UN Security Council passes no-fly zone resolution, air strikes expected 'within hours' - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Tac Error;28657166]That was back in 2003. Now American forces have been focused largely on low-intensity conflict/COIN for nearly a decade now. Hell, the famous National Training Center at Fort Irwin no longer trains rotating units in high-intensity conventional conflicts with their Soviet motor rifle regiment force. To take an example, conventional warfare was once what the IDF excelled at back in the 1960s-1980s, but over a decade of fighting Palestinians diminished its conventional capabilities and when they decided to go fight Hezbollah in 2006, they had a surprise waiting for them. [url=http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcarl.army.mil%2Fdownload%2Fcsipubs%2FmatthewsOP26.pdf&ei=KHmCTcHCDofksQO43YHmAQ&usg=AFQjCNHBoDvumkO50mu1UvWbQG9smww-yw&sig2=eTbZSrUQmkZRdhuWRjZhkA]Source[/url] The swiftness of Iraqi military defeat was more due to the fact that they were really [i]incompetent[/i] than any superiority of the US military.[/QUOTE] Whatever the resolution [i]authorises[/i], I don't think NATO have any intention of fighting a full war here, they seem to just intend to use bombers and cruise missiles to wreck Gaddafi's shit

[QUOTE=smurfy;28657308]Whatever the resolution [i]authorises[/i], I don't think NATO have any intention of fighting a full war here, they seem to just intend to use bombers and cruise missiles to wreck Gaddafi's shit[/QUOTE] I assume that this resolution would actually authorize things such as cruise missiles?

[QUOTE=Jsm;28657207]And add to that the fact they gave up pretty quickly. They were not dedicated to the cause it seems, unlike in Libya where it looks like Gaddafis army really support him (Although I wonder they would feel like that if they had jets flying overhead) [/QUOTE] To be entirely honest Gaddafis loyalists look like a bunch of drunken 20 year olds, they walk around shooting in the air like idiots and have some sort of confounded blind devotion to Gaddafi. I don't think they know what the fuck they are doing, they just don't know any better. Hopefully with these airstrikes they emphasize more on breaking equipment (if possible) rather than blowing people apart. Stupidity and ignorance aren't really warranting of death by dismemberment, but it'd be nice to see some of those (hopefully empty) tanks be turned into smoking wreckages.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28657343]To be entirely honest Gaddafis loyalists look like a bunch of drunken 20 year olds, they walk around shooting in the air like idiots and have some sort of confounded blind devotion to Gaddafi. I don't think they know what the fuck they are doing, they just don't know any better. Hopefully with these airstrikes they emphasize more on breaking equipment (if possible) rather than blowing people apart. Stupidity and ignorance aren't really warranting of death by dismemberment.[/QUOTE] I think if anything the NFZ/air strikes will break morale more than anything.

[QUOTE=Jsm;28657339]I assume that this resolution would actually authorize things such as cruise missiles?[/QUOTE] [quote]Authorises member states ... to take all necessary measures ... to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory...;[/quote] Any forces that are being used to attack towns or cities can be taken out.

Worst case scenario, this sound. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvdVxr8rMLM&feature=fvwrel[/media]

32 minutes until the vote.

[QUOTE=smurfy;28657308]Whatever the resolution [i]authorises[/i], I don't think NATO have any intention of fighting a full war here, they seem to just intend to use bombers and cruise missiles to wreck Gaddafi's shit[/QUOTE] The potential problem, I said before is what if by the time that NATO/UN/US actually gets aircraft to conduct strikes, Gaddafi's goons and the rebels are heavily intermixed with each other in the fighting? That's not a good environment for precision weapons - especially air-delivered weapons. Then it's not going to be as effective as oh-so-perfect Desert Storm's air campaign against Iraq in 1991.

a about fucking time

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28657343]To be entirely honest Gaddafis loyalists look like a bunch of drunken 20 year olds, they walk around shooting in the air like idiots and have some sort of confounded blind devotion to Gaddafi. I don't think they know what the fuck they are doing, they just don't know any better. Hopefully with these airstrikes they emphasize more on breaking equipment (if possible) rather than blowing people apart. Stupidity and ignorance aren't really warranting of death by dismemberment, but it'd be nice to see some of those (hopefully empty) tanks be turned into smoking wreckages.[/QUOTE] "Hey, I promise to give you lots of money if you woot and cheer joyfully at my name. or, you'know, I could kill you if you don't" Pure propaganda, nothing more.

I expect something like this to happen: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NktsxucDvNI[/media]

So, I'm a bit confused... tactical air strikes by NATO if it's voted in? Then essentially a joint ground force attack with Arabian countries and NATO if Gaddafi isn't eliminated? Or am I completely off?

Sky are reporting that China, Russia, Brazil, India and Germany are expected to ABSTAIN (not vote no). They are only quoting "UK sources" though, this could just be hearsay. If these countries do not vote, are they counted as "no" or are they just not counted at all (so if all but one nation abstained would that go through?)

[QUOTE=Tac Error;28657479]The potential problem, I said before is what if by the time that NATO/UN/US actually gets aircraft to conduct strikes, Gaddafi's goons and the rebels are heavily intermixed with each other in the fighting? That's not a good environment for precision weapons - especially air-delivered weapons. Then it's not going to be as effective as oh-so-perfect Desert Storm's air campaign against Iraq in 1991.[/QUOTE] Well, on one handed Gaddfi's forces are still going to have some really obvious targets on the outskirts of the city. The tanks are pretty easily spotted from the air, and Gaddafi's forces are getting their ammunition and weapons from somewhere, obviously. I think the main purpose of this would just be to cut the legs off of Gaddfi's military movement; destroying tanks and light armor, and bombarding ammunition supplies. Obviously easier said then done, but it's probably still feasible. The only real edge they have over rebels is their armor support and mobility, if those are taken out of the equation it'd really help out.

[QUOTE=Fycix;28657528]So, I'm a bit confused... tactical air strikes by NATO if it's voted in? Then essentially a joint ground force attack with Arabian countries and NATO if Gaddafi isn't eliminated? Or am I completely off?[/QUOTE] In [I]theory[/I] the resolution (at least the last draft that the media have seen) authorizes that if needed. That clause could be dropped before it goes to vote.

FINALLY caps

[QUOTE=Jsm;28657546]Sky are reporting that China, Russia, Brazil, India and Germany are expected to ABSTAIN (not vote no). They are only quoting "UK sources" though, this could just be hearsay. If these countries do not vote, are they counted as "no" or are they just not counted at all (so if all but one nation abstained would that go through?)[/QUOTE]Abstination doesn't equal a no vote, else what's the point of abstaining instead of just voting no?

[QUOTE=Fycix;28657528]So, I'm a bit confused... tactical air strikes by NATO if it's voted in? Then essentially a joint ground force attack with Arabian countries and NATO if Gaddafi isn't eliminated? Or am I completely off?[/QUOTE] The resolution authorises ANYTHING to be done to protect civilian populated areas (specifically including Benghazi), except an occupation force. NATO will probably use air strikes against Gaddafi's forces positioned around towns and cities, but if they wanted they COULD deploy ground troops to defend the cities. [editline]17th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Jsm;28657546]Sky are reporting that China, Russia, Brazil, India and Germany are expected to ABSTAIN (not vote no). They are only quoting "UK sources" though, this could just be hearsay. If these countries do not vote, are they counted as "no" or are they just not counted at all (so if all but one nation abstained would that go through?)[/QUOTE] The number of No votes versus abstentions don't matter - the resolution needs 9 Yes votes to pass.

[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;28657586]Abstination doesn't equal a no vote, else what's the point of abstaining instead of just voting no?[/QUOTE] Good point, for some reason I didn't see it like that. [editline]17th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=smurfy;28657599]The resolution authorises ANYTHING to be done to protect civilian populated areas (specifically including Benghazi), except an occupation force. NATO will probably use air strikes against Gaddafi's forces positioned around towns and cities, but if they wanted they COULD deploy ground troops to defend the cities. [editline]17th March 2011[/editline] The number of No votes versus abstentions don't matter - the resolution needs 9 Yes votes to pass.[/QUOTE] Surely that means anything other than a yes vote counts as a no vote (even not voting).

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28657343]To be entirely honest Gaddafis loyalists look like a bunch of drunken 20 year olds, they walk around shooting in the air like idiots and have some sort of confounded blind devotion to Gaddafi. I don't think they know what the fuck they are doing, they just don't know any better. Hopefully with these airstrikes they emphasize more on breaking equipment (if possible) rather than blowing people apart. Stupidity and ignorance aren't really warranting of death by dismemberment, but it'd be nice to see some of those (hopefully empty) tanks be turned into smoking wreckages.[/QUOTE] What if the rebels attack my cities? Also my loyalist are just that loyal to the greatness I gave Libya. I will shoot down the west's planes too.

Abstaining from voting doesn't count either way technically, although it certainly doesn't help pass something. But yeah, it's closer to a no than a yes, because it prevents it from getting passed.

Hmmm, anyone know If there are any US/NATO task force close to Libya? Surely they will need to be deployed quickly if they want to strike them with surprise.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28657556]Well, on one handed Gaddfi's forces are still going to have some really obvious targets on the outskirts of the city. The tanks are pretty easily spotted from the air, and Gaddafi's forces are getting their ammunition and weapons from somewhere, obviously. I think the main purpose of this would just be to cut the legs off of Gaddfi's military movement; destroying tanks and light armor, and bombarding ammunition supplies. Obviously easier said then done, but it's probably still feasible.[/QUOTE] AFIAK, interdiction of lines of communication (LOC)/supply lines usually affects the enemy on the operational and strategic level. The US/UN/NATO air component can't be deployed in the Med as quickly as people would like. How fast are Gaddafi's forces moving towards Benghazi? If fighting has already started by the time the air component has begun their missions, cutting the legs will impact very little unless the Battle of Benghazi becomes drawn out over time that interdiction of LOC can work. Besides, don't the rebels have armored vehicles of their own? How are the aircrews going to distinguish between a Gaddafist and a rebel tank? When forces are intermingled it's almost impossible.

[QUOTE=smurfy;28656886]Nah[/QUOTE] Don't worry I have a few good one saved up for the right occasion. [editline]17th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Tac Error;28657732]AFIAK, interdiction of lines of communication (LOC)/supply lines usually affects the enemy on the operational and strategic level. The US/UN/NATO air component can't be deployed in the Med as quickly as people would like. How fast are Gaddafi's forces moving towards Benghazi? If fighting has already started by the time the air component has begun their missions, cutting the legs will impact very little unless the Battle of Benghazi becomes drawn out over time that interdiction of LOC can work. Besides, don't the rebels have armored vehicles of their own? How are the aircrews going to distinguish between a Gaddafist and a rebel tank? When forces are intermingled it's almost impossible.[/QUOTE] I like the word Gaddafist. And they can't attack me on the strategic level that would not cater to the charater.

[QUOTE=shian;28657712]Hmmm, anyone know If there are any US/NATO task force close to Libya? Surely they will need to be deployed quickly if they want to strike them with surprise.[/QUOTE] The US moved into position about 2 weeks ago. The UK / France isn't that far away and the Arab countries are obviously very close. Unrelated, but every single time the UK has reviewed its defence budget in the last ~20 years it has gone onto fight a war or do some "police" action shortly after.

[QUOTE=smurfy;28655253]The soldiers don't wear boots! :science:[/QUOTE] Anything short of sneakers on the ground? :v:

[QUOTE=ewitwins;28657777]Anything short of sneakers on the ground? :v:[/QUOTE] Put the soldiers in tanks! :science:

[QUOTE=Tac Error;28657732]AFIAK, interdiction of lines of communication (LOC)/supply lines usually affects the enemy on the operational and strategic level. The US/UN/NATO air component can't be deployed in the Med as quickly as people would like. How fast are Gaddafi's forces moving towards Benghazi? If fighting has already started by the time the air component has begun their missions, cutting the legs will impact very little unless the Battle of Benghazi becomes drawn out over time that interdiction of LOC can work. Besides, don't the rebels have armored vehicles of their own? How are the aircrews going to distinguish between a Gaddafist and a rebel tank? When forces are intermingled it's almost impossible.[/QUOTE] Well, unless the loyalists actually make it into the city and it's innercity fighting, it'll be pretty obvious what with the Gaddafist forces firing into the city and the rebels defending the city. Regardless though, if it gets that close an airstrike would be pretty damn risky.

The webcast is online but showing a wall with a bunch of flags in front of it, and the occasional person walking past [url]http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/webcast/index.html[/url] Channel 3

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;28655088]Like Vietnam amirite?[/QUOTE] I hear the Libyan jungles are quite nice this time of year