Libya: SAS leads hunt for Gaddafi

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Libya: SAS leads hunt for Gaddafi


www.telegraph.co.uk

As a £1 million bounty was placed on Gaddafi’s head, soldiers from 22 SAS Regiment began guiding rebel soldiers after being ordered in by David Cameron.

For the first time, defence sources have confirmed that the SAS has been in Libya for several weeks, and played a key role in co-ordinating the fall of Tripoli.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
The cat is out of the bag...well sort of.

This was already assumed by anyone with some knowledge of special operations and military history.

At least now the cat is out officially.

Expect to see more official reports in the coming days revealing the extent of special operations on the ground in Libya, along with an announcement of EUROFOR being deployed to restore order and deliver humanitarian aid.

Qui audet adipiscitur

www.telegraph.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 24/8/11 by MikeboydUS because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


the SAS are on the ground in every conflict of the world that has any hint of British interest. When they really want deniability, the soldier actually gets officially discharged from the Army so if they get caught they can deny they were sent there by the UK. Of course they get a handsome payment for doing this and get signed up on their undected return to the UK.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   
I never doubted for one min that the SAS were not in Lybia. Who else could do such a good job of helpng the rebels and manage to stay so well hidden? The SAS are about as elite as it gets when it comes to this kind of special operations.

I doubt you will hear to many storys about what they have been up to in the last few weeks. They dont care for recognition and glory. Good job lads


edit on 24-8-2011 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by PhoenixOD
 


The SAS are good but I wouldn't say they are significantly better than other nations special forces around the world. They seem to excell in intelligence gathering and subversion, but everything else they do they are pretty much run of the mill. The problem with the UK special forces is that they are asked to cover many roles wheras nations such as the USA have special forces for each task. The SAS certainly breeds fear into their enemies though thanks to their reputation. And I have read stories of a Ghurka who made it in the SAS who defended an outpost single handedly from a 50 man assault with nothing more than a bunker and a machine gun.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 


They are on par with DEVGRU, formerly known as SEAL team six.

Really can't get any better than that.... at least officially.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by PhoenixOD
 

The SAS certainly breeds fear into their enemies though thanks to their reputation. And I have read stories of a Ghurka who made it in the SAS who defended an outpost single handedly from a 50 man assault with nothing more than a bunker and a machine gun.


It was a Ghurka armed with a bread knife and some harsh words actually.........


www.dailymail.co.uk...

PDUK
edit on 24-8-2011 by PurpleDog UK because: (no reason given)
edit on 24-8-2011 by PurpleDog UK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by PurpleDog UK
 


That man needs a movie.

Heck the Ghurkas need a movie.

I figured it was Kukri and not a breadknife though. oh well.

From the article

The only weapon he did not use was the traditional Kukri knife carried by Gurkhas because he did not have his with him at the time.


edit on 24/8/11 by MikeboydUS because: quote



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 


Absolutely nothing the SAS do is run of the mill mate - most special forces are based on the SAS and train with them at some point



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   
I guess every country thinks their special forces is the best in the world. For what its worth I just put "best special forces in the world" into google and a lot of the lists put SAS at number one. But then i would say that im from the UK


Navy seals, Delta force , U. S. Army Green Berets, U. S. Army Rangers, Australian SAS , Shayetet 13, MARSOC ,Spetsnaz and the UK SBS are excellent elite special forces teams as well. In all the lists of 'best special forces teams' i saw the US certainly has the most entries for any country


edit on 24-8-2011 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by PurpleDog UK
 


No that is a different scenario, however it does not suprise me as the Ghurka's are absolutly fearless and a credit to the UK armed forces. They will fight anyone with anything and usually win. Plus a Ghurka curry rocks.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Troops on the ground.

Didn't they say they would not do that?

Assasination of Gadaffi.

Didn't they say tehy would not do that?

edit on 24-8-2011 by JennaDarling because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by JennaDarling
Troops on the ground.

Didn't they say they would not do that?



Obama said he would not do that.

Though I don't remember the British PM or the French President saying the same thing.

I don't think they'll kill him, just take him to the Hague for war crimes.
edit on 24/8/11 by MikeboydUS because: add



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS

Originally posted by JennaDarling
Troops on the ground.

Didn't they say they would not do that?




Obama said he would not do that.

en.wikipedia.org...

"Key points

The resolution, adopted under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter:

demands the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians;
imposes a no-fly zone over Libya;
authorises all necessary means to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas, except for a "foreign occupation force";
strengthens the arms embargo and particularly action against mercenaries, by allowing for forcible inspections of ships and planes;
imposes a ban on all Libyan-designated flights;
imposes an asset freeze on assets owned by the Libyan authorities, and reaffirms that such assets should be used for the benefit of the Libyan people;
extends the travel ban and assets freeze of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970 to a number of additional individuals and Libyan entities;
establishes a panel of experts to monitor and promote sanctions implementatio"

Where does it say assasination?



They plan to do the same Kangaroo court as they did in Iraq with Saddam.

Even the lawyers involved in that court said it was so.


Then they get away with it by claiming "but the people wanted it, he was tried by his own people".

Yeah right.

edit on 24-8-2011 by JennaDarling because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by JennaDarling
 


Some lawyer somewhere could easily render execution or life imprisonment as something different than assassination.

Its the same way for "foreign occupation force" as opposed to humanitarian peacekeepers. The wonders of semantics and lawyers.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   
the victors can do what the hell they like including writing the history books. If there's one thing history has taught us it is this.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by JennaDarling

Originally posted by MikeboydUS

Originally posted by JennaDarling
Troops on the ground.

Didn't they say they would not do that?




Obama said he would not do that.

en.wikipedia.org...

"Key points

The resolution, adopted under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter:

demands the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians;
imposes a no-fly zone over Libya;
authorises all necessary means to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas, except for a "foreign occupation force";
strengthens the arms embargo and particularly action against mercenaries, by allowing for forcible inspections of ships and planes;
imposes a ban on all Libyan-designated flights;
imposes an asset freeze on assets owned by the Libyan authorities, and reaffirms that such assets should be used for the benefit of the Libyan people;
extends the travel ban and assets freeze of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970 to a number of additional individuals and Libyan entities;
establishes a panel of experts to monitor and promote sanctions implementatio"

Where does it say assasination?



They plan to do the same Kangaroo court as they did in Iraq with Saddam.

Even the lawyers involved in that court said it was so.


Then they get away with it by claiming "but the people wanted it, he was tried by his own people".

Yeah right.

edit on 24-8-2011 by JennaDarling because: (no reason given)


It does make you wonder what is the REAL motive behind this Libya thing........??

What are we being kept from seeing ??
It was never really as JD stated above ??

All I can see is the further Alienation of the Arabic people whom will not forget the Western intrusion into their society even if it is ''for the better'' in the short term.............people have long memories..

What is the real motive ??

PDUK
edit on 24-8-2011 by PurpleDog UK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
You know this man has been in power for over 40 years (because we let him), he probably built a very good place(or places) to hide



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Gaddafi was taken out because he held the UK to randsome with his oil to have the Lockerbie Bomber released, France came on board because Sarchozy needed a war to save his reputation and he wanted the Oil contracts. Thats it really.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by JennaDarling
 


Some lawyer somewhere could easily render execution or life imprisonment as something different than assassination.

Its the same way for "foreign occupation force" as opposed to humanitarian peacekeepers. The wonders of semantics and lawyers.


We all know its a farce. Any legal cases should be in the international court, it was done with the Kosovo war, so why not Iraq and why not Libya now?

Because it is a farce. Gadaffi and Saddam are not playing ball with the ones calling the shots. So they get a kangaroo court.





new topics
top topics
 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join