killed. The only discernible objective I can see is one to topple Gadffi and put in place an alternative government (who benefits by that is something I dnt wanna get into.Besides it would be merely speculative) But that will not put an end to the violence. At-least I don't think so.

Misery Called Life wrote:Well BM it's not like UK and France did'nt publicly and actively lobby for the no-fly zone.

From what I've seen on the news White House seems bent on getting out of this ASAP. So that leaves whom? UK, France and Italy right (?) apart from a few other itsy-bitsy countries, unless you expect the Arab League to send in troops(!!!!!)

I mean it's great that someone is doing something, but mere in-the-sky bombings aren't gonna stop civilians from being killed. The only discernible objective I can see is one to topple Gadffi and put in place an alternative government (who benefits by that is something I dnt wanna get into.Besides it would be merely speculative) But that will not put an end to the violence. At-least I don't think so.

I would have thought the first step in stopping the violence was to get rid of Gadaffi, say whatever you want, my thoughts are with the UN and the actions that have been taken by member countries, lets all pray that it ends up saving lives and leads to a better libya.

Yes, MCL, David Cameron did actively lobby the UN for a no fly zone. I don't really expect the Arab League to send in troops although they supported the No Fly Zone at first and Qatar have put 4 planes at the UN's disposal.
We have rendered the Libyan Air Force incapable of flying so they won't be attacking their own people in the near future. For that I think we need to congratulate the UN and the Royal Air Force. It is reported that every bomb we drop costs £800,000 and the cost of the round trip to Libya for a Tornedo is £200.000. I wonder where we are getting the money from?

As for the future plans regarding Gadaffi, well there seems to be some confusion whether he is a legitamate target. There can be few people who would think that to leave him in power would be a good thing. Considering Gadaffi's track record, I would like to see him gone. I hate to think of the reprocussions after this, what he describes as, terrorism.

I live under the flight path of planes heading to the States, if the bomb on the plane that came down over Lockerbie had gone off 1 minute earlier it would have taken my house out. A very scarey thought. I'd rather that threat was removed.

Misery Called Life wrote:And once again the UK set's out to create a mess of everything. If my history serves me right, wasn't it the Brits, backed by the holier than thou "BBC" who kick-started the campaign to oust the Shah of Iran? Which they successfully achieved and the results are before us, for all to see.

And the answer to that one would be for you to go back to school and retake your history papers! a resounding, no it wasn’t! And maybe with your analogy we should ask the BBC correspondents in Tripoli to tell Gaddafi to go, it would cost much less in human and financial cost than the present policies

Once again part of me believes that they'll make a mess with Libya too. Unless they finish this campaign soon, the only possible outcome is a split Libya, with two separate governments (old habits die hard). That no doubt would be catastrophic.
Not that intervention in Libya is a bad thing, but if u gonna intervene, go the whole hog. Eventually NATO will need to deploy ground forces (assuming that the air strikes dnt achieve their purpose) and something tells me there is no way they're gonna do that.

Libya has been catastrophic and split for the last 40 Years with Gaddafi having the upper hand so, nothing new there then? And there you go making an a$$ of yourself again with your assumptions, Resolution 1973 expressly forbids foreign occupation forces in Libya “while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory”. That doesn’t mean to say the deployment of ground forces isn’t an option! The Libyans are in a mess of their own making and the outcome is entirely up the Libyan people and no one else, Resolution 1973 is about protecting the civilian population from Gaddafi’s own and African mercenary armed and forces.

Well BM it's not like UK and France did'nt publicly and actively lobby for the no-fly zone.

Yes they did, after a request was received a week earlier from the Arab League.

From what I've seen on the news White House seems bent on getting out of this ASAP. So that leaves whom? UK, France and Italy right (?) apart from a few other itsy-bitsy countries, unless you expect the Arab League to send in troops(!!!!!)

The US aren’t bent on getting out of anything, it was decided on Saturday last, at a meeting in Paris that the US would provide Command and Control for the start of the operations from their already established network in Germany, handing over to the UN by the following weekend, and will continue to support the UN Mandate with assets as required by the incoming UN Command.

Britain and France spearhead this attack, while Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Holland, Norway, US and Spain will accompany them in this offensive. The Italian and Greek jetfighters will not take part in these operations, but, the coalition forces will have access to these two countries' airports. The Arab League aren’t likely to provide anything more than rhetoric, finance and humanitarian aid, as expected.

I mean it's great that someone is doing something, but mere in-the-sky bombings aren't gonna stop civilians from being killed. The only discernible objective I can see is one to topple Gadffi and put in place an alternative government (who benefits by that is something I dnt wanna get into.Besides it would be merely speculative) But that will not put an end to the violence. At-least I don't think so.

The only body of people capable of putting an end to the violence are the Libyan people themselves! Without the aid of the African mercenary forces employed by Gaddafi. It is up to the Libyan people to provide their own governance, not the UN or any other external force.

I hope and pray they get Gadaffi, but I highly doubt bombing shanties and tin foil roofs is gonna stop civilians being killed. I can't see why there's confusion on weather Gadaffi is a legitimate target? What are they so scared off?
@ Dillion The rest of ur post is merely pedantic, nothing we didn't know. But who will the incoming UN command be? Last heard Italy was lobbying for that. I'm not exactly sure how that works....

My post was based on Britain's past track record when interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, and why we all need to be wary. I used the ouster of Iran's Shah as a reference. And yes Britain did have a role to play in the Shah's ouster. When the Ayatollah was expelled to France, it was the BBC who ran programs in favor of him. I would think such programs definitely shaped public perceptions.
Said so by the Shah himself http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKUQUDf5 ... re=related (skip to 3:35)
Hopefully this time round the end result will be more favorable and history will look down kindly upon you. (this is where i put that devil smiley in, which for some reason i can't do on my phone)

You’re confused again MCL, The System of Government in the United Kingdom, and foreign policy, is a parliamentary democracy with a constitutional monarch, with Queen Elizabeth II, as the current head of State. Please see here for further details http://www.parliament.uk/

The British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is the largest broadcasting organisation in the world. Its mission is to enrich people's lives with programmes that inform, educate and entertain. It is a public service broadcaster, established by a Royal Charter and funded by a licence fee that is paid by UK households. Trust is the foundation of the BBC: “we are independent, impartial and honest.” Please see here for further details. http://www.bbc.co.uk/

So you see MCL, the BBC are an entity, independent from any Governmental influence or control, now I realise that this would be a difficult concept to grasp for some individuals, in particular, say the residents of countries having a less democratic governance, nevertheless, and history proves it time and time again, the BBC criticises all and sundry, including the British Public and their ruling Government, whatever their political affiliations, and more relevant to your last post, just about every autocratic political leader that ever lived, including the last Shah of Iran and his government.

In truth, The Shah enjoyed the staunch support of successive British Governments, commerce and industry for most of his adult life.

Nowhere in any of the Shah’s interviews does he indicate that he believed his downfall was due to actions by the British Government or their agents. The BBC are, amongst other things a news broadcaster, the choice is yours whether you believe them or not.

You say, ‘My post was based on Britain's past track record when interfering in the internal affairs of other countries’ please indicate specifically, which countries you are referring to as to the best of my knowledge, successive British Governments over the last 100 Years have been requested to assist rather than ‘interfere’ in other countries business.

Muammar Gaddafi as a politician, is not a legitimate target, according to Resolution 1973, but Libya's commander in chief and chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council is a legitimate target, and this has been clarified many times in the news.

You say ‘I highly doubt bombing shanties and tin foil roofs is gonna stop civilians being killed’ me too, I thought the coalition forces were removing Gaddafi’s air defences and all means necessary to protect civilians, I guess if Gaddafi’s air defences are protected by ‘shanties and tin foil roofs’ this would explain it?

NATO have assumed control of the no-fly zone over Libya as agreed at last week’s meeting in Paris and within the timescale set of 1 week set at that same meeting, you really do need to be more selective in the news items you read MCL.

Yet again, there appears to be an underlying distaste for everything British in your posts MCL, why is that?



-- Fri Mar 25, 2011 4:00 pm --

UAE updates support to UN resolution 1973, As an extension of those humanitarian operations the UAE Air Force has committed six F-16 and six Mirage aircraft to participate in the patrols that will enforce the No Fly Zone now established over Libya. UAE Participation in the patrols will commence in the coming days."

Well they’re getting closer, not quite there just yet but given a little more time they may just make it?

http://www.wam.ae/servlet/Satellite?c=W ... N-FullNews

@Dillion I did read Resolution 1979 and it does explain everything. Guess I have no counter now (I need a smiley that shows how stupid I look)

Well the Iran argument is long and irrelevant. On that issue I maintain my earlier stand though.

MCL, do you mean resolution 1973?