Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Puzzlemaker]

Well, fuck.

That... godamn.  That's just fucked up.

[RedKing]

Saw one analysis that suggested Qaddafi may have ratcheted up the attack on Zawiyah because he's running low on fuel and supplies for his forces near Bin Jawad. Wiping out the pocket of resistance in Az-Zawiyah would free up three brigades to move east and either add to the siege of Misrata, or bypass Misrata and reinforce the attacks near Bin Jawad-Ra's Lanuf.

Somebody earlier compared Az-Zawiyah to Thermopylae. I only the latter part of that is right (in that it's a tactical defeat, but a strategic victory by tying them up long enough).

[Phmcw]

Mustafa Mohamed Abud Al Jeleil is the chief of the opposition for now.

[DJ]

Let's hope that the Zawiyah defenders got some good shelters. Shelling can be surprisingly ineffective vs dug-in infantry.

And holding onto that city is very important. Inability to take a place held by such light troops must be wrecking the loyalist morale, while at the same time boosting the rebel morale. I'd say this is even more important than tying up 3 brigades or threatening Tripoli, as this war will most likely end when the loyalist army collapses in chain desertion.

[olemars]

I think there might have been a failed coup attempt or two already the last few days. There's been strange gun battles around the Gaddafi compound at least one night.

[RedKing]

There's some strange reports flitering around now that the rebels have actually broken through the lines around Bin Jawad and are nearing Sirte.

Can't imagine how on Earth...unless the cloud cover has been maintained enough that all the airstrikes stopped for a long duration. Remember, a couple of days ago, every time the rebels drove forward on land they were winning -- it was only Qaddafi's airpower that drove them back. C'mon clouds!!

Also, Libyan state media is reporting a senior commander involved in the battle for Zawiya defected to the rebels. This seems like a strange thing for them to admit. However, the rebels were claiming earlier today that they had killed a senior brigade commander in Zawiya. So my guess is that rather than admit that the rebels are able to kill even senior officers, they'll claim he defected and was then either killed by loyalists forces or murdered by the people he defected to. Libyan disinformation is getting more and more sophisticated and subtle (even if Qaddafi continues to proclaim that it's raining upside down and that the sun rolls backwards in the sky for him).

[Jopax]

It could be that he got sick of shelling one of his cities so decided to switch sides.Also there could be problems with the aircraft we don't know about, fuel or ammo shortages perhaps?

[RedKing]

It could be that he got sick of shelling one of his cities so decided to switch sides.Also there could be problems with the aircraft we don't know about, fuel or ammo shortages perhaps?

I'm not saying that it's strange for somebody to defect. I'm saying it's strange that Qaddafi's own TV station would be admitting this. Hence my theory that this commander was the same one already killed in the battle, and rather than admit the rebels could kill a senior officer, they claim he "defected".

[LordSlowpoke]

I decided to go on a Twitter run. And according to what I've read, Muammar's got missiles. And is firing them. Can anyone confirm?

Also, posting to follow, yadda yadda yadda.

[olemars]

He's got rockets. Not so many missiles.

[RedKing]

It's night in Libya, so things are kinda quiet for the moment. A member of the NLC managed to make it to Strassbourg to speak before the European Parliament.

His message was basically, "We need help, but not direct military intervention." By which, he seemed to be saying that a no-fly zone is fine, but not boots on the ground. Which I think would be preferable for most of NATO as well. Nobody wants or can afford to be sending boots on the ground.

Problem now is that NATO's reluctant to act without a UN Security Council authorization, and Russia is apparently balking in the SC.

[Phmcw]

We're probably not ready yet anyway.
Russia can't hold the UN indefinitely, NATO would just act ,with full public opinion AND local support, and Russia would win nothing.

[Bouchart]

I don't think any Western power wants to spend their resources in a fight that the rebels will likely win through attrition anyway.  Does anyone honestly think Khadaffi will reclaim his whole country at this point?

And it sets a bad precedent because any number of countries in North Africa/Middle East could have insurrections.

[lemon10]

We're probably not ready yet anyway.
Russia can't hold the UN indefinitely, NATO would just act ,with full public opinion AND local support, and Russia would win nothing.

I could be wrong, but as a member of the security council, they could stop the UN from ever interfering if they wanted too enough.
And i don't think that the US (and by extension NATO) really wants to directly interfere, even with a no-fly zone.

[Bouchart]

As long as Russia is present at the security council meetings, Russia could veto any actions.

The Korean War was started because Russia wasn't present at that meeting.  They'll never make that mistake again.

And Russia specialized in selling outdated military equipment to third world despots and insurgents.  The rise in oil prices is good for them too.  They probably want this to drag on for a while.