As if the war in Libya weren’t already complicated and ill-defined enough, NATO Commander Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard threatened the rebels on Thursday, saying the NATO warplanes would start attacking them too if they kept killing civilians.
NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu reiterated this sentiment, saying that NATO “will apply the (UN Security Council) mandate across the board.” It is UN Resolution 1973 that NATO is using as an excuse for its war in Libya.
But it is unlikely to be entirely applied across the board, or NATO’s warplanes will have to start attacking one another. That’s because one top Catholic official in Tripoli said that 40 civilians were killed in his city alone during the bombing campaign.
Though UN Resolution 1973 was initially designed to call for a no-fly zone it also contained language about protecting civilians. This was used by NATO nations as an excuse for the massive air strikes and, at least for some, the notion of funneling arms into the hands of favored rebel factions.
Is NATO going to blame the rebels for civilians killed by NATO bombings or CIA spooks?
”As if the war in Libya weren’t already complicated and ill-defined enough, NATO Commander Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard threatened the rebels on Thursday, saying the NATO warplanes would start attacking them too if they kept killing civilians”.
So they are killing civilians blaming Libyan army or for that matter US-NATO bombardment.., we have said from very beginning that what is called Libyan Council is a non functioning political system with only one agenda to establish a Islamic system like Afghanistan with Osama Bin Laden governing a Islamic system.., now it turn out that US – NATO trying every measurable and political corridors to avoid their involvements helping Libyan Council to start this war, now they are trying to withdraw not only their involvements but also the fact that some of these Muslims rebellions’ are financed by Saudis and Arab Emirates tyrants Kingdome families.
We'll kill everyone and anyone who gets between us and the oil.
General, that shouldn't be too tough an assignment to wipe out the remaining thousand rebels. Then you could bring in the recently annointed "leader" of the rebel opposition. Ya know the guy that lived in Virgina for the last 20yrs down the street from CIA HQ in Langley. You ought to get along with him just fine. Bring in the Marines to support the lone rebel. I'm trying to visualize this. It's almost humorous if it weren't so diabolical.
The US needs to get out of the policing business, period. It costs too much, and we're no good at it. If Europe wants to stay in the Libyan mess, let them do so at their own peril and on their own dime- not ours.
At this point, I'm honestly having to reassess which side I'd like to see prevail- Gadhafi or the rebels. Each day it's looking like there's not that much difference either way it goes.
On the whole, IF the rebels are pursuing an agenda to establish an Islamic state I'll go for that IF- and only IF- it's done right, with cooler, saner (and fair-minded) heads providing the leadership. If they are intending to establish a Nigeria- or Saudi-like Islamic state, I'll have to have serious reservations about that.
Why is US NATO supporting the rebels? Civilians holding guns shooting at soldiers are not civillians! They are terrorists! Why is NATO supporting terrorists?Why isnt NATO bombing other countries that have civil war? Why no body bombed US when it had it's civil war? Stopped pretending to be righteous!