Skip to comments.
NATO admits mistakenly striking Libyan opposition forces
CNN ^
| June 18, 2011
| CNN Wire Staff
Posted on 06/18/2011 1:52:52 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
In its statement, NATO said that "a column of military vehicles, including tanks," were spotted Thursday around al-Brega where Gadhafi forces "had recently been operating." During what it called "a particularly complex and fluid battle scenario," leaders in the military alliance ordered a strike after determining these vehicles posed "a threat to civilians."
(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gaddafi; hostilities; libya; missioncreep; nato; noflyzone; obamawar; oup; r2p; warpowers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
To: Berlin_Freeper
2
posted on
06/18/2011 1:58:14 PM PDT
by
Psalm 144
(Voodoo Republicans: Don't read their lips - watch their hands.)
To: Berlin_Freeper
Bring our boys and aircraft home!!!
3
posted on
06/18/2011 1:58:21 PM PDT
by
Paperdoll
(NO MORE BUSHS!)
To: Berlin_Freeper
And to think that these guys were actually going to have to fight the Russians if WW3 broke out.
4
posted on
06/18/2011 1:59:17 PM PDT
by
Farmer Dean
(stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
To: Berlin_Freeper
Good start,that is how you kill a billion of them,a few at a time.
5
posted on
06/18/2011 2:00:11 PM PDT
by
Cheetahcat
( November 4 2008 ,A date that will live in Infamy.)
To: Berlin_Freeper
To: Berlin_Freeper
They could not possibly have injured anyone since we are not engaged in “hostilities”.
7
posted on
06/18/2011 2:01:48 PM PDT
by
P-Marlowe
(LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
To: Berlin_Freeper
8
posted on
06/18/2011 2:02:03 PM PDT
by
John W
(Natural-born US citizen since 1955)
To: Berlin_Freeper
Which will happen on occaision when ‘friendly’ ground forces are not accompanied by a forward air controller. Sometimes it even happens when the ARE with a FAC. I’m guessing NATO pilots only have a vague idea as to exactly where the so-called frontlines are, making close air support next to impossible.
9
posted on
06/18/2011 2:02:35 PM PDT
by
Tallguy
(You can safely ignore anything that precedes the word "But"...)
To: Berlin_Freeper
10
posted on
06/18/2011 2:04:09 PM PDT
by
xjcsa
(Ridiculing the ridiculous since the day I was born.)
To: Berlin_Freeper
Comedy of errors with real lives.
How come the left isn’t screaming about these innocents dying?
11
posted on
06/18/2011 2:05:09 PM PDT
by
Vendome
("Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it anyway")
To: John W
Interesting parallel there, given that Alfred Nobel started by blowing s*** up.
12
posted on
06/18/2011 2:05:29 PM PDT
by
Slings and Arrows
(You can't have Ingsoc without an Emmanuel Goldstein.)
To: Tallguy
Considering that the original stated purpose of NATO intervention was to protect the lives of the rebels against Quaddafi, that explanation won't wash.
This is failure in the making.
To: Berlin_Freeper
Well works for me.
Didn´t Nato say they want to protect civillians?
And a rebel with a gun is no civillian.
But of course since we play air force for the rebels (because this is what we do) i guess Nato regrets it.
To: hinckley buzzard
It ‘washes’ if the stated purpose of our Libyan-intervention (humanitarian) is a bunch of BS — which it is. The reason for the intervention is the security of the oil fields. Once the rebellion started our European allies have done what they have done repeatedly in the past where Africa is concerned — throw in with the side most likely to be able to guarantee safe extraction of the mineral resources.
The irony is that Republican administrations are always harried by the “No Blood for Oil” slogan. But this is truly a case for it.
15
posted on
06/18/2011 2:32:24 PM PDT
by
Tallguy
(You can safely ignore anything that precedes the word "But"...)
To: Tallguy
That's because you can't equip a camel or a donkey with IFF.
Boy! We sure are protecting those ‘civilians’ against getting slaughtered aren't we?
16
posted on
06/18/2011 3:05:43 PM PDT
by
240B
(he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
To: Tallguy
It washes if the stated purpose of our Libyan-intervention (humanitarian) is a bunch of BS which it is. The reason for the intervention is the security of the oil fields. Once the rebellion started our European allies have done what they have done repeatedly in the past where Africa is concerned throw in with the side most likely to be able to guarantee safe extraction of the mineral resources.
The irony is that Republican administrations are always harried by the No Blood for Oil slogan. But this is truly a case for it.
Good observation.
But now comes the ultimate “bluff”
Only “half of europe” supported this.
This means in other words regardless who wins “we” will get our oil.
If nato wins the rebels will sell it to britain, france...
If gadaffi wins he will sell it to germany (because they didn´t vote for the bombing).
But anyway europe will get its oil.
Because after its bought the EU can (and will do) transfer it so everyone gets his fair share of the oil.
To: Berlin_Freeper
NATO admits mistakenly striking Libyan opposition forces Oh well, kind of like Bosnia/Serbia. Yawnnnnn.
18
posted on
06/18/2011 3:14:27 PM PDT
by
FreeMaine
(America unite and kick Maine out of the Union.)
To: Berlin_Freeper
19
posted on
06/18/2011 3:25:28 PM PDT
by
Iron Munro
(Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster - Sun Tzu)
To: Berlin_Freeper
Well, I’m sure the bombing was done without any hostility.
20
posted on
06/18/2011 3:29:17 PM PDT
by
wildbill
(You're just jealous because the Voices talk only to me.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson