US gunships blast Gaddafi's troops

US gunships blast Gaddafi's troops
Tue Mar 29, 2011 10



The US has used AC-130 gunships and A-10 Thunderbolt tankbusters against Moamar Gaddafi's troops in Libya, the Pentagon has confirmed.

Vice Admiral Bill Gortney confirmed the use of the ground attack aircraft this morning but denied the US was directly supporting rebel fighters.

The AC-130 gunship is a heavily modified Hercules transport plane armed with 20mm, 40mm and 105mm cannons. The A-10 is designed for close air support, especially against tanks and armoured vehicles, and carries a multi-barrelled 30mm cannon which can fire nearly 4,000 rounds a minute.

Unlike the long-range guided missile attacks that have targeted command centres and anti-aircraft defences, both aircraft are designed for close-range assaults against ground troops.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/29/3176341.htm?section=justin

-------------

You wanted your 'no-fly' zone....now we escalate to the 'no-drive' zone portion of the war.

What? You thought it was over - it's just begun.

. . . you love the smell of cyber napalm in the morning.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

so we can revel like school children in it awesome power.

very much... :sarcasm:

be brought into use as it now has been:

Statement on the potential use of depleted uranium in Libya
At the time of writing there is no definitive evidence that depleted uranium munitions have been used in joint US, UK, French and Italian attacks on Libya. However there is potential for them to be used and ICBUW reminds belligerents of their obligations under IHL. The statement is available in English, Italian and French.
21 March 2011 - ICBUW

ICBUW is concerned that the current use of US Marine Corps AV-8B Harrier ground attack aircraft could lead to DU contamination should their cannon be deployed against ground targets. ICBUW is also concerned that the potential for contamination may increase significantly as the conflict develops if US Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt ground attack aircraft are deployed.

The majority of platforms that fire DU are land-based, although some air and sea-based platforms have also been developed. The only air-based platforms currently in service with the countries currently involved in the conflict are the US A-10 Thunderbolt and the AV-8B Harrier.

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/396.html

IIRC, PressTV was excoriated here yesterday for suggesting that DU was being used by the US. Oops.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x757773

thanks for the links ferrari. utterly disgusting.

I remember that thread, it was rightfully excoriated and locked.

:hi:

Both of the main platforms for DU are now in use.

I certainly hope that they're not being used in Libya. I assume that the cannons can use other munitions.

But to be truthful, I have zero confidence that our military will not use DU.

And I applaud its use.

Or maybe it was Spooky, but I think that was the C-43 and the 130 was Puff. It certainly is not a new invention.

But I read somewhere that it can cover every square inch on a football field in like .3 seconds or something crazy like that. It's a flying Gatling gun on steroids.

My god this is absurd already. Either declare war against Libya or stop this shit.

They should make me Secretary of State - I can do this jarb.

upon massed troops: the slaughter inflicted would surely be in horrifyingly unimaginable proportions. :patriot:

our strength is in our function, not our construction

n/t.

:puke:

human gets treated humanely and which gets treated like a bad dog? Good fucking grief.

US gunships mark change of tactic in Libya air strikes

The US has been giving the impression that it has backed away from the bombing campaign in Libya. It has now emerged that while the initial intensity of the high-altitude air strikes and cruise missile attacks has diminished, the US has not let up. In a dramatic and significant escalation of the assault on Gaddafi's forces, the US has deployed low-flying, heavily-armed aircraft against Libyan armour.

It is a deployment far removed from the initial concept of a "no-fly" zone.

The aircraft are better suited than high-flying fighter bombers to attack targets in built-up areas without so much risk of civilian casualties, defence officials say. However, their sheer firepower can lead to civilian deaths as their attacks on the Iraqi city of Falluja after the 2003 invasion of Iraq demonstrated.

The use of the close air support aircraft has fuelled claims that the US is actively co-ordinating tactics with the rebels. Aware of the controversy any such admission could unleash, Gortney, director of the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the US actions were in support of the UN-backed resolutions to protect Libyan civilians. "We're not in direct support of the opposition, that's not part of our mandate, and we're not co-ordinating with the opposition," he added. He described the US strategy as one of continuing "to pressure them where we think it's going to give us the best effect".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/29/gunships-mark-change-tactic-libya

it is of great importance to achieve air superiority in battle
air supremacy nearly promises victory
we have entered another war
though it is for the benefit of commerce across the mediterranean,
i think the west would like an excuse to smash qaddafi just for his past misbehavior
neolibs are smarter than neocons and they work well with allies
we are seeing the empire run more efficiently these last two years
relax and enjoy the petroleum products

Do we have to wait for them to destroy the Ho Chi Minh trail?

Then see what happens.

could take awhile

For them, Libya needs to be a 'no go zone.'

Eternal.

"What? You thought it was over - it's just begun."

You then believe this conflict will take a long time? How long, and upon what is the answer predicated on?

1: a long wandering or voyage usually marked by many changes of fortune

Conjecture: An opinion with no basis on which it is predicated.

:shrug:

Maybe we'll get lucky and Moe's head will end up on a stick, but if not, we'll be saying "Months not years".


NO MORE FUCKING WARS!!!

What is so fucking hard to understand about that? Haven't we learned anything?

Doing his share to hype the Invasion of Iraq, Donald Rumsfeld's response to the "How Long" question:
"*Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: "It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."

That was in 2003,
and we are STILL in Iraq with a 50,000+ Occupying Force in 2011 with NO end in sight.

No wimpy "No Fly Zone" for US.
Frankly, I was embarrassed when they first cracked the NEW WAR egg with a No Fly Zone.
Those are strictly for Light Weights, and an insult to the mightiest Superpower on the planet.
Thank God that was only scam to get things really rolling.

NOW, we got"Spookies" with Gatling Guns and Cannons blasting Brown People into hamburger faster than you can count them!
Now THATS what I am Talking About!
Looks like all those brown people will LEARN to FEAR our Corporations The HARD WAY! LOL!


USA!...USA!...USA!
No war too small to spend out children's money on!
:patriot:

WAR WAR WAR!



> signed

The warparty

Not to worry, this is humanitarian cannon fire.

that town has taken a real beating...

that moves. And if Qaddafi sticks his head up, accidentally fire a few rounds at him.