LIBYA: RESISTANCE IS FUTILE. Yet they resist --despite overwhelming odds against Nato-backed forces.

[Distant Observer]

Six months after NATO began operations against Libya in March, After teams of special operations forces on the ground in Libya have begun coordinating the over 20 thousand NATO air missions . After tons of advanced weaponry has been put in the hands of the anti-Gaddafi forces (in one report, the French landed over 40 tons of weaponry to one group of fighters). After the NATO-back forces rain the cities with over 100,000 civilian residents with long-range missiles.

THE LIBYA RESISTANCE STILL FIGHTS ON.

Who said this was just a popular uprising against a hated dictator?

Who said this was not a civil war?


All the horrors feared regarding an assault against a civilian city that were trumpeted regarding Benghazi are now taking place with Western backing against pro-Gaddafi cities.

NOW THE FAUX-HUMANITARIANS LOOK AWAY AND PRETEND ITS NOT HAPPENING.

--- ---

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/09/2011915235553251868.html

Libya: fighting rages in Bani Walid and Sirte

Casualties reported as NTC fighters face stiff resistance in their bid to capture inland city and Gaddafi's hometown.

In an assault on Muammar Gaddafi's Mediterranean hometown, fighters loyal to the Libyan National Transitional Council have been trying to fight their way into the city centre of Sirte from three fronts.

Before making a "tactical withdrawal", fighters had surged into Bani Walid, another remaining Gaddafi bastion, in a campaign to break the back of regime holdouts.

NTC leaders described the offensive as a co-ordinated push to take Sirte - a city of about 100,000 people - from the south, east and west.

But their advance was hindered by snipers among the loyalists of the toppled Libyan leader, as NATO warplanes flew overhead and smoke was seen rising from parts of the coastal city.

[existentialist]

1. OK, its not just an uprising against a dictator but a civil war.

This asks but does not answer the question:

What should we do?

[inna]

21. Stop the assault. The answer to your question is that simple.

[existentialist]

25. Your answer is partial.

OK, we stop the assault. Do we just try to stay out of it?

Do we recognize two (or more) Libyas?? ? ? ?

[sabrina 1]

32. Why are 'we' there in the first place? Libya is not a NATO

country nor did it attack a NATO member?

[inna]

31. to add: and pay the reparations to Libya, and prosecute those responsible for war crimes

[pinboy3niner]

2. Are you offering me some gum?

Or are you just being unnecessarily sTrident?

[malaise]

3. They're all pretending there's no resistance

Cameron and Sarkozy were in Libya yesterday like flaming imperialists announcing their conquest.
They should read Libyan history.

[joshcryer]

5. I agree...

...people should in fact http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1778354&mesg_id=1778354">read http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fgw-libya-fighting-20110821,0,2228355.story">recent http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2011/08/fall-tripoli">history. :hi:

[Distant Observer]

6. Some are so good at redefining words. It's called PROPAGANDA

[Cerridwen]

22. Yes, and propaganda flows both ways.

That's why it's so difficult to ascertain fact in order to discern truth.

Sometimes, all I can do to wade through it all is attempt to divine motive. Fortunately, when I trust them, my "divinitory" skills are fairly accurate.

Anyone, who has ever posted here or on any other board or twitter feed I follow, and has made glowing reports of gaddafi, not a very trustworthy individual.

By the same token, when I see only glowing reports of one faction during a violent uprising, I know their words need to be parsed as well.

The truth may not lie somewhere in the middle, but rarely does it lie at one extreme or the other.

[pinboy3niner]

7. 'Resistance' applied to Gaddafi regime supporters is a corruption of the term

The term normally is applied to opponents of an oppressive regime. Applying it to the regime is truly Orwellian.

[inna]

18. War Is Peace!

:nuke: :patriot:

[Distant Observer]

28. Joy to the World the Killing continues. Soon we will be able to have "free and fair" elections

[Distant Observer]

8. Its the well known psyops strategy -- like the "strategic" lies regard Gaddafi sons killed

[EFerrari]

29. Have you seen the American envoy's resume?

Haiti, Iraq, Lebanon, it's a list of predations, "how to be a BushCo speartip and fail upward".



Jeffrey D. Feltman (born c. 1959) is an American diplomat, currently the Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. He was sworn into the office on August 18, 2009. He was previously the United States Ambassador to Lebanon from July 2004 to January 2008.

Before becoming Ambassador to Lebanon, Feltman volunteered to serve at the Coalition Provisional Authority office in Irbil, Iraq, from January to April 2004. Prior to his work in Iraq, he was at the U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem, where he served first as Deputy (August 2001-November 2002) and then as Acting Principal Officer (November 2002 to December 2003).

He joined the U.S. Foreign Service in 1986, serving his first tour as consular officer in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. He has spent much of his career dealing with Eastern Europe and the Near East. He served in Embassy Tel Aviv as Ambassador Martin Indyk's Special Assistant on Peace Process issues (2000-2001). Before that, from 1998-2000, Feltman served as Chief of the Political and Economic Section at the U.S. Embassy in Tunisia. He served in the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv from 1995 to 1998, covering economic issues in the Gaza Strip.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_D._Feltman

[xchrom]

4. recommend

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Distant Observer]

10. And you love to see the "murderous" blood-stained armored waves of "freedom fighters" on rampage

against any and all opposition?

So beautiful!

[socialshockwave]

12. Of course I don't

But it's a matter of supporting either:

A) A man who openly said he'd destroy a city full of almost half a million people and showed no regard for helping his people

Or

B) Factions of freedom fighters who are racist pigs and should be stopped.

[Prometheus Bound]

37. That bit of propaganda (A) is easily debunked by referring to any agency report.

TRIPOLI, March 17 (Reuters) - Muammar Gaddafi told Libyan rebels on Thursday his armed forces were coming to their capital Benghazi tonight and would not show any mercy to fighters who resisted them.

In a radio address, he told Benghazi residents that soldiers would search every house in the city and people who had no arms had no reason to fear.

"It's over ... We are coming tonight," he said. "You will come out from inside. Prepare yourselves from tonight. We will find you in your closets."

The speech was broadcast on radio and television shortly after a defence ministry statement warned that any foreign military action would trigger counter-attacks and endanger all air and sea traffic in the Mediterranean region.

In Benghazi, live footage on Al Jazeera television showed hundreds of defiant Libyan rebels gathered in the central square waving the tricolour flag of the monarchy era in a rally after Gaddafi's speech was broadcast.

In the speech, the Libyan leader denounced the rebels and said: "We will show no mercy and no pity to them".

He also told his troops not to pursue any rebels who drop their guns and flee when government forces reach the city.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/17/gaddafi-benghazi-libya-news_n_837245.html

[sudopod]

54. Or we could just mind our own business and park the death machines someplace out of the sun. nt

[inna]

14. "Gaddafi fanboys" - absurd and despicable slur, even worse than "Saddam fanboys"

:puke:

truly despicable

[Fumesucker]

17. I'm hardly a fanboi but I'm to the point now where I'm utterly skeptical of the West in general..

And the USA in particular when it comes to military action in the Middle East.

It's the old story of the boy who cried wolf, I've seen so many blatant world-class FUBARs from the Western world to believe without extremely strong evidence that they actually give the slightest damn about the aboriginal populations of those places we drop Nobel Peace Bombs on.

It's well past a cliche these days but I'll take a lot of convincing that the new boss isn't just the damn same as the old boss.

[Cerridwen]

23. I'm just gonna post this one thought to you.

I don't care to fight it out on the boards because emotions are far too high on this issue.

You used the allegory of the boy who cried wolf. Please see how that story ended. There were a couple of "lessons" wrapped up in the story.

[inna]

11. truly unbelievable, isn't it. solidarity. nt

[Distant Observer]

13. I wish they would surrender -- NATO bombing from above and waves of incoming missiles. HORRIFYING!

[inna]

16. i don't think they realize that NATO does not give a flying f*ck about civilians, after all

[Cerridwen]

26. Actually, they just might; if for no other reason than PR and the 24/7 "news"

cycle and social media.

[TBF]

15. Recommend.

West propaganda insists that the Libyan people hate Gadaffi, but I've found evidence to the contrary. Here is one example: http://hamsayeh.net/archive/573-libyans-support-gaddafi-libyan-girl-writes-in-her-letter.html

"She wrote a vast majority of Libyans prefer the current leadership of Muamar Ghaddafi to the phony one proposed by oil-hungry Western colonialists. News reports now reveal the CIA had in fact trained and supported the Libyan opposition from the outset of unrests in Libya. Oddly, the opposition leadership had enough time to establish its own Western linked banking system based in Benghazi. They even exported a million barrel of oil right amidst the ongoing civil war."

Sadly the US, GB, and Allies are after the resources in Africa. I'm not as strong on personally supporting Gadaffi as some, but if his people love him then leave him alone. When they are done with him, they will move on to the next country. Probably Syria, since they are currently warning Americans to leave. It's so blatant.

[polly7]

27. Shades of deja vu and Iraq. I've found many examples that contradict

the propaganda we're fed here in the west. And yes, you're correct that they are after the resources in Africa.

[sudopod]

56. Much like North Korea.

They've been brainwashed for two generations. Qaddafi is a horrible bastard, but they can't see that since they've been taught to love him from day one of their education, especially in these "last stand" zones. We'll see the same thing if we ever get into it in North Korea. How five-foot tall half-starved "soldiers" in the NK army love their Dear Leader like a god who bestrides the Earth?

No one ever promised that people are rational.

[Starry Messenger]

19. K&R

[blindpig]

20. How Tripoli fell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TTpM_kSfT1w

k&r

[Distant Observer]

24. Doubt many will believe the ruthlessness with which NATO helicopter gunships cleared the way for the

"rebels."


History is written, and rewritten, by the victors.

[Cerridwen]

30. Not to worry. I have it on good authority that it was all filmed on a film set in Doha. n/t

[sabrina 1]

33. If only that were true, so many civilians would be still be alive.

I wish Iraq had been filmed in a studio somewhere also.

[Cerridwen]

34. OMG!!!! NO!!! You mean it wasn't true???!! It wasn't filmed on a set??!!!

But my resources were so reliable. I knew they were reliable because they kept saying it over and over and over and over again and we all know that means it's reliable.

Okay, snark attack over. I'm just going to copy and paste a reply I made elsewhere.

Propaganda flows both ways.

That's why it's so difficult to ascertain fact in order to discern truth.

Sometimes, all I can do to wade through it all is attempt to divine motive. Fortunately, when I trust them, my "divinitory" skills are fairly accurate.

Anyone, who has ever posted here or on any other board or twitter feed I follow, and has made glowing reports of gaddafi, not a very trustworthy individual.

By the same token, when I see only glowing reports of one faction during a violent uprising, I know their words need to be parsed as well.

The truth may not lie somewhere in the middle, but rarely does it lie at one extreme or the other.

"The enemy of my enemy" is not always my friend.

Sorry, sabrina. I don't want to fight with you. Let's leave it at ignoring each other in the Libyan discussions, okay?

[sad sally]

53. And the United States still bears the largest financial burden among the NATO allies,

so you can bet the outcome, no matter how long or how many lies, will be touted as being better than before.

[Hart2008]

36. Yes, the Qatari flag raised over the palace at Bab Al-Aizizya proves Qatari troops fought there.

I saw the Qatari flag raised over the ruins of Quaddafi's palace at Bab Al-Azizya on TV. It was ignored by the networks covering the event, but the photos prove that Qatari troops were involved in the action there:




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Qatar

While the official story is that the coup against Quaddafi is a totally domestic Libyan affair, the size of that Qatari flag tells a different story. The obvious conclusion is that Qatari forces were involved in the capture of the palace. Despite having three networks covering this event, CNN, BBC, And Al Jezeera, there was no discussion of why the Qatari flag had been raised there.

This man's interview confirms the obvious.

The events in Libya are more of a foreign supported coup, than a revolution.

[inna]

35. late night kick

[CJvR]

38. No matter....

...how crazy Mad Dog is he is only one man. He can't terrorize an entire nation on his own. Naturally there are pockets of supporter for Gaddafi - all the people he favored and who ran his regime and oppression machinery for him. These are people with still alot to lose ( such as being held accountable in a court or in the street for their activities under the Gaddafi reign ) it would be unrealistic to expect them to quit as long as they have a snowflake's chance in hell.

[Distant Observer]

39. Pre-Gaddafi Libyan's were ranked most impoverished- below Haiti. Before war rated above UK

As crazy as Gaddafi was, he put in place policies that resulted in distribution of wealth, education and healthcare.

[CJvR]

40. So?

And Hitler built the autobahn. So?

GDP/capita hardly matters when all of it ends up in Gaddafi's pocket does it?

[Distant Observer]

41. FALSE: Libya poured massive investments into all sectors of economy. Incomes, health, education

sky-rocketed despite western sanctions.

Despite a cut-back in oil production after the revolution, Gaddafi left Libya with massive surplus (not debt), and a legacy of social investments throughout Africa.

Please read a little history. It is just fraudulent to compare Libya with Western-backed dictatorships that totally exploited their country -- Congo, Saudi, Yemen, Iran

[CJvR]

42. And...

...even more massive investments into Gaddafi's pockets.

[Distant Observer]

43. Evidence??? I don't care. He was delusional and dictatorial, and poured funds into revolutionary

struggles. But, I have never seen evidence that Gaddafi lived any more lavishly than other rulers, and the large investments and assets that have been discovered were in the name of the Libyan Government.
That is exactly why they could be so easily identified and frozen.

I lived in the region for 10 years and followed the revolution from the time of the coup. But, maybe you are an expert in these matters.

[CJvR]

44. Why do you...

...assume evil people can't do good things? Indeed most despots who get access to free wealth inevitably spend some of it to buy loyalty with social reforms and public spending. Take Saddam for example, the coup (where he had half the Baath party leadership shoot the other half) was followed by rather good times in Iraq - as long as you didn't attract Saddam's attention that is. It is the rule rather than exception that despots who have the funding spend some to buy popular support.

Arguing that the Libyan state owned things rather than Gaddafi is also rather pointless since Gaddafi ultimately was the state.

LOL! You must have missed the storming of the various Gaddafi compounds all over Libya then if you think Gaddafi was a humble wage slave like the rest of us.

[Distant Observer]

45. You are just repeating the propaganda. Check the World bank stats for the last 50 years

Those are the facts: infant mortality, literacy, heath-care, life expectancy.

And Gaddafi was not the State. He was barely relevant towards the end. And you last sentence is just a ridiculous stretch. The compound was pathetic compared with most other Governing centers -- in Paris, Washington, Iraq, Doha, Cairo, etc

[CJvR]

52. So...?

You again assume evil people can't do good things. Sure they can, particularly when they benefit from doing so.

Don't be so overtly stupid D-O, just because dictators don't always give themselves fancy titles doesn't mean they don't have the ultimate power. Indeed the simple fact the Gaddafi is still around is the primary force driving the Libyal conflict.
Really? The Presidents of the US and France have personal fortified complexes scattered around in most major cities in their nations? In Iraq you are quite correct - Saddam did have a similar palace system as Gaddafi.

[Distant Observer]

46. Please justify continuation of NATO bombing in Libya -- Is this to enforce NFZ, protect who?

Or was it all a lie?

[CJvR]

50. Oh...

...there are plenty of excuses you can use to justify continued operations.

The original mandate is still in place...
The rebels are technically civilians...
The legitemate Libyan goverment asks for support...

The actual resolution text is just a figleaf anyway and it has to be formulated in such a way that nations (Russia and China) that would prefer if the Arab reactionaries crushed the Arab spring cant vote against it. Personally I am rather indifferent since, IMPO, the objective was to bomb Gaddafi out of power from day one - and a worthy objective it was and remains. I really don't get why loud howls of hatred were aimed at the Libyan people the moment NATO stopped Gaddafi from killing them enmasse. Perhaps many here on DU simply hates Libyans.

[Distant Observer]

55. Except, NO EVIDENCE that Gaddafi was killing anyone enmasse -- US Senate Testimony

Council on Foreign Relations
Senate Testimony

http://www.cfr.org/africa/perspectives-crisis-libya/p24602
Richard Hass, CFR President:

" In two critical areas, however, I would suggest that what has been asserted as fact was in reality closer to assumption. First, it is not clear that a humanitarian catastrophe was imminent in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi. There had been no reports of large-scale massacres in Libya up to that point, and Libyan society (unlike Rwanda, to cite the obvious influential precedent) is not divided along a single or defining fault line. Gaddafi saw the rebels as enemies for political reasons, not for their ethnic or tribal associations.
To be sure, civilians would have been killed in an assault on the city – civil wars are by their nature violent and destructive – but there is no evidence of which I am aware that civilians per se would have been targeted on a large scale. Muammar Gaddafi’s threat to show no mercy to the rebels might well have been just that: a threat within the context of a civil war to those who opposed him with arms or were considering doing so. "

James Clapper, the Director of National Inteligence, concurred with this assessment

---------------

In fact, previous Gaddafi action against the militant factions was at the request of the CIA after the cooperation agreement with the US and UK.

[Swede]

47. Then they should surrender.

nt

[Distant Observer]

49. Like the Jewish resitance at Masada facing Roman legions, those guys seem to believe in their cause

[CJvR]

51. The Zealots...

...were completly nuts - on a 9/11 highjacker level crazy, as was demonstrated by the eventual outcome of the siege. IIRC they were hated by the population in general by the time of the siege.

ps: You had to be seriously crazy to think you could beat the Romans in a formal siege - that was something of their specialty.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

48. The same could be said for NATO still fighting a lost war in Afghanistan.