NATO airstrike kills Gaddafi's son, grandchildren

[elcent]

Breaking news is that Gaddafi and his supporters had revenge and that the Italian Embassy is burning at the moment. The British residence was also attacked which promted the British govt to expell all Lybian diplomats. They have to leave the UK within 24 hours.

Also the UN is leaving Tripoli due to attacks on their offices http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13253896

Edited May 1, 2011 by elcent

[ronz28]

Gaddafi has been killing innocents for months now. What goes around comes around.

The difference is that his troops directly shot at and bombed innocent people but NATO hit a command bunker. If these people died (proof??) due to the bombing, then GeeDaffy knew his innocent grandchildren were in the command post so he could blame NATO when people were hurt. Who in his right mind would put their grandchildren in a command post bunker? Sorry Gaddafi that you used your grandchildren as shields for your military command post.

Edited May 1, 2011 by sbk
nonsensical name removed- please use the real name

[EnSvenskTiger]

"Kill Gaddafi and the conflict there effectively ends. There is no real Gaddafi ideology to fight for once he's gone."

Can the same be said for , lets say, Obama?

By the way the russians are getting tired of this; http://en.rian.ru/russia/20110501/163809342.html

"The disproportional use of force, all the more so, beyond the mandate of UN Security Council Resolution No. 1973, which in no way stipulates the replacement of the Libyan leadership, is leading to harmful consequences and the death of civilians,"

And so is the rest of the free world!

Tiger

[Wallaby]

I do not understand why there is continued discussion. Bab al Azizya is the headquarters of the Gaddafi regime. It is where the key military decisons are made. There are military barracks and facilities at the location. This makes it a legitimate target. look at the satellite phots. Look at the news footage of the bombed bunker. It was several stories below ground, built of reinforced concrete. The building that was targeted was not a primary purpose residential building.

Well all I can say is that you are getting different news to me. Our television news reports that Gadaffi's home has been bombed killing members of his family. Then at the end of the report, like a footnote, they said that NATO claimed it was a military target.

Well NATO bombed it so they would obviously say that.

I just don't get all the bullshit about this. Everyone knows NATO wants him dead, just bllody say so and stop the crap about only having a no fly zone to protect the civilians (which seems to include rebels).

[Ulysses G.]

Breaking news is that Gaddafi and his supporters had revenge and that the Italian Embassy is burning at the moment. The British residence was also attacked which promted the British govt to expell all Lybian diplomats. They have to leave the UK within 24 hours.

Also the UN is leaving Tripoli due to attacks on their offices http://www.bbc.co.uk...africa-13253896

I in no way support Gaddafi, but I can not say that I blame him on this. NATO is talking out of both sides of its mouth and has gone way past any mandate dealing with "protecting civilians" This thing is a farce, but it is too late now. .

[soihok]

What is important is not to be seduced by the face and statements of the western media.

Lets have a greater focus on Africa .

Lets start with Sudan, enormous amount of human crime and tragedy. Help from the west ? Not really , far too complicated and not worth anything to anyone.

Somalia, anarachy. Not worth it, nothing to gain. Nothing on offer.

Ivory Coast. Civil war , not far from Libya and again, nothing on offer, apart from chocolate. Lets just forget it shall we.

Libya. Now we have a wierdo in control and loads of oil,,,,,,yeah,,,,,lets kick his ass. Supply loads of arms and bombing stikes to kill more children. Great idea.

I am in no way a supporter of Gadaffi, but I am in support for not killing children.

I hate the world. It has been totally debased.

Edited May 1, 2011 by soihok

[koheesti]

Breaking news is that Gaddafi and his supporters had revenge and that the Italian Embassy is burning at the moment. The British residence was also attacked which promted the British govt to expell all Lybian diplomats. They have to leave the UK within 24 hours.

Does that include the diplomats who have defected?

[Ulysses G.]

I hate the world. It has been totally debased.

It has been "debased" since Adam and Eve.

[geriatrickid]

What is important is not to be seduced by the face and statements of the western media.

Lets have a greater focus on Africa .

Lets start with Sudan, enormous amount of human crime and tragedy. Help from the west ? Not really , far too complicated and not worth anything to anyone.

Somalia, anarachy. Not worth it, nothing to gain. Nothing on offer.

Ivory Coast. Civil war , not far from Libya and again, nothing on offer, apart from chocolate. Lets just forget it shall we.

Libya. Now we have a wierdo in control and loads of oil,,,,,,yeah,,,,,lets kick his ass. Supply loads of arms and bombing stikes to kill more children. Great idea.

I am in no way a supporter of Gadaffi, but I am in support for not killing children.

I hate the world. It has been totally debased.

Yes, let's have a look;

Sudan: UN Peacekeepers have been present and helped implement the end to the civil war in 2005. Sudan just had a referendum and the south voted for independence. The UN peackeeping force is helping that occur. African nations provide a large number of the peacekeepers and Africa supported the intervention.

Ivory Coast: UN peacekeepers and the French military assisted the democratically elected government take control of the country. The French military presence is now being slowly phased out. Again, African nations provide a large number of the peacekeepers. Again, Africa supported the intervention.

Somalia: The regional neighbors, particularly the Arab and African nations do not want a international intervention and have actively blocked such an effort. Yes, one could argue that there should be an intervention, but past experience in Somalia has demonstrated that in the absence of a public desire, i.e. Somalians asking for intervention, such an intervention would fail. Somalia is an African problem and the Africans must decide what to do.

The difference with Libya is that the request for intentaional assistance came from a diverse group of nations including regional neighbors and Libyans themselves. In respect to the oil supply, the oil was flowing to the EU long before there was a UN mandate. In fact, it would have been in the best interests of the EU to prop up the Gaddaffi genocidal regime. However, there was extreme pressure brought to bear by social service and humanitarian agencies that something be done to stop Gadaffi's slaughter of Libyan citizens.

You might wish to look at the nations providing the UN forces in Africa related missions.

[geriatrickid]

I do not understand why there is continued discussion. Bab al Azizya is the headquarters of the Gaddafi regime. It is where the key military decisons are made. There are military barracks and facilities at the location. This makes it a legitimate target. look at the satellite phots. Look at the news footage of the bombed bunker. It was several stories below ground, built of reinforced concrete. The building that was targeted was not a primary purpose residential building.

Well all I can say is that you are getting different news to me. Our television news reports that Gadaffi's home has been bombed killing members of his family. Then at the end of the report, like a footnote, they said that NATO claimed it was a military target.

Well NATO bombed it so they would obviously say that.

I just don't get all the bullshit about this. Everyone knows NATO wants him dead, just bllody say so and stop the crap about only having a no fly zone to protect the civilians (which seems to include rebels).

How many homes have bunkers with heavy reinforced concrete? Please go and look at the photographs. Why were there ammunition cases scattered about? Reuters reported as follows;

"They saw two large holes in the ground, where the bombs had torn through a layer of soil,followed by a layer of reinforced concrete, to pierce what appeared to be an underground bunker.Smoke was rising from one of the craters and ammunition crates lay nearby.Ibrahim (Libyan government spokesman) said the area was disused and the ammunition boxes were empty."

Question: If the area was disused, why then was the bunker occupied? Why were there ammunition boxes scattered about? That hardly seems like the best place to place "innocent children". It seems to me that the death of the children is welcomed by Gaddafi simply because they are useful tools to manipulate western public opinion. This is how a madman thinks. Sorry if it is disturbing, but with Gadafi, everyone and anyone can be sacrificed to keep his regime in power. This is what the world is dealing with.

[coma]

Fox news is saying Obama will address the nation live at the bottom of this hour. The issue is of '' foriegn policy '. Possibley Libya. Sounds serious.

At 10.45 EST

Edited May 2, 2011 by coma

[flying]

Fox news is saying Obama will address the nation live at the bottom of this hour. The issue is of ''national security'. Possibley Libya. Sounds serious.

At 10.45 EST

Standard Operating Procedure before they go & do something.

1st raise threat level even though one never existed

2nd attack

Although the claims are the speech is not about Libya

Edited May 2, 2011 by flying

[coma]

Off topic. But reports stating Osama Bin Laden is DEAD.

[OzMick]

I do not understand why there is continued discussion. Bab al Azizya is the headquarters of the Gaddafi regime. It is where the key military decisons are made. There are military barracks and facilities at the location. This makes it a legitimate target. look at the satellite phots. Look at the news footage of the bombed bunker. It was several stories below ground, built of reinforced concrete. The building that was targeted was not a primary purpose residential building.

Come on!! Gaddafi could be taking a dump in an out house in the middle of the desert and NATO would attack it, call it a military target. Because to NATO, Graddafi is the target

Assassination of a head of state is illegal under international law, and forbidden by various US presidential orders. On the other hand, the targeted killing of those woven into the enemy chain of command is shrouded in legal ambiguity.

Given the personalistic nature of the regime, and the "all means necessary" clause in UN Resolution 1973, it might be argued that killing Col Muammar Gaddafi and certain members of his family - such as his son Khamis, commander of an elite military brigade - would be permissible, even if it posed a risk to those non-combatants around the regime.

Legality, though, indicates neither legitimacy nor prudence. This strike, and the death of Saif al-Arab, have produced little military result at the greatest diplomatic and symbolic cost to Nato.

Saif al-Arab was, unlike his brothers, not a senior military commander or propagandist. His death is redolent of the 1986 US strike on the same compound.

...

http://www.bbc.co.uk...africa-13252192

"The law is an ass" and none more so than this self-serving piece put up by politicians scared for their own skinny butts. Who would have been prosecuted for bombing the Fuehrer Bunker, or stringing up Mussolini? Why should every US general be a legitimate target, but the Commander-in chief not? Because he says so?

Pols are quite happy to send troops to war, for the public to be put at risk, but it is illegal to target them or their family?

Those that live on the cream of despotic societies are taking a risk - tough tit if they have to pay the price.

[soihok]

Yes, let's have a look;

Sudan: UN Peacekeepers have been present and helped implement the end to the civil war in 2005. Sudan just had a referendum and the south voted for independence. The UN peackeeping force is helping that occur. African nations provide a large number of the peacekeepers and Africa supported the intervention.

Ivory Coast: UN peacekeepers and the French military assisted the democratically elected government take control of the country. The French military presence is now being slowly phased out. Again, African nations provide a large number of the peacekeepers. Again, Africa supported the intervention.

Somalia: The regional neighbors, particularly the Arab and African nations do not want a international intervention and have actively blocked such an effort. Yes, one could argue that there should be an intervention, but past experience in Somalia has demonstrated that in the absence of a public desire, i.e. Somalians asking for intervention, such an intervention would fail. Somalia is an African problem and the Africans must decide what to do.

The difference with Libya is that the request for intentaional assistance came from a diverse group of nations including regional neighbors and Libyans themselves. In respect to the oil supply, the oil was flowing to the EU long before there was a UN mandate. In fact, it would have been in the best interests of the EU to prop up the Gaddaffi genocidal regime. However, there was extreme pressure brought to bear by social service and humanitarian agencies that something be done to stop Gadaffi's slaughter of Libyan citizens.

You might wish to look at the nations providing the UN forces in Africa related missions.

Peace keeping = bombing raids. Not quite the same is it?

[geriatrickid]

[

Peace keeping = bombing raids. Not quite the same is it?

French forces attacking a former President of Cote Ivoire is part of the peace keeping mandate.

It is quite the same.

[Wallaby]

[

Peace keeping = bombing raids. Not quite the same is it?

French forces attacking a former President of Cote Ivoire is part of the peace keeping mandate.

It is quite the same.

Not even close.

[OzMick]

I hate the world. It has been totally debased.

It has been "debased" since Adam and Eve.

No, No............since Santa Claus! Or was it the Tooth Fairy?

[geriatrickid]

[

Peace keeping = bombing raids. Not quite the same is it?

French forces attacking a former President of Cote Ivoire is part of the peace keeping mandate.

It is quite the same.

Not even close.

Your personal views as the UN and participating nations disagree.

[tw25rw]

"Kill Gaddafi and the conflict there effectively ends. There is no real Gaddafi ideology to fight for once he's gone."

Can the same be said for , lets say, Obama?

No.

Obama is the elected leader. The system he is part of will continue. Gaddafi is a tyrant who rules by decree. Kill him and, apart from a few who will be disadvantaged, no one will particularly miss him.