Arab League backs no-fly zone in Libya

Jetboogieman · Mar 13, 2011

Cairo, Egypt (CNN) -- The Arab League voted Saturday to back a no-fly zone in Libya and is asking that the U.N. Security Council impose the measure, officials of the regional body told reporters.

"It has one goal: To protect the civilian population," Amre Moussa, the body's secretary-general said.

"We will inform the U.N. Security Council of our request to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya," Moussa said. "The U.N. Security Council should decide how it will be enforced."

Youssef bin Alawi bin Abdullah, Oman's foreign minister who joined Moussa to answer questions, said the no-fly zone would be a preventive measure and would have to be stopped immediately when the Libyan crisis ends.

He said Arab League members have reservations about military intervention, but said all countries agreed that a no-fly zone must be imposed urgently to protect civilians.

"We hope the Libyan authorities will respect a no-fly decision," he said. "Be assured the Arab countries will not accept the intervention of the NATO coalition."

Moussa said the league also voted to open channels of communication with the Transitional National Council, the Libyan opposition's newly formed administration, and that any talks with that body would be on a humanitarian basis.

"We are giving them legitimacy but we're not giving them political recognition," Moussa said. "We are prepared to help evacuate any Arab nationals from Libya regardless of their nationality."

The Arab League also called for immediate humanitarian assistance and an end to the bloodshed in Libya, where civil war has broken out between forces loyal to leader Moammar Gadhafi and a tenacious opposition movement.

The White House cheered the League's announcements and stressed it will continue to pressure Gadhafi, support the opposition and prepare for "all contingencies."

Arab League backs no-fly zone in Libya - CNN.com

Hear that everyone. Obama's going to "pressure" Gaddafi. "Pressure him". By saying some very mean things.

Fantastic Obama. Really nice work. Now that the rebels are in retreat, and it looks like Gaddafi's going to survive, apply all the "pressure" you want.

All faith in Obama is lost, his lack of leadership during this crisis has sickened me to be honest.

I understand he had a fine line to walk, and I applaud his actions of non intervention in places like Egypt and Tunisia, however the situation in Libya was so vastly different and required some type of action.

However on the other side of the coin, it isn't America's problem. I couldn't care less if you guys did anything or not, I'm just tired of all the talk. Sick of talk.

"Well I... Ummmmm.... Gaddafi's bad.... ahhhhhh and ummmmmm, ahhhhh we might do something ahh.....".

Do something or don't do something. Just stop talking about it. Gaddafi ain't scared of your sanctions or your words.

Jetboogieman · Mar 13, 2011

Gadhafi forces retake rebel town, state TV claims - CNN.com

Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- Libyan state TV reported Sunday that the opposition-held town of al-Brega had "been cleansed from the criminal gangs and mercenaries, the area is now safe, and all citizens should go back to their work and their normal life."

Forces loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi have been fighting to recapture towns from the rebels since an uprising began last month.

CNN was not able to confirm immediately that al-Brega was in government hands.

The military has been pounding the key oil port of Ras Lanuf, once in the hands of rebel forces, and has taken control of towns such as nearby Bin Jawad. The Gadhafi government appears intent on retaking all territory from the opposition despite growing international pressure.

Al-Jazeera journalist killed in Benghazi, network says - CNN.com

(CNN) -- An Al-Jazeera cameraman was killed in an apparent ambush near Benghazi, Libya, becoming the first journalist killed in the country since the start of the civil war, the network reported Saturday.

Ali Hassan al Jaber was returning to Benghazi, an opposition stronghold in the east, from a nearby town where he had reported on an opposition protest when "unknown fighters opened fire on a car he and his colleagues were traveling in," Al-Jazeera reported on its English-language website.

The cameraman and another person were wounded. Al Jaber was rushed to a hospital, but did not survive, the network said.

"Al-Jazeera condemns the cowardly crime, which comes as part of the Libyan regime's malicious campaign targeting Al-Jazeera and its staff," the network reported.

Cold Highway · Mar 13, 2011

Actually Obama not doing anything has to be one of his better moves

Why the US must not intervene in Libya | Stephen Kinzer | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

It's Their War, Not Ours by Patrick J. Buchanan

Jetboogieman · Mar 13, 2011

chevydriver1123 said:
Actually Obama not doing anything has to be one of his better moves

Why the US must not intervene in Libya | Stephen Kinzer | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

It's Their War, Not Ours by Patrick J. Buchanan

Well, it's not your problem, it's not your war I agree.

That's why I just wish you would come out and say it so the Libyan people would know the West is not coming into help.

Not that I think they'll appreciate it afterwards anyway.

Infinite Chaos · Mar 13, 2011

Jetboogieman said:
Arab League backs no-fly zone in Libya - CNN.com

Hear that everyone. Obama's going to "pressure" Gaddafi. "Pressure him". By saying some very mean things.

Fantastic Obama. Really nice work. Now that the rebels are in retreat, and it looks like Gaddafi's going to survive, apply all the "pressure" you want.

All faith in Obama is lost, his lack of leadership during this crisis has sickened me to be honest.

I understand he had a fine line to walk, and I applaud his actions of non intervention in places like Egypt and Tunisia, however the situation in Libya was so vastly different and required some type of action.

However on the other side of the coin, it isn't America's problem. I couldn't care less if you guys did anything or not, I'm just tired of all the talk. Sick of talk.

"Well I... Ummmmm.... Gaddafi's bad.... ahhhhhh and ummmmmm, ahhhhh we might do something ahh.....".

Do something or don't do something. Just stop talking about it. Gaddafi ain't scared of your sanctions or your words.

Gaddafi's survival has always been on the cards. There never was a point in the US getting involved here and it looks pretty clearly like Gaddafi's forces will be back in control of all major cities by the end of next week.

The Arab league no-fly zone now is very strange - they could also have waited and left it looking like a British and French idea to remove Gaddafi. This will make the next Arab league meeting very strange when Gaddafi walks into the meeting as President.

donsutherland1 · Mar 13, 2011

IMO, the Arab League's gesture is a rather hollow one.

1. The Arab League has effectively punted to the UN. The UN has demonstrated during repeated humanitarian crises (Rwanda, Darfur, etc.) that it lacks the agility and capability to address them.
2. The article notes: "We hope the Libyan authorities will respect a no-fly decision," he said. "Be assured the Arab countries will not accept the intervention of the NATO coalition." In other words, the Arab stance is built on the "hope" that Gadhafi will comply (when he has rejected all other diplomatic requests to date on the issue). They don't want NATO intervention and they appear unwilling to bring their own air assets into play.

As for the U.S. stance, I continue to believe shipping a limited arsenal of arms, particularly anti-aircraft weapons e.g., Stinger missiles, would have been useful. I do not believe direct military intervention was justified by U.S. interests.

Jetboogieman · Mar 13, 2011

Infinite Chaos said:
Gaddafi's survival has always been on the cards. There never was a point in the US getting involved here and it looks pretty clearly like Gaddafi's forces will be back in control of all major cities by the end of next week.

The Arab league no-fly zone now is very strange - they could also have waited and left it looking like a British and French idea to remove Gaddafi. This will make the next Arab league meeting very strange when Gaddafi walks into the meeting as President.

Taking out Gaddafi's air superiority would have given the rebels a fighting chance.

To bad it's probably to late.

Infinite Chaos · Mar 13, 2011

Jetboogieman said:
Taking out Gaddafi's air superiority would have given the rebels a fighting chance.

To bad it's probably to late.

It is too late, the Arab League are unwilling to actually enforce the idea of a no-fly zone and won't accept western forces providing the muscle. All they've done is play to both sides here.

It was never clear anyway how Britain or France would push this forward either if they were going ahead. The rebel movement was lost from the start.

ludahai · Mar 13, 2011

I will be STUNNED if the UNSC passes anything meaningful. Moscow and Beijing have vetos, and neither have any interest in any result other than a victory by the madman in Tripoli.

ric27 · Mar 13, 2011

Jetboogieman said:
Taking out Gaddafi's air superiority would have given the rebels a fighting chance.

To bad it's probably to late.

Controlling the ports and the oil. Nothing else matters

Humorous hypocrisy, that's all. lol

Gardener · Mar 13, 2011

I thought the whole gripe against us was that we meddled in the internal affairs of Arab countries?

apdst · Mar 13, 2011

Jetboogieman said:
Well, it's not your problem, it's not your war I agree.

That's why I just wish you would come out and say it so the Libyan people would know the West is not coming into help.

Not that I think they'll appreciate it afterwards anyway.

Ohhhhhhhhhh, yeah! If we went in locked, cocked and ready rock you would be complaining about that. Since we're not, you complaining that we aren't doing anything.

apdst · Mar 13, 2011

donsutherland1 said:
IMO, the Arab League's gesture is a rather hollow one.

1. The Arab League has effectively punted to the UN. The UN has demonstrated during repeated humanitarian crises (Rwanda, Darfur, etc.) that it lacks the agility and capability to address them.
2. The article notes: "We hope the Libyan authorities will respect a no-fly decision," he said. "Be assured the Arab countries will not accept the intervention of the NATO coalition." In other words, the Arab stance is built on the "hope" that Gadhafi will comply (when he has rejected all other diplomatic requests to date on the issue). They don't want NATO intervention and they appear unwilling to bring their own air assets into play.

As for the U.S. stance, I continue to believe shipping a limited arsenal of arms, particularly anti-aircraft weapons e.g., Stinger missiles, would have been useful. I do not believe direct military intervention was justified by U.S. interests.

We would have had to put people in the field and trained the rebels on the proper deployment and employment of those weapons systems. I trained on the Stinger and you don't just pick it and shoot and expect expert results.

apdst · Mar 13, 2011

Jetboogieman said:
Taking out Gaddafi's air superiority would have given the rebels a fighting chance.

To bad it's probably to late.

You realize that the first step in removing Qadaffhi's air supremacy--not air superiority--is to destroy his air forces, right? And that means putting steel on target. I doubt that anyone, especially the Arab League, is ready to take that step.

Jetboogieman · Mar 13, 2011

apdst said:
Ohhhhhhhhhh, yeah! If we went in locked, cocked and ready rock you would be complaining about that. Since we're not, you complaining that we aren't doing anything.

You presume to know alot about me apdst.

When you do not.

donsutherland1 · Mar 13, 2011

apdst said:
We would have had to put people in the field and trained the rebels on the proper deployment and employment of those weapons systems. I trained on the Stinger and you don't just pick it and shoot and expect expert results.

Of course. I never suggested otherwise. However, a handful of trainers does not constitute direct military intervention. The model used in Afghanistan during that country's conflict with the Soviet Union albeit on a smaller scale would provide an example of how it could be done.

apdst · Mar 13, 2011

Jetboogieman said:
You presume to know alot about me apdst.

When you do not.

So, you support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

washunut · Mar 13, 2011

Jetboogieman said:
You presume to know alot about me apdst.

When you do not.

How about letting the Arab league do it! What are we their dog on a leash that they get to say go attack. Does anyone see the irony in them saying it is OK with them if we risk our kids lives to fix one of their problems.

apdst · Mar 13, 2011

donsutherland1 said:
Of course. I never suggested otherwise. However, a handful of trainers does not constitute direct military intervention. The model used in Afghanistan during that country's conflict with the Soviet Union albeit on a smaller scale would provide an example of how it could be done.

Yeah, but we've seen what happens when we start out with, "a handful of trainers". Not saying I oppose it, entirely; just pointing out where a handful of trainers, historically, has led us.

If we're going to do that, I suggest we hire some privateers to go in and train the rebels, so then we'll have some pluasible deniability.

Jetboogieman · Mar 13, 2011

apdst said:
So, you support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

I support the troops there, and I hope for victory. Afghanistan was justified, to me Iraq was not. But that's not the topic here, and we could talk about it all damned day.

But if you mean to tell me that the invasion of Iraq is the same as enforcing a no Fly Zone over Libya, then you must be crazy...

Besides if you read what I actually said, I personally don't mind of America intervenes, actually I'd prefer it if they don't, I'm just tired of Obama Umming and Ahhing over it. Do it or don't, tired of talk.

apdst · Mar 13, 2011

washunut said:
How about letting the Arab league do it! What are we their dog on a leash that they get to say go attack. Does anyone see the irony in them saying it is OK with them if we risk our kids lives to fix one of their problems.

I say we don't do it because the Arab League is suggesting we should.

apdst · Mar 13, 2011

Jetboogieman said:
I support the troops there, and I hope for victory. Afghanistan was justified, to me Iraq was not. But that's not the topic here, and we could talk about it all damned day.

But if you mean to tell me that the invasion of Iraq is the same as enforcing a no Fly Zone over Libya, then you must be crazy...

Besides if you read what I actually said, I personally don't mind of America intervenes, actually I'd prefer it if they don't, I'm just tired of Obama Umming and Ahhing over it. Do it or don't, tired of talk.

What about Operation Ajax? Was that a good idea?

But if you mean to tell me that the invasion of Iraq is the same as enforcing a no Fly Zone over Libya, then you must be crazy...

I seem to remember a no-fly zone over a country back in the 90's. Hmmm, which country was that?

Jetboogieman · Mar 13, 2011

apdst said:
What about Operation Ajax? Was that a good idea?

Nope.

I seem to remember a no-fly zone over a country back in the 90's. Hmmm, which country was that?

My historical knowledge does not allow me to comment on that situation. But I would see it as justified compared to direct intervention.

apdst · Mar 13, 2011

Jetboogieman said:
Nope.

I rest my case.

My historical knowledge does not allow me to comment on that situation. But I would see it as justified compared to direct intervention.

My point is, when you start with a no-fly zone, it has a lot of potential to escalate into something else.

Jetboogieman · Mar 13, 2011

apdst said:
I rest my case.

Explain.

My point is, when you start with a no-fly zone, it has a lot of potential to escalate into something else.

Only if you let it...

Arab League backs no-fly zone in Libya

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

Cold Highway

Dispenser of Negativity

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

Infinite Chaos

donsutherland1

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

Infinite Chaos

ludahai

Defender of the Faith

ric27

Gardener

free market communist

apdst

apdst

apdst

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

donsutherland1

apdst

washunut

apdst

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

apdst

apdst

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

apdst

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon

Arab League backs no-fly zone in Libya

Somewhere in Babylon

Somewhere in Babylon

Dispenser of Negativity

Somewhere in Babylon

Somewhere in Babylon

Defender of the Faith

free market communist

Somewhere in Babylon

Somewhere in Babylon

Somewhere in Babylon

Somewhere in Babylon

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency