Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The sides begin to form: Zimbabwe and Algeria send troops to Libya

page: 1
8

log in

join

posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   


While the Colonel certainly has a lot of enemies it seems some of his very few friends are extremely loyal as since the conflict started many reports of Zimbabwean and Algerian soldiers fighting for his regime have emerged.

Also backing the reports, in March the Zimbabwean Mail stated that according to sources from the Zimbabwean military intelligence, "The Zimbabwe National Army and its Air force are heavily involved in the fierce battles between forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and the rebel's forces."

It also announced that "Libyan government soldiers backed by Zimbabwean troops battled rebels on the road to the insurgent stronghold of Benghazi as the United States raised the possibility of air strikes to stop Muammar Gaddafi's forces.


Source

Although the Zimbabwean and Angola governments say they don't know anything about it, they are as competent at lying as our leaders are. France also recently refuted this information as well (which makes it more credible IMHO).

Edit to add: Apparently Uganda may have been involved in the earlier fighting as well, and have publicly come out in favor of Gaddaffi:


In Uganda, in April there were also reports that some troops of the UPDF, the President Yoweri Museveni's party had been sent to the country.


This goes along with the recent report that NATO will soon be landing ground troops in Libya.

U.S. invasion of Libya due in October 2011
edit on 16-6-2011 by Skerrako because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-6-2011 by Skerrako because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   
OH JOY

The United states is supposed to send ground troops to libya in october. Its like, Connecting the dots, Or doing a puzzle if you know what i mean.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Skerrako
 


Great so I guess we'll be bombing Zimbabwe and Algeria soon as well. I'll have to do some checking to see what kinds of resources those countries have.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Im sorry, I know its terrible but I just cant help but laugh to myself. This is going to end with another western occupying force and be the U.S.'s military gateway into Africa. Hopefully Obama is stopped by congress before U.S. boots can touch Libyan soil in large numbers, but I doubt it.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   
This seems very strange!, due to the geographical positions of Zimbabwe and Libya (opposite ends of the African continent) it would be virtually impossible for Mugabe to move, supply and maintain forces over such a distance. Specially, given the very poor state of the Zimbabwean economy. The article only numbered these forces at just over 500, Barack Obomber is quaking in his boots at the sheer magnitude of having to take on such an august body of men.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
LOL - The Algerians and Zimbabweens? What the hell did we ever do to the Algerians?? The Zimbabweens I understand, because they are just crazy, but Algeria? LOL

No matter. Nothing a few stealth bombers can't take care of in an afternoon.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Cryptonomicon
 


I don't think its a matter of what we have done to them. If past actions dictate future events, its a matter of what will we do to them or at least I bet thats how they see it.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
As far as I know all we have done to them is send them food, money and AIDS medication.
How about instead of blowing their narrow asses up, we just stop feeding them?



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Hmmmm...looking at the source of the OP'ers piece on Algeria and Zimbabwe, I have to say that it is not at all a fact that troops/militia have been send to aid Gaddafi. The whole article is full of conflicting info of who said what/to whom/when//who saw/who thinks/ reports say/reports said/ we have reports etc etc et al et al. There is absolutely no proof that these countries are aiding Gaddafi. None!
For me...no sides have begun to form. Yet.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Skerrako
 


Lybia hires most of it's military from outside of the country. These are private citizens and not backed by thier goverments. This is not any ground breaking news that the Lybian goverment has foriegn fighters in thier army and air force. This has been going on for years.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 10:38 PM
link   
Sides begin to "form"? LMAO. Ummm what do you mean?

In typical ATS fashion, someone has taken an article from a "news source" and run with it. Zimbabwe and Algeria? And how will they get troops there? What "sides" form from this non-event?

Sounds like someone wants desperately to start a WW3 scenario from this. Two words for ya:

AIN'T HAPPNENIN'



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Silverado292
 


Zimbabwae=Diamonds

reply to post by princeofpeace
 


Did you even read the article???

The troops are ALREADY there, and Zimbabwae is capable of moving it's armies through Afric using the African Union nations
edit on 17-6-2011 by Skerrako because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Birddog26
 


This article is not about mercenaries. It does talk about Gaddaffi hiring some mercs, but I was more focused on the parts I quoted in the first post:




other reports suggested that while the mercenaries might have represented a very small part of Gaddafi's forces, the governments of Algeria, Zimbabwe and even South Africa were actively helping the leader.

...

Also backing the reports, in March the Zimbabwean Mail stated that according to sources from the Zimbabwean military intelligence, "The Zimbabwe National Army and its Air force are heavily involved in the fierce battles between forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and the rebel's forces."


The Zimbabwean National army and air force are not mercenaries.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Skerrako
 


To start with anyone who knows anything about the countries being stated in the article would know just how absurd the accusations are. To start with all three are members of the African Union. These were the same members who urged the U.N. and NATO to take action in Lybia. The Zimbabwean National Army has about 30,000 total troops in 5 brigades with about half being support troops. Other than smqall operations they are primarly for border protection with training support from the British. I do not think they want to fight against the country that helps train and supports them. The Angolian forces are the largest with about 65,000 troops but they are mainly tied up in border security and fighting in the Congo.To top that off they are still trying to recover from thier own civil war. The Army of South Africa has about 31000 troops who have supported the UN and the African Union in peacekeeping missions with NATO being thier largest supporter. Again I do not think they would wish to fight against the hand that feeds and supports them.

Now many former soilders from those countries do work as mercs throught the world but are not sanctioned or supported by thier goverment. I also have already debunked the thread you referenced about the ground invasion of Lybia and the inside information. The stuff that is being thrown out is pure propaganda and fear mongering. It only takes a few minutes to verify the information as false with a little research.






top topics



 
8

log in

join