Allied Forces Begin Military Action Against Libya - Live Updates

reply to post by phatpackage

U.S. military aid finances most of Egypt's big-ticket defense procurements--$1.3 billion annually for several years. Large projects underway include the M1A1 Abrams tank manufacturing facility, M88A2 coproduction program, IFF, the HAWK rebuild program, and Peace Vector V. Such projects can be expected to continue, although improvements to and maintenance of existing force capabilities are perhaps more likely targets of future spending than entirely new systems.

en.wikipedia.org...

That is a link to that information - it was mentioned on Sky News when the 'revolution' was going on

HAHAH commentator on Sky News (Former Ambassador for UK to Saudi Arabia) just gave a dose of reality to the Jingoists.

Stated the aim is a thinly veiled course of regime change, and that the reality will be that this cannot be done by air strikes alone, and that in the end we are going to be stuck in a civil war.

Well if anyone knows the region surely it would be an experienced diplomat in the region.

Indeed this is madness

reply to post by stumason


Yes I agree they say that, but everytime there is a defence review they seem to be wittling it back to nothing

Originally posted by makeitso
reply to post by asala

 

Warplane shot down in Libyan rebel town of Benghazi belonged to rebels, rebels admit

LIBYAN rebels acknowledged that a warplane which crashed in flames in their Benghazi stronghold early yesterday belonged to them and that it was shot down by Muammar Gaddafi's forces. "Yes, it was one of the insurgents' planes. It was downed by Gaddafi's forces," a senior rebel official told AFP, reached by telephone.

"From what I hear the pilot is dead but I cannot confirm that," he said, adding that the plane was a French-built Mirage fighter.

"We have a few planes but they are old planes," he added.

The rebel plane, which was downed in Benghazi, not Tripoli as the new claim by the Libyans hints at, was in fact a MiG-23, not a Mirage. So this new claim of a french plane downed by the Libyans is a different case. It is also untrue.

AHHH YES....NATO Forces only pick on countries with legacy equipment...why can't they fight a modern war with a modern adversary. This is boring to me. I want to see a country capable of picking out the tomahawks out of the sky or even hacking them and redirecting them back to the carrier. That would be interesting. Come on USA, show me a real war, not fighting some third world country, have we been reduced to wusses that we have to fight 3rd world countries to act big..

reply to post by blackcat99


How is this proof beyond all doubt that the USA in a round about way as you put it is supplying Libya with weapons? Try again!

reply to post by stumason


Stu,

yeah you were a little late on that hehehe,

Already conceded that I could well have been wrong on that. Was sure I heard something about the Typhoons in relation to the latest SDR. and them being reduced or mothballed

I was working in the Czech republic, and was inside the active airfield (in the hangar) when a big military airshow was going on. They had a UK Typhoon doing displays, and is really is an AWESOME aircraft in terms of maneuverability and speed. LOUD too!!

So even if they had thought about it, it would be madness

Originally posted by phatpackage
reply to post by SpeachM1litant

 

This is about Libya not that murdering terrorist Mugabe. You say my point about Lockerbie is irrelevant. Mugabe is not relevant either!

Lockerbie is irrelevant, it has nothing whatsover to do with the current situation. Mugabe is relevant, as he is still in power, he has killed far more then Qaddafi yet NATO and the U.S do nothing about him. I guess it may be becuase he isn't sitting on a proven 40 billion barrels of high quality oil. Mugabe highlights U.S hypocrisy and is supporting my argument that this is about monetary/resource interests rather then saving lives. If the U.S wanted to save lives it wouldn't bomb Tripoli. Dosen't bombing Tripoli seem counter productive to you?

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Don't worry TP you'll have China to look forward to at some point soon!!

reply to post by JakiusFogg


I have seen that display at Fairford - and it was really awesome as you said - he was flipping it around like anything...

Originally posted by dude69
reply to post by Nightchild

 

Well...what is it about then? Getting rid of that looney Gaddafi and implementing a neat functioning democracy like in Iraq?...

riiiiiight...

Nice to see people read threads. Personally, I am working my way through the 30 odd pages since I last posted last night, reading each one and replying as such. You obviously ignored my posts from the first few pages.

This war is very much about several things, least of all Oil. This is more about not having a failed state sat on Europes border that is already a launchpad for illegal immigration into Europe and could end up being a festering wound far to close to the continent posing a major security risk. Also, this crisis has sent oil prices rocketing, so it is very much about stabalising the price, therefore our economies which are wonky at the moment.

Honestly, a little critical thinking is required, but it seems every other post in this thread is either "OMG! WW3!!!" or "Another US war for Oil..."

Same old sensationalist crap being posted weith nothing to back it up. Look at the facts people, not everything is some evil Zionist conspiracy to control Oil.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
AHHH YES....NATO Forces only pick on countries with legacy equipment...why can't they fight a modern war with a modern adversary. This is boring to me. I want to see a country capable of picking out the tomahawks out of the sky or even hacking them and redirecting them back to the carrier. That would be interesting. Come on USA, show me a real war, not fighting some third world country, have we been reduced to wusses that we have to fight 3rd world countries to act big..

Yeah, I see what you mean... it would be fun to see a country killing another's
people using really modern equipment. Lot's of sleek designs and flashing
lights...

Do you really think a country attacks another to look 'big'?
Big to who?

reply to post by SpeachM1litant


Incorrect, Zimbabwe is not relevant to the thread, not one iota no matter what you say or think. It's not about wrongly perceived hypocrisies its about Libya, Gadaffi and all the rubbish he has created in his entire time and what we can do to help these severely oppressed people! As for Lockerbie not being relevant well, when you know families of one of the victims it might mean something different to you!

Dosen't bombing Tripoli seem counter productive to you?

No because there is "method in the madness" as the saying goes! That method is to remove Gadaffi!

Is anyone watching the live afress by gadhaffi? Its on CNN and maybe some other channels and he's ranting somewhat. He's also saying that america will fall like hitler, moussalini...I can't find any links to it right now but its showing it off of Libyan state TV. It shows a golden fist crushing a silver het with "USA" on the rear of the jet. This is kind of odd to say the least...anyone else see it anywhere?


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Yes I am watching it at the moment - is it me or has that fist been repainted since last night

I am disgusted by the amount of war mongers in this thread.

People are refusing to be realistic, refusing to acknowledge that this will turn sour as fast as any other middle-eastern conflict. You people act as if we are watching a movie, where we must only remove the bogeyman and the credits will roll. This is disgustingly naive, and we played this same silly game not even 10 years ago.

This is just sad, and some people are simply showing their true colors.

Reply to post by philosearcher

Apologies for two posts in a row. On the m.ats I can't go back and edit my last post. I just checked all the other big news channels on my basic cable and no one else is covering it. Also, sorry for the short ramble-ish post. Kind of random, in a working thread but I just wanted to get it out somewhere quickly. Also, I didn't check the spelling in that post...that's what happens when you type quickly on a blackberry without looking...he's still going on too.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by deutschbag
reply to post by Christian Voice

 

What about Yemen, Bahrain, Darfur............

I have also mentioned this too..

Yemen and Bahrain are geopolitically off limits, due to the Saudi's.

The uprisings there are Shia's against Sunni's, likely backed bY iran or at thevery least egged on. Supporting Shia revolts in these two countries would not only give Iran and foot in the door on the Arabian peninsular, but would destablise Saudi too.

Imagine what the oil price would look like then and also what if Iran gained influence over the whole penisular! We'd be boned!

reply to post by phatpackage


Out of sheer curiosity, would you be supportive of an occupational force designed to remove Qaddafi?

reply to post by philosearcher


I just tuned in to the speech on al-jazeera. First thing I heard Gaddafi say was something about Somalia and how it turned out there. I missed the first part of it.

2 mins after tuning in - Hes saying something about Vietnam and Afghanistan and about their failures

english.aljazeera.net...

Edit - Hes saying the UN has to come down from the air to take their oil and the UN will lose if they try - thats what al-jazeeras summary is saying