Tripoli facing three-sided advance by Libyan rebels

Source: The Guardian

Muammar Gaddafi's 41-year grip on power in Libya looked to be loosening on Friday night, with the capital facing rebel advances from three sides after opposition forces from the once-besieged town of Misrata dramatically broke out to seize Zlitan in the east.

With fresh operations launched to clear the last pro-Gaddafi troops out of the town of Zawiyah, 30 miles west of Tripoli, rebels now have the main coastal road under pressure on both sides of Tripoli and it is also under threat from the Nafusa mountains.

As the stranglehold on the capital grows, plans are being made to evacuate the last remaining foreign workers by sea.

It was a day of heavy street fighting in Zlitan, where rebels came up against tanks and troops from the 32nd brigade commanded by Khamis Gaddafi. Thirty-five rebel troops were killed and scores more injured.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/19/tripoli-facing-advance-libya-rebels

---

Wow, this is big. Power to the people!

Are they not also Libyans? Would you say that the others should give up to stop massive bloodshed?

It sickens me that we are interfering in another country's civil war. Obviously the Libyans are not all of one mind, and a sizable number of them like the government they have. I think they should determine their future, not US bombs.

... the ones that started massacring those who didn't?

Should a government just roll over any time someone wants it gone? What were they going to do? Obviously they had enough support to have their military fight for them, unlike the Egyptians.

Neoliberals make money killing, murdering wholesale, if the international community was compelled to take a side during a civil war, it would mean the end of them, wholesale.

The weapons trade would've been jumping with glee at the prospect of a decades long war in Libya, which by all accounts would've been the outcome given the resilience of the rebels and how they simply don't want to stand down until their tyrant is removed.

There are a handful or more civil wars currently going on in Africa. If the international community actually gave a shit about wholesale slaughter of people, they'd intervene. Hopefully this sets a precedent. I believe that all innocent people should be helped.

The conscripted army refused to slaughter their countrymen. The "loyalists" are mostly mercenaries, Blackwater-types. One defected officer even states that the morale is terrible on the remaining elements of the Libyan Army still under Gaddafi's control and he's using the mercs to force them to fight.

if such 'government' is LEGITIMATE or not (I know it's such a silly idea...) :sarcasm:

Nah...

Better start shooting at the crowds who show just a glimpse of 'protesting' and 'demanding' a 42-year long bloody & torturing tyrant to step down...

Always worked (so far), but surprise-surprise, not THIS time (so it seems...).

This place has become a real cesspool.

http://english.aljazeera.net//news/africa/2011/08/2011819145519307139.html


Local residents celebrate after Libyan rebel fighters drove Gaddafi forces from Gharyan, south of Tripoli

Libya's opposition fighters have captured the city of Zlitan, in a deepening push towards the capital, Tripoli, and a further threat to the forces of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

The Al Jazeera correspondent said that it's more than two months since they have been stuck on the outskirt of Zlitan but they wanted to take this town. "It was a major block because there wasn't overall support by the people of Zlitan initially. Those civilians who may have been Gaddafi supporters were treated well by the opposition.

"It's a strategic town, they want to advance on to Tripoli, now they could do very quickly. They have a clear run on this coastal road of almost 60km."

Az Zawiya was one of the first cities to rise up against the Gaddafi regime when the Libyan revolt began in mid-February on the heels of the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. Protests were quickly crushed by the Gaddafi regime, even going as far as razing a local mosque in the main square that rebels used as a meeting point and makeshift hospital.

Say "NO!" to the IMF and Global Corporations,
and get ready for some Freedom Bombs!



If you're not FOR the New WAR in Libya,
you're WITH The Communists AlQaeda The Terrorists Saddam Qaddafi!!!

between having a "V" avatar and mocking the use of force to overthrow a tyrannical government? Really?

I swear people were supporting the rebels up until that point. But there really was no other entity that could've helped them. Had western states sat idly by I'm sure that this thing would still be ongoing, and by now at least some of those supposed supporters might be considering an intervention phase, but I suspect it'd have to get to the level of Sarajevo before anyone started giving a crap and speaking about it vocally.

I don't support the replacing of sovereign governments with NeoLiberal Disaster Capitalists.
Just because "Gaddafi is BAD" doesn't mean that his replacement is "GOOD",
even if our Media calls them "The REBELS".
or haven't you been paying attention over the last 40 years?
Did what happened in Iraq ("Saddam BAD EVIL Dictator") fly completely over your head?

Do you remember that just a couple of years ago, Gaddafi was Honored by the Obama White House as a visiting Foreign Dignitary...Full Red Carpet Treatment?

Do you also know that since that time, Gaddifi demanded and received a BIGGER cut of Oil Profits?

Do you know that Gaddifi has recently been talking about "Nationalizing" the Libyan Oil Companies?
(THAT is a SURE way to get a whole BIG BATCH of Freedom Bombs!)

Why Gaddafi is suddenly the NEW Boogieman


Are you able to supply a cogent rebuttal to ANY of these KNOWN facts:


Can you contradict ANY of the above statements?

Do you know WHO is funding "The Rebels"?
Did you know that our CIA has admitted to having "boots on the ground in Libya months BEFORE the "Uprising"?
Do you know WHAT "deals" have already been made with "The Rebels"
Do you KNOW who "The Rebels" are?

And finally,
do you TRUST our Media to honestly give you ANY of those answers?

I proudly STAND by my avatar.
I long ago left the World of Binary Thinking, and started looking at the History of US Military Involvements of the last 40 years.
If YOU do the same, you can see the same pattern replayed over & over again.

You should read:
The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein
http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine

...and then get back to me,
Or do you really want to believe that this is ALL a BIG COINCIDENCE.
The choice is yours.



If you're not FOR the New WAR in Libya,
you're WITH The Communists AlQaeda The Terrorists Saddam Qaddafi!!!




Solidarity!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This revolution has been filmed and blogged about at the grass roots level since Day 1. If you can convince yourself it's fake or manipulated in any way, I'm afraid I can't I can't add to that.

Ultimately, you have to take responsibility for the results of your proposals. The Libyans did what your avatar would want them to do. You would leave those accountants and shopkeepers at the mercy of heavy weaponry and tens of thousands of highly armed foreign mercenaries with billions in resources. We saw the beginnings of that that campaign and the intentions in unimpeachable terms.

The right-wingers sometimes talk about liberals as hating America so much that they are unable to find anything of merit in American actions. I don't it's true of Democrats in general. But if you can talk your way into that position, apparently it's true of you.

where the net was off and the number of twitter users before this "rebellion" was too small to be measured.

You really don't need to be convinced of anything. The script will play out.

You are clearly out of touch with what is happening in Libya, and it's disgusting to say the least.

it wouldn't have to keep being explained over and over and over.

There may be some, of course, hell, McCain is, but I mean, on these forums and in my discussions with pro-rebel advocates.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/27/politics/main20036923.shtml

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704823004576192852331022690.html

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/11/daniel-pipes-help-libyas-opposition/

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/03/13/150322/kristol-war-libya/



Fuck this pnac war. you can go peddle your nonsense to someone more gullible.

you were obviously just talking about "people who post on these forums"?

First time.

So, it's not the same.

Rebels who are dying to overthrow a tyrannical state or so called progressives who occasionally play cheerleader to tyrants?

Or a countries leader not playing by the corporatist agenda?

Supporting the tyrant against the people is the antithesis of everything that being a progressive stands for.

The military intervention is almost entirely European, are you suggesting France, Italy and the UK all bow down to a Washington think tank?

it's not even a word, it's a phrase.

the "rebels" were bought long ago, years ago.

http://bit.ly/pRqQtg

Welcome back, btw, I dunno how you evaded the ban but I suspect you'll be gone soon enough (OK, you might last another few years, but who knows).

win their freedom, it is actually the opposite, they want to have the "new" leaders dependent on them for their "freedom" which usually cost a lot more then the original agreements.

Strange way of defining helping people for freedom. Switching masters is not freedom.

:rofl:

The guy was opening trade up.

It would illogical not to. If by selling your oil creates a profit and by investing in other options does the same why wouldn't his country do it?

I take it you have no investments?

Assets that belong to the Libyan people.

If you're really anti-imperialist you would not be a pawn to imperialists.

You would not offer Russia a place to build a naval base.

You would not offer oil companies 30+ year leases with extremely favorable profits.

1. Seems the majority of Libyan assets were spent on the people.
2. Pawn of the Imperialist? Like the "rebels".
3. If you are negotiating a base and not forced to have one after be invaded, your not a pawn. (See Iraq, Afghanistan)
4. Libya has some the highest taxes on oil in the world. They are not giving their oil away unlike the "new government" has already said they will favor countries who helped in the violent coup.

At least try to come up with a good argument next time.

I pray you drive out the foreign invaders trying to destroy and steal your natural resources. Stay strong my African brother

This is an uprising of the Hatfields against the McCoys, Qaddafi is bad enough as it is, and the "rebels" promise no improvement.

:rofl:

source: Dumfries & Galloway Standard
Aug 19 2011

John Corrie, of Tongland near Kirkcudbright, was one of four ex-MEPs who have just got back from a four day fact-finding visit to Tripoli on behalf of the European Parliament.

...

Mr Corrie has doubts whether rebel forces will ever be able to overthrow the Gaddafi regime which is currently bearing the brunt of attacks by NATO.

...


“I can’t see him moving and I can’t see the rebels having the strength. They may take a village, but Gaddafi will push them back out again as he has the tanks and the weaponry.”

Mr Corrie has vast experience of African affairs from his time in the European Parliament and will return to the country next month for talks with the rebels.

http://www.dgstandard.co.uk/dumfries-news/local-news-dumfries/local-news-dumfriesshire/2011/08/19/tongland-man-says-gaddafi-totally-underestimated-51311-29259954/

Does Mr Corrie know what such an arms embargo does to any 'army' that keeps shooting in the desert sands?

It's not rocket science, really...

LAUGH
OUT
LOUD

Tell me, when Gadaffi is hung like and disemboweled like a 21st century Mussolini, will you send flowers to his funeral?

"African Brother"? You know that North Africans are CAUCASIANS, right?

Lolz African Brother....hahahahahaha

'Stay strong Gaddafi... my African brother'

Ugh.

(And I doubt that Gaddafi would consider himself as African.)

but Gaddafi definitely does consider himself to be African and is very interested in African unity and pan-Africanism in general. Facts and all that...

He's used ethnic battles before to pit black Africans against Arab Africans, and the Green Book is very denigrating of Black Africans. He has threatened to "open the floodgates" of black African migration to Europe if he wasn't paid bribery money (I think it was $5 billion or something).

The dude is a racist pedophile rapist (if you can go by his leading female body guard who defected early on and came out with a skathing video about how he'd order boys and girls to come to his lair to rape them).

Does this site have any standards at all?

Projecting much?

Or the 'foreign invaders' must be your poor African brothers gaddafi exploits as 'mercenaries' not even bothering to pay them for risking their lives???

Please explain... :cry:

The old dinars are almost worthless, particularly when you're a black African. It's so cruel and they're so foolish for buying into his crap.

:rofl:

:shrug:

Nope.

but only some "tyrants" does it attempt to overthrow. only the ones not completely in its pocket.

Libya is an unknown variable. Some say it's racists, some say it's Al-Queada, some say it's islamists.

But there's never even room for "hey maybe they're fucking people who want freedom."

Nope, never room for that possibility.

Fucking vile.

Um, no.

Maybe they'll also get the released Lockerbie guy too, who Scotland told us had only a few months left to live (and is still holding pro-Gaddafi rallies.)

Source: Rasmussen Reports


Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Voter support for continued military action in Libya continues to fall along with the number of voters who think dictator Moammar Gaddafi will be removed from power as a result.

...

Support for continued military action in Libya is at a new low, down from 24% in July and 26% in June. This also marks the first time a majority of voters oppose continued military action in the North African nation.

...

Most Americans also want to bring home U.S. troops from Afghanistan within a year as few Americans think we have a clearly defined mission anymore in that troubled country.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2011/20_now_support_u_s_military_action_in_libya

...because they sure are looking at their chosen side in this conflict through some rose-colored glasses.

This is a fight between Nationalists(Qaddafi's side) and the formerly dis-empowered royalists(the Benghazi rebels). The royalists did not exactly run Libya like the shining beacon of democracy you would have hoped. It was a dynasty after all.
If you are among those who are thinking the fall of Tripoli will in-itself be a good thing for Libya. you are thinking wrong. Whichever side wins will result in the other becoming disenfranchised unless the UN acts in good faith to ensure proper representation. NATO has taken it upon themselves to run the show instead of involving the rest of the world, or you know, AFRICA. They are obviously not acting in good faith as they have already made clear that they want to appoint the new government themselves rather than have a real democracy where people actually vote for their leadership. They have set their designs on the kin of the former royalty, who were just English puppets in the first place.

The nationalists overthrew the monarchy because they were sick of living under a king, not unlike the United States. In the following decades, Libya has not done well, no thanks to the US and NATO, so it is now time for another revolution. But will what comes next be good for the country? Not if the State Department and the rest of NATO have anything to do with it. They just want to appoint people in the same broken system where leaders passively sat by taking bribes from the US and UK as their countries' oil was pumped out for a song.

A young Benghazi rebel holding up a picture of King Irdis


There will not be liberty, or democracy, or human rights, or any of that pretty stuff if people do not get their head out of the sand about what is going on.

They're overthrowing the royalty that they've had for so long.

I'm sorry to break it to you but the entire conflict is not supported by one single entity or group.

They might wind up installing some king, who knows, but I find that unlikely. It will only happen if there is a political vacuum like Iran. I don't see that, because they lived under a tyrant for so long it'd be amusing if they chose the same fucking system.

This is not some kind of secret. NATO has already stated their plan. They will appoint who they want. No election, no Democracy. So there is no point in saying "who knows" as it is wasted speculation. They will appoint who they want just as the UK did before and damn most of Libya and the African Union. What is really ironic, is that if this was 1969, most of the people here would probably be cheering Gaddafi and the Nationalists(except they would call them rebels, because that's sexier) on as King Idris was no better. "Who knows? Maybe Qaddafi would be good" they would have said. Never mind democracy.

Also, you are not breaking anything to me. I am aware that people outside the royal family are fighting the Nationalists. The world is becoming more connected with the speed of communications. The isolationism of Pan-Arabism is becoming less and less attractive. Especially among young people who are eager to become part of the first world. Most of the older people who lived under post Ottoman European oppression are now dead so there is less bitterness against the West.

So there will be an era of revolutions in the Arab world, just like in the 60's. And just like in 60's there is some good and bad in it. But it is mostly going to be bad if the global military/industrial powerhouses(us,uk,fr,ru and soon cn) continue to bully their way into installing unelected puppets.

The course is very much set for this and people posting on a site called "Democratic" Underground should not be cheering for it. It is possible to support the Arab revolutions and be against NATO and the State department's designs which is the opposite of democracy. It is not a binary decision.

What part of a unelected governing authority based out of one of two population centers in the country being given full recognition as the ruling body of the entire country sounds democratic to you? There is no hint of any serious involvement of the larger Libyan population. This is a very much the same thing as before. I am not sure how you think it will be different this time, if I am reading your statement correctly in assuming that you do.


Obama, Clinton, Cameron and Sarkozy don't need to actually stand in front of podium and say "I don't want democracy in Libya!!!" obviously but their current positions very much show that. So again I am not sure what you two want as far as links go.

The history of the US and European powers does not bode well for the little country either. The guy who is in line to be prime minister spent most of his career championing oil privatization. If you know a little bit about world politics, you know that is never a good sign for a country. Check out this interview and listen to this guy's answers. He gives a perspective that is different from "THE SUPERPOWERS ARE INFALLIBLE AND KNOW WHAT IS BEST FOR YOU ARABS" viewpoint that is constantly being spouted on Fox, CNN et al. Even the interviewer smacks of it a little. But the guy keeps his cool and gives serous answers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9436093.stm

First of all, the leaders in Benghazi were not appointed by NATO; they have emerged among the Libyan people there. No, it wasn't a democratic process, but they're in the middle of fighting a war. It really isn't practical to arrange an election when there's fighting in the streets and you're evacuating people while under bombardment; and the cities and towns you could include changed day by day.

Secondly, that's an interim government. You claimed that NATO has already said they will appoint someone. You said "This is not some kind of secret. NATO has already stated their plan. They will appoint who they want. No election, no Democracy". Yes, what I want is a link that shows that 'this is not some kind of secret', and that 'NATO has already stated the plan'.

No offence, but you haven't even tried to answer my question and back up your assertion.

seized power (and money) 40-something-years ago.

For most of their lives, they've known nothing BUT a brutal, ruthless KING.... uh, DICKTATOR.

What's the diff?

I hope the second half of my response to the other poster is an adequate answer to that.

There's nothing we can do or write that will change anything to the tragic situation.

But, for me, just seeing that billionnaire killer mofo get what he's been asking for for so long is reason enough to party.

Here's to hoping it will last. If it doesn't, well, at least one of these loathsome plutocrats and his photo-op's Court finally got what they deserve...

And represents us in NATO and the UN. Democracy is good enough for us but not for Arabs? I wish Americans would share some of the ire they have for tinpot puppets with their own politicians who install them.

PS - The US is very much in the position to set things right and is far from being a spectator. But it is not. It is actively working against a democratic solution in Libya.

PPS - By the way Qaddafi was tolerated so long by the US and EU because he eventually did what King Irdis did. Which is allow foreign extraction of oil in central Libya for comparatively little compensation and largely enriched himself, his tribe and his allies. That is EXACTLY what King Irdis did and it too eventually led to the majority rebelling against him and his ouster.

Total fabrication.

I can keep up with your responses in the other line. You don't have to spam my every post with one-liners.