Qaddafi's regime fell in Tripoli just before midnight Sunday

[Xavier_Onassis]

I fail to see any real evidence that things got worse.


Sadat was extremely unpopular with the poor in Egypt. He was an aristocrat and catered to the small oligarchy. He was no better for the average Egyptian than Mubarak was, he was simply better at stroking up to the West. Assad is no better than his father, and so far, his father has the higher body count. When Sadat was assassinated, there was no cry for democracy, nor was there anything like that when the first Assad died. Yemen is not an actual country in the way we understand such things: it is a collection of tribes and clans. It is largely illiterate, and the entire country is spaced out on a leaf people chew called qat until noon every day.

It takes a while for democracy to emerge anywhere. It took the UK something like 100 years.

Libya has few people and lots of oil. It could be similar to Qatar or the UAE, which are not all that democratic, but are certainly not oppressive dictatorships.

All in all, the overthrow of Qaddaffi is a good thing. There could be no democracy until he was gone.

[sirs]

Discussing anything with you has proven to be simply a total waste of time.

As I said, Its nice to see the continued effort in avoiding debate, in this, a debate forum.  Bravo

You are irrational and incapable of anything other than "I am still waiting for you to admit that I am right/"

Then we can also add that you pay little to no attention, to what's actually posted.  Here's a hint, never once have I asked such an absurd question

[Xavier_Onassis]

That is ALL you do. Every discussion you have with everyone ends with the same crap.

"I am waiting for you to admit that I am right."

[sirs]

Which again demonstrates how wrong you are.  Let us know when you plan on debating the question posed, in this, a debate forum

[Christians4LessGvt]

British, French, Jordanian, Qatari
special forces battered Qaddafi's compound

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report

August 23, 2011


Tripoli under bombardment

debkafile's military sources report that British, French, Jordanian and Qatari Special Operations forces Tuesday, Aug. 23, spearheaded the rebel "killer strike" on Muammar Qaddafi's regime and Tripoli fortress at Bab al-Azaziya, Tripoli. 

This was the first time Western and Arab ground troops had fought together on the same battlefield in any of the Arab revolts of the last nine months and the first time Arab soldiers took part in a NATO operation.

Our military sources report that the British deployed SAS commandoes and France, 2REP (Groupe des commando parachutiste), which is similar to the US Navy DELTA unit, as well as DINOP commandos. Fighting too were Jordan's Royal Special Forces, specialists (HENNY!) in urban combat and capturing fortified installations like the Qaddafi compound in Tripoli, and the Qatari Special Forces, which were transferred from Benghazi where they guarded rebel Transitional National Council leaders.

According to our military experts, even after getting through into the compound, this combined force faced four obstacles to before reaching its military heart which is largely underground:

1. Because it was too small to carry the two tasks of breaking into the heart of the Bab al-Azaziya complex which covers some 6 square kilometers and at the same time overwhelm Qaddafi's 12th Tank Division also underground, this force needed to be backed by larger trained contingents armed with anti-tank weapons, which would advance into the labyrinth under close air cover from assault helicopters. Britain and France transferred Apaches to Libya two months ago but never used them in Tripoli where they would be vulnerable to Qaddafi's anti-air missiles.

2.   The main body of the rebels to the rear of the combined foreign force was nowhere near being a unified military force. The rebels who took part in the first major push into Tripoli Sunday, Aug. 21, turned out to be mostly Berber tribal fighters from the Nafusa Mountains in the West, divided into small groups of no more than 100, each representing a different village. They have never trained together or acquired experience in urban warfare. NATO imported better-trained fighters by sea from Benghazi and Misrata.

3.  The great black clouds seen over the compound and caused by NATO jet bombardments and anti-tank fire may have looked menacing but they were not evidence of a major battle in or around the compound. And indeed it was soon over. As the rebel forces burst in, there was no sign of Qaddafi himself or his family and commanders.  They were presumed to have fled.

4.  NATO was short of specific intelligence about the military nucleus of Bab al-Aziziya. Most of its key facilities are underground and proof against bombardment. Western alliance warplanes pummelled the compound month after month from March 19. They flattened the surface residential buildings and command centers, but their ordnance never reached the buried facilities. Our military sources say these chambers are interconnected by a network of corridors, some broad enough to accommodate tanks. The network branches out to the sea and locations outside Tripoli.

Sunday, Aug. 21, debkafile's military sources reported that the Qaddafi regime has fallen in Tripoli, but there is quite a way to go before the war is over.
     

[Christians4LessGvt]

Qaddafi flees Tripoli with family.
Guerrilla and/or tribal warfare feared next

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report

August 23, 2011

lMuammar Qaddafi, his sons and military and political elite are reported by debkafile's military sources to have abandoned their Bab al Aziziya fortress early Tuesday, Aug. 23, using his son Saif al-Islam's surreal appearance before foreign reporters earlier in the day to cover their escape.

Our sources believe they exited the compound through one of the underground tunnels of the compound's military complex. But regional intelligence experts are baffled by the enigma of the mysterious sudden disappearance of Qaddafi's divisions overnight. It's as though the ground swallowed them up leaving no trace.

No one knows Qaddafi's destination but informed observers expect him to make for Sebha in southern Libya where the local tribes are loyal to whom and where he established a whole range of subterranean military facilities. And that is where he located Libyan nuclear facilities in 2000, which he later agreed to dismantle. Qaddafi may have equipped a place of asylum at Sebha with military and residential facilities form which to launch a guerilla war against whomsoever takes power in Tripoli and against NATO targets in Libya and Europe, as punishment for his downfall.

Thousands of fighters from the tribes loyal to Qaddafi are reported by debkafile's military sources to have been streaming to the desert town in recent weeks. Prominent among them were members of his own Gaddadfa tribe which numbers some 100,000 members and is based in Sirte, a town lying on the Mediterranean coast in the north between Tripoli and the rebel base of Benghazi. Qaddafi will need the help of tribes other than his own in a region 800 kilometers south of his home town on the fringes of the Sahara, for waging a guerrilla war against the new rulers in Tripoli.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Certainly Tunisia is better off than it was prior to the overthrow of the dictator. There is now free speech, and once tourism returns, as it will, the economy will improve. This is the first moment in which the intent of the rebels has been to establish a democracy. Prior to this, rebellions have been to overthrow a colonial regime, or a leader imposed by a colonial regime, like the Shah in Iran, King Idris in Libya, the French imposed leader in Syria, or one elite by another, as Sadat's plutocracy by the Egyptian military. Mubarak was not a party to the assassination of Sadat, but he was the beneficiary.

In any event, NATO Obama and their allies, like the Qataris played this as well as seems possible, since they are not overtly supporting any particular faction, only the removal of a brutal dictator.

[sirs]

How is that any different then the removal of a brutal dictator, in Saddam?

[Christians4LessGvt]

In any event, NATO Obama and their allies, like the Qataris played this as well as seems possible,
since they are not overtly supporting any particular faction, only the removal of a brutal dictator.

If.....HUGE IF.....HUGE HUGE IF
but if a better regime emerges in Libya Obama will deserve credit.
An Iran like regime could emerge in Libya...would be bad news & Obama should be condemned if this happens.
An Al-Qaeda or Taliban type regime could emerge in Libya and would be bad news...again would be Obama's fault.
We just don't know....yet.
Al-Qaeda or Taliban in charge of Libyan oil would in my opinion be much worse than Qaddafi
because their goals include exporting worldwide terror...Qaddafi was primarily much more of a localized bully

Actually this is a way of war I have been advocating for years.
Iran could be brought to it's knees with the basic same strategy
Iran would take more time, be more troublesome, but it could be done
I gave credit to President Clinton for a similar great strategy in Kosevo
Although I am still unsure we were on the correct side on that war
Still a great way to fight a war...Clinton gets credit....air power....not ground troops.
Use your strength to the ultimate max
Our strength is AIR POWER...
With air power only you cant determine the aftermath
but you can cause calamity & chaos that interupts bad regimes agendas, & most likely bring about regime change
Clinton got rid of Milosevic basically with air power only...with very little loss of American life
Now Obama seemingly has got rid of Qaddafi with basically air power only with very if any loss of US lives.
The downside to this is you never know what will emerge from the rubble....
but still in many cases not a bad strategy with very little risk and saves soldiers lives

[Xavier_Onassis]

How is that any different then the removal of a brutal dictator, in Saddam?

Duh.

It did not involve 3000 Americans dying, or hundreds of thousands of locals being forced into exile, nor a secular civil war that lasted years.

[sirs]

Yea, because the far more needed war in Afghanistan, per Obama & company, is the epitome of no one dying, no one forced into exile, and no one still battling each other for control

[Xavier_Onassis]

Might I remind you that Obama did not start the war in Afghanistan? He did, however, involve the US in Libya, and it has turned out to have been a wise choice this far. Obama finally got rid of Bin Laden, and I certainly hope we leave Afghanistan soon, as there is little chance that we will be willing or able to spend the time and money necessary to turn Afghanistan into a modern state and dependable ally. The bigger problem is Pakistan, anyway, and there is NO WAY we can solve that by force of arms.

[sirs]

Might I remind you that Obama made it crystal clear, on the campaign trail, that Afghanistan was where U.S. forces needed to be (in other words, had 911 occured under Obama, he WOULD have started a war in Afghanistan)

Might I remind you the purpose of our effort in Iraq, is largely along the same lines as our apparent involvement in Lybia, just with far less direct U.S. interest (read terrorist camps/training)

Which brings us back to the original position that's been refuted, you can't demean Bush & Iraq, for loss of life and a protracted military involvement, then try to give Obama & Afghanistan a pass for the same.  That would be grossly hypocritical 

[R.R.]

Obama finally got rid of Bin Laden

Obama didn't do jack squat. Our Navy Seals got bin Laden, not Obama. Obama was on the frinkin golf course, and I have seen videos of his swing - he sucks.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The Seals would never have carried out that raid without Obama's orders and you bloody well know that.
Juniorbush could have done the same thing, but for seven years, he did not.