Libyan forces have captured Muammar Gaddafi

[Proton Soup]

...
Then there is the Sharia law. I don't like Sharia, but I don't mind when Libya wants to go that direction, but I do mind that the NTC decides for the rest of the populace that that's the way to go. It's undemocratic.

In Tunisia, they did it right. First elections, then a new constitution. If the majority of the people decides on Islamic law, who am I to decide? But the NTC, IMO, just doesn't have a mandate except for bringing forth democracy (or a decentralized democracy with 'city states,' I might see that working too.)

[Then again, Gaddafi himself wrote that the will of the people will always emerge, and they studied that. Guess he was proven right.]

the people of libya didn't win the war, NATO did.

 

[mheslep]

That's a disservice to the Libyan fighters. NATO provided air support and supplies, not boots on the ground where people were getting killed.

 

[Proton Soup]

That's a disservice to the Libyan fighters. NATO provided air support and supplies, not boots on the ground where people were getting killed.

no it isn't. i paid attention to it as it was being waged. the rebels were inept, good at getting themselves killed. NATO would clear an area, and the rebels would ride in unopposed to claim victory.

if you want to say they're brave or whatever, then fine. but they didn't win this war.

i realize it's not politically correct and that it doesn't match the photo-ops for the media, but i don't give a hoot what the public's impression is supposed to be.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

... if you want to say they're brave or whatever, then fine. but they didn't win this war.

I think you’re right, there’s no chance in h*ll these untrained "Mad Max Warriors" could have withstand an intact Gaddafi army, with a crazy leader who would not have hesitated to bomb anything and all, that was not on his side.

But I wonder... could NATO have done this alone? Who would have put boots on the ground? This was not sanctioned by the UN resolution, what would Russia have said? Could US have afforded another full-scale war in this economy? And what would Michele Bachmann have said about that? ()

Maybe we can say that they did it together...?

 

[MarcoD]

I think the one thing to conclude out of it for NATO was that it was a successful intervention, so far.

 

[mheslep]

But I wonder... could NATO have done this alone?

Though I agree of course that the rebels would not have beaten Gaddafi alone, conventional air power by itself never wins anything alone.

 

[mheslep]

no it isn't. i paid attention to it as it was being waged.

Good. Then it should be easy to demonstrate the following with a source:

... NATO would clear an area, and the rebels would ride in unopposed to claim victory.

Can you source one example? A completely unopposed victory thanks only to NATO air power?

if you want to say they're brave or whatever, then fine. but they didn't win this war.

I did not and do not say the Libyans won by themselves. I'm calling into question your claim that "NATO did" with the implication that NATO "won" by themselves.

 

[Proton Soup]

Good. Then it should be easy to demonstrate the following with a source:
Can you source one example? A completely unopposed victory thanks only to NATO air power?
I did not and do not say the Libyans won by themselves. I'm calling into question your claim that "NATO did" with the implication that NATO "won" by themselves.

there is another thread on it in this forum. go find it.

 

[Evo]

I think you’re right, there’s no chance in h*ll these untrained "Mad Max Warriors" could have withstand an intact Gaddafi army, with a crazy leader who would not have hesitated to bomb anything and all, that was not on his side.

But I wonder... could NATO have done this alone? Who would have put boots on the ground? This was not sanctioned by the UN resolution, what would Russia have said? Could US have afforded another full-scale war in this economy? And what would Michele Bachmann have said about that? ()

Maybe we can say that they did it together...?

This article has information. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/with-starring-nato-role-in-libya-french-and-british-boost-europes-military-image/2011/10/21/gIQADlop3L_story.html

And this. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ain-creating-path-to-the-fall-of-Tripoli.html

In all fairness, yes, the rebels were slaughtered in large numbers, but NATO did as much as possible to protect them as they cleared the way for them since they were not capable of such a war on their own.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

This article has information. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/with-starring-nato-role-in-libya-french-and-british-boost-europes-military-image/2011/10/21/gIQADlop3L_story.html

And this. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ain-creating-path-to-the-fall-of-Tripoli.html

In all fairness, yes, the rebels were slaughtered in large numbers, but NATO did as much as possible to protect them as they cleared they way for them since they were not capable of such a war on their own.

Thanks Evo, interesting articles.

I absolutely agree; the 'real' work was done by NATO.

And thinking more about it, the question "... could NATO have done this alone?" is maybe dumb and purely hypothetic. This war wouldn’t have happened the way it did if there were no NTC forces on the ground.

It would have been a completely different scenario...

 

[MarcoD]

Thanks Evo, interesting articles.

I absolutely agree; the 'real' work was done by NATO.

And thinking more about it, the question "... could NATO have done this alone?" is maybe dumb and purely hypothetic. This war wouldn’t have happened the way it did if there were no NTC forces on the ground.

It would have been a completely different scenario...

Depends on your definition of 'real' work. From the press pictures I get the idea that the total NTC forces (though I doubt all of them would like to fall under the NTC) is: one remodeled bulldozer, less than a hundred remodeled pickups with medium-weight artillery, a few thousand fighters.

From Evo's sources it looks like NATO must have destroyed all the airplanes, (heavy) artillery, radar, telecommunications, and spend some time destroying supply lines, and played a big part in planning the ground operations. I have the feeling NATO forces must have a lot of 'fun' employing the latest military techniques (urban war fare) and hardware in it. There was virtually no army left, if there was ever any.

But the ground forces did the real 'dirty' work. Man-to-man combat is different from dropping a bomb from a few thousand feet. And I don't think NATO forces could have done the 'dirty' work. Most people don't like foreigners from any country, unless for removing other foreigners, otherwise you mostly end up fighting the local population.

Military, it was pretty clean, despite some war crimes. I would call it a complete success.

[ Then again. I guess NATO already won the moment they said they were coming. It's a completely undefendable country, and I doubt troop morale was high, certainly if they had Iraq in the back of their minds. ]