Gaddafi threatens 'martyr' attacks in Europe

[Turborama]

Source: Reuters

07/08/2011 21:07

TRIPOLI - Muammar Gaddafi threatened on Friday to send hundreds of Libyans to launch attacks in Europe in revenge for the NATO-led military campaign against him.

"Hundreds of Libyans will martyr in Europe. I told you it is eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. But we will give them a chance to come back to their senses," the Libyan leader said in a televised speech.

Read more: http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=228521

---

"Martyrs"? -- "eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth"?

I thought Gaddafi was supposed to be protecting the world from religious extremists like Al Qaeda, wasn't he?

[daleo]

1. Libya doesn't have to attack the west

Our own governments seem bent on destroying our way of life anyway, via war debt and social program elimination.

[TheWraith]

2. Desperate people do stupid things.

Including sending the handful he has left of ancient Soviet-made attack planes against an integrated air defense system in Europe. Also known as pilot suicide.

[Amonester]

3. So, gawdawful isn't just a 'suspected' war criminal under warrant...

but also a 'recorded' threatening terrarist...

Yeah, that will 'help' ...

[stuckinarut]

4. We should definitely send more "humanitarian aid"!

Apparently we haven't sent enough...

Maybe we should step up drone attacks, and definitely use more depleted uranium rounds.

That will solve this problem.. Qaddafi that murdering madman...how dare he?

[RZM]

5. Oh please

He's been in power for 42 years. He's had his day and everybody but him knows it. Time for him to take a fucking hike.

[stuckinarut]

6. Yup, but it isn't the job of the US

or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to inspire/create regime change in foreign countries.

I guess, that is just another trick the executive picked up along the way along with extrajudicial assassinations, and the death of posse comatatus, whatever laws conflict with our geo-political interest don't need to be headed, right?

But we should DEFINITELY hold others to the standard.

[RZM]

8. Not sure it is

They are a bit confused about what their goals are in Libya, I'll admit. But I'll stand with NATO, the US, and the rebels over Ghaddafi any day.

[stuckinarut]

9. Im still trying to figure out

what Libya has to do with the North Atlantic...that one baffles me.

The only answer that has come my way was in an article Chomsky wrote a few weeks ago, about how the only connection would be that Libya posed a threat to NATO trade interests...but if that was the case, they would not have had to make the whole "humanitarian" argument...lets call it what it is..a coup.


Peace, Brother.

[Iterate]

10. If you have any evidence of depleted uranium use, please link.

Seriously. I've been looking for months and so far have seen only speculation, misunderstanding, and outright deception. If they've used them, I want to know.

[stuckinarut]

11. Here's some articles I've found.

I wouldn't discount it..it's not like it isn't the US' weapon of choice..

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/402.html

http://rt.com/usa/news/nato-depleted-uranium-libya/

http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/175157.html

Although it may be hard to collect samples for lab tests...

[Iterate]

28. Not even close to being evidence.

I've watched over the past few months how this interview in particular (speculation by one partly informed columnist who watched some video) has gotten passed around from agency to agency, blog to blog. I've seen how the source is stripped away and his conclusions passed on as fact. The worst culprits in that slight of hand have been RT, Presstv, and Pravda.

Most of the attention to this issue occurred during late March to early April when the fighting was focused on the Benghazi to Ras Lanuf highway. It was open to the press and NGOs at that time. Part of it still is. Swab a statistically significant sample, establish a chain of custody, send it off to three independent labs.

Otherwise, continually passing on the speculation as fact diminishes the credibility of those who might have evidence either way and sets back the effort of those who wish to see those weapons banned.

[leveymg]

13. Cannon fire from some NATO warplanes might include DU rounds.

#
20mm Ammunition
www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/20mm.htm
Jan 10, 2006 – Aircraft using the M61A1 20mm cannon include the F-15, F-16, F/A-18 ... The 20mm Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS), Depleted Uranium ...
►
#

[CJvR]

22. None of those...

...are likely to make strafing runs under the current ROE. If you are going fishing for DU the helicopter gunships deployed are a far better suspect.

[Iterate]

26. Capability is not evidence of use.

They're also capable of firing blanks and practice bombs.

Moreover, the exact capabilities seem to be endlessly confused and repeated. It only serves to obscure whatever truth can be found.

"The 20mm Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS), Depleted Uranium sub-caliber penetrator was changed to Tungsten in 1988. "
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/20mm.htm

[stuckinarut]

29. Are you insinuating that it is "unlikely"

that we use these munitions, or are you just trying to say that we aren't until you have me go to Libya?

Because it is very common that we use these munitions. As in, all the time. If we are trying to "bust bunkers" or "stop tanks", you bet your ass they are using DU for those jobs.

It is also common that we deny their use, even when there IS definitive proof. I would put nothing past our government at this point...And when did we EVER start caring about the ROE???

Or any international law by that matter?

And for the record, I will take my news from RT and Press TV any day of the week before I go to American venues.

[jakeXT]

7. I hope it's not a translation snafu again and a setup for some foul play

Lockerbie and La Belle have both intelligence agency finger prints on them.




How Gaddafi's words get lost in translation

...

It is also the single most important bond uniting the Arabs, who are otherwise so diverse.

But it has a problem. The educated form of the language, based on the Koran, is literally nobody's mother tongue. All Arabs speak a local dialect. If they are educated, especially if their education is traditional, they aspire to speak correctly, but scarcely ever quite make it.

Hence the common remark to a foreigner who has learned his Arabic from a grammar book is: "You speak Arabic better than I do."

In this respect, Mr Gaddafi scarcely even tries. For the most part he speaks Libyan dialect, and Arabic dialects are not fully understood by Arabs from other regions.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12566277

[Johnny Harpo]

12. OK..Enough Of This Guy...Send In....

a special ops team and take him out.

After the smoke clears we can deal with whoever is left standing.

[trud]

14. turn about is fair play.

If Europe has its nickers in a twist about being attacked, perhaps it shouldn't have attacked Libya first.

If I were he, I'd have gone after every country that attacked Libya a lot earlier than this.

By the way, I love how suddenly he's a "terrorist" for saying he'll attack the countries that attacked him. What is this, Israel-speak?

[Xithras]

15. He didn't identify his targets, so we don't know if this is a terrorist threat or not.

If he sends those martyrs to attack European military installations or to kill European government officials, then those "martyrs" would be attacking legitimate military targets and he would be acting legally according to the international laws of warfare.

Gadaffi sending "martyrs" to attack European military infrastructure is no more "illegal" than when we put commando teams into France before D-Day. Because those nations are currently involved in an open war with Libya, it's only terrorism if he attacks civilian targets.

I can't stand this entire "If they don't fight fair and die quickly, they must be terrorists" mentality. Under international law, it would be perfectly legal for Gadaffi to have an assassin take out Nicolas Sarkozy or David Cameron right now. People may not like it, but the laws of war go both ways. The same laws that allow us to bomb Gadaffi's homes and military installations also make it legal for him to bomb the homes of our own leaders, and our own military installations right here on American or European soil.

[joshcryer]

16. Huh? The UN states participating did not declare war on Gaddafi.

It is a UN peacekeeping action. Are you saying those other UN peacekeeping actions in Africa deserve their participating states to be attacked by disgruntled anti-peace people? This makes no sense whatsoever.

[Bosonic]

18. It's not peacekeeping

But don't believe me, ask the UN:

http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/

They've got a handy front page map, the pin in Libya is notable by its absence.

In fact, from the http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/peacekeeping.shtml">What is peacekeeping? section:

UN Peacekeeping is guided by three basic principles:

Consent of the parties;
Impartiality;
Non-use of force except in self-defence and defence of the mandate.


So to call the Libya conflict peacekeeping is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwellian">Orwellian.

[joshcryer]

19. Fair enough, it was a wrong use of words. Sorry about that. It falls under R2P.

Which many liberals called for when it came to many African countries.

[Xithras]

20. UN declaration doesn't trump the Geneva Conventions.

The 1949 Geneva Conventions do not differentiate between "peacekeeping" troops and "combat" troops. They simply address the lawful combat actions of belligerant nations during a state of conflict. Nowhere in the UN charter were they given authority to suspend application of those international laws simply because they conflict with the UN's own goals.

In fact, the 1949 Conventions repeatedly reiterate that they apply "in war, armed conflicts where war has not been declared and in an occupation of another country's territory". The UN/NATO action against Libya clearly qualifies under the second of those terms.

So long as Libyan fighters engage foreign targets under the terms specified in those conventions (non civilian targets, properly marked uniforms, etc), attacks staged on the home soil of the NATO countries currently engaged in the Libyan conflict is a perfectly lawful activity under current international law.

This, of course, is why those countries have armies. To stop these sorts of attacks. This is also why you should never rush to war. Getting attacked on your home soil is never fun.

[pinboy3niner]

17. A Militant Gadhafi Threatens to Target European ‘Homes, Offices, Families’

TRIPOLI, Libya (The Blaze/AP) — A defiant Moammar Gadhafi threatened Friday to carry out attacks in Europe against “homes, offices, families,” unless NATO halts its campaign of airstrikes against his regime in Libya.

The Libyan leader, sought by the International Criminal Court for brutally crushing an uprising against him, delivered the warning in an audio message played to thousands of supporters gathered in the main square of the capital Tripoli.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/a-militant-gadhafi-threatens-to-target-european-homes-offices-families/

[Xithras]

21. So, reading that, he didn't actually threaten to attack Europe at all.

He said that the Libyan people would take revenge. Useless bloviating.

And here I'd actually given him a bit of credit, thinking that he was going to take a guerilla war onto European soil. Strategically, that's about the only way he can win at this point. Instead, he's reminding me more and more of a certain Iraqi we once joked about...

[Turborama]

24. That was a separate speech he made a week ago.

Qaddafi Threatens To Launch Attacks On Europe: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4903166

[pinboy3niner]

25. A quote from this Friday's speech:

“Tens, hundreds or thousands of Libyans might die in Europe. We will raid their houses, women and children, like they raided us, and I told you an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” Qaddafi said. “We are threatening them now.”

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-07-09/libya-s-qaddafi-threatens-europe-vows-his-regime-won-t-fall.html

Al Jazeera has been airing the audio with translation, but it hasn't been posted at their site.

[Turborama]

27. Yep, that's a direct and indisputable threat against European women and children

I've been so busy I haven't been able to follow any news on TV for the past few weeks. Thanks a lot for the update.

:hi:

[trud]

23. homes, offices, families

You mean like NATO and the US have done to him?