Libya Crisis

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
Libya is making news again as another breeding ground for IS. It's being described as critical for European security as to do nothing would be to allow the establishment of IS similar to Iraq only across the Med from the shores of Southern Europe. IS has already made gains in the country.

Isis will reach Med within two months ‘unless West intervenes’ | The Times
IS strengthens presence on Libyan coast | Middle East Eye

Italy has already said they would be prepared to fight as part of an international coalition to help strike IS targets. They've even offered to lead if rival factions inside Libya could be convinced to cease fighting.

Italy 'Ready to Fight' in Libya if Needed, Foreign Minister Says

Following air strikes from the Egyptian Air Force in retaliation for the beheading of 21 Egyptian citizens (christians), Egypt has called for international action to help contain the spread of IS in Libya. However the Libyan Government strongly condemned the action deeming it an assault on Libyan sovereignty.

BBC News - Islamic State: Egypt urges international intervention in Libya
Egypt says it has bombed militants in Libya - IHS Jane's 360
 

BlueRose

New Member
This is a bad situation all together. Overall less stability than when Gaddafi was in power. You have all sorts of militias running around. You have the Libyan Parliament, New GNC, and the Shura Council of Benghazi Revolutionaries(Including ISIL) fighting amongst themselves.

I don't see this conflict resolving anytime soon, this is another fractured country like Syria. Fortunately, I don't see this conflict being as brutal as the one in Syria. Though, blood is blood no matter the amount. Even if the west starts training, supplying and even doing air raids against ISIL, I foresee not much of a result. In the future interference should be limited, cause it seems all you get from it is a bunch of splinter cells.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
This is a bad situation all together. Overall less stability than when Gaddafi was in power. You have all sorts of militias running around. You have the Libyan Parliament, New GNC, and the Shura Council of Benghazi Revolutionaries(Including ISIL) fighting amongst themselves.

I don't see this conflict resolving anytime soon, this is another fractured country like Syria. Fortunately, I don't see this conflict being as brutal as the one in Syria. Though, blood is blood no matter the amount. Even if the west starts training, supplying and even doing air raids against ISIL, I foresee not much of a result. In the future interference should be limited, cause it seems all you get from it is a bunch of splinter cells.
A sad state of affairs when Gaddafi, Saddam, and Assad seem to be better options than what we have now.
 

BlueRose

New Member
A sad state of affairs when Gaddafi, Saddam, and Assad seem to be better options than what we have now.
Agreed, I just hope it's a lesson for less intervention. I just hope everyone can come to some sort of consensus on how to proceed in the future.
 

Musashi_kenshin

Well-Known Member
Agreed, I just hope it's a lesson for less intervention.
Yes, it would have been so much better if we had let Gaddafi burn Cyrenaica and massacre everyone there - which is exactly what he promised to do after the rebellion kicked off.

Sometimes we're stuck between a rock and a hard place when choosing what to do when problems like this come up. It's a lot easier to do nothing than make a difficult choice. I think at the time we were justified to decide to try to stop a crazy dictator commit genocide to stop opposition to his rule. The fact the situation isn't peaceful now doesn't mean we should always watch from the sidelines as countries burn to the ground.

Furthermore, I should point out that one reason Syria is in such a mess is because we didn't take any military action and have largely just stood by and watched. There is an argument - which may or may not be correct - that attacking Assad with naval/airstrikes early on (especially after the gas attacks) could have convinced the military to switch sides and/or depose him. At that time the secular/non-extremist rebel movements had credibility and could have profited from outside intervention. Now it's much too late for that because the Opposition is fragmented and extremist Islamist groups are the most powerful.
 

BlueRose

New Member
Yes, it would have been so much better if we had let Gaddafi burn Cyrenaica and massacre everyone there - which is exactly what he promised to do after the rebellion kicked off.

Sometimes we're stuck between a rock and a hard place when choosing what to do when problems like this come up. It's a lot easier to do nothing than make a difficult choice. I think at the time we were justified to decide to try to stop a crazy dictator commit genocide to stop opposition to his rule. The fact the situation isn't peaceful now doesn't mean we should always watch from the sidelines as countries burn to the ground.

Furthermore, I should point out that one reason Syria is in such a mess is because we didn't take any military action and have largely just stood by and watched. There is an argument - which may or may not be correct - that attacking Assad with naval/airstrikes early on (especially after the gas attacks) could have convinced the military to switch sides and/or depose him. At that time the secular/non-extremist rebel movements had credibility and could have profited from outside intervention. Now it's much too late for that because the Opposition is fragmented and extremist Islamist groups are the most powerful.
I can somewhat agree with your sentiments here. It's hard to watch from the sidelines from any of this. I would support the idea of airstrikes, and localized special operations in Libya and other hot spots. It is far too late, even for Libya at this point. Containment is the only thing available for now, full on invasion isn't gonna do much. We've seen this in Iraq and Afghanistan, though it was necessary to do something in those situations. What we can do though, is try to prevent this type of thing from happening in other Middle Eastern countries, especially with the knowledge we have now.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
A sad state of affairs when Gaddafi, Saddam, and Assad seem to be better options than what we have now.
I think that's confirmed, yet again the West is meddling and going for regime change and making a bigger mess than what was there before. Why we can't just leave the Middle East alone I do not know, but it's been nearly a century of mistakes and blunders, when will we learn.
 

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
Catch 22. If you don't go in then you get flak for standing and watching as the dictator massacres his population with indiscriminate attacks and you also get flak for getting involved and not doing the job properly. A job which is crazy hard to do because the ME is how it is.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I think that's confirmed, yet again the West is meddling and going for regime change and making a bigger mess than what was there before. Why we can't just leave the Middle East alone I do not know, but it's been nearly a century of mistakes and blunders, when will we learn.
The ME will be left alone once an alternative to fossil fuels emerges. When this occurs, the ME will be a no-go zone, in both directions.
 

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
The ME will be left alone once an alternative to fossil fuels emerges. When this occurs, the ME will be a no-go zone, in both directions.
Very much this. But that's a seriously long time.

In other news, Italy is contemplating intervention in Libya in the form of ground forces. Presumably air strikes would end up being utilised.

Italy Mulls Intervention in Libya to Halt Islamic State - Bloomberg Business

Italy’s government will brief parliament this week on the deteriorating situation in Libya as Prime Minister Matteo Renzi considers military intervention to halt the advance of Islamic State on his Mediterranean doorstep.

Italy is ready to send more than 5,000 soldiers under a United Nations mandate to stop Islamic State, “which is now 350 kilometers from our shores,” Foreign Minister Roberta Pinotti said in an interview published Sunday in newspaper Il Messaggero. “We’ve been discussing it for months, but now the need for intervention has become urgent.

...

“From a strategic point of view, Libya is crucial for Italy,” said Nicoletta Pirozzi, senior research fellow specialized in EU-Africa relations at the Institute for International Affairs in Rome. “It’s an energy security issue, it’s a immigration and internal security issue, and it’s fast becoming a terrorism issue, with direct threats leveled at it.”

Renzi, who brought up Libya at last week’s European Union summit, said Monday that Italy will only consider intervention with the consent of the UN Security Council, softening the tone of remarks made over the weekend by fellow cabinet members.
 

Musashi_kenshin

Well-Known Member
I think that's confirmed, yet again the West is meddling and going for regime change and making a bigger mess than what was there before.
Ah, yes, meddling in things that don't concern us. Much like what Lord Hallifax was saying in 1940. Would have been so much better to leave Hitler alone and end up with a lot more dead Jews. Same thing in Libya, just replace Hitler with Gaddafi and the Jews with Cyrenacia.

But I know some people on this forum are extremely worried about their careers/income and don't really care about anything else.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
That's a big step there by Italy, if this goes through.

The situation with refugees across the Med is causing huge problems for the Italian govt, under operation 'Triton'.

Wonder if Spain will feel any pressure to also potentially act?
Spain, Italy, and France should all combine to address the refuge flow across the Med. Should be easier than containing the flow of illegals across the US/Mexico border given there are no tunnels under the Med to deal with.
 
Spain, Italy, and France should all combine to address the refuge flow across the Med. Should be easier than containing the flow of illegals across the US/Mexico border given there are no tunnels under the Med to deal with.
They did through the EU, under operation 'Mare Nostrum'. Funding had reduced this to 1/3. Mainly a CG effort now.

I agree, more should be done and in some ways, what the Italian Govt is currently contemplating, could be the solution..

2014 was a world record on the number of forced refugees since the Second World War.. Circa 55mio globally. It's a worrying macro-level trend and where do you 'temporarily' house these numbers en masse?

My point on Spain was regarding joint military action, if the Italians decide to act (which I still can't see with ground forces).

With the French, Belgium, Dutch and British forces acting in Syria and Iraq, I would hazard a guess the Spanish would be called upon to provide some assistance. I believe they (Spain) provided assets in the previous Libyan air campagin.
 

BlueRose

New Member
Spain, Italy, and France should all combine to address the refuge flow across the Med. Should be easier than containing the flow of illegals across the US/Mexico border given there are no tunnels under the Med to deal with.
Liberal politicians of Europe will let them all in regardless, this creates such a burden on the economy, ect. You have to clothe, house, and supply those immigrants, then "find them work."
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Liberal politicians of Europe will let them all in regardless, this creates such a burden on the economy, ect. You have to clothe, house, and supply those immigrants, then "find them work."
Don't be throwing rocks in a glass house. The US/Mexico border containment is a frigging joke. Then again, if Canada bordered Mexico, it would be a frigging horror show. The bottom line is the West needs to take a hard line on this "infiltration" and screw liberal-a$$ PC BS.
 

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #17
Italy Deploys Ships To Monitor Libyan Coast

Looks like it's starting to happen, Italy is to deploy a naval force to monitor the Libyan coast according to a source who reported it to defensenews.

Reportedly the effort will likely involve an LHD*, a pair of FREMM frigates, a patrol vessel and Predator UAVs, I think I'm right in thinking a Predator us an unarmed Reaper. Italian Marines will also be part of the force for boarding suspicious ships.

* The Italian Navy doesnt have a LHD yet (it's moving along however) so it must be their San Giorgio class LPDs, they don't have a proper hangar to store aircraft but according to Wiki (I know) one of their class is capable to move helicopters from flight deck to vehicle deck.
 

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #18
France Plans More Anti-ISIS Surveillance Flights

French Air Force have been conducting recce flights over Sirte and Tobruk and reports are that the UK and Italy are considering strikes in Libya to counter IS. Italy represents a key partner considering their geographical location, they're supporting strikes in Iraq in AAR and ISR services.
 

Toblerone

Banned Member
Well I hope their security forces back at home can handle the blowback from any strikes. As much as some like to deny it, I am convinced that with the immigration tsunami wave, political decisions have to be weighted against the reaction of the millions of muslims in Europe.
 

Ranger25

Active Member
Staff member
France Plans More Anti-ISIS Surveillance Flights

French Air Force have been conducting recce flights over Sirte and Tobruk and reports are that the UK and Italy are considering strikes in Libya to counter IS. Italy represents a key partner considering their geographical location, they're supporting strikes in Iraq in AAR and ISR services.


USAF Also flying recce our of Aviano, also has F16s and predators available there if needed

Not to mention the TLAMs aboard ship in the Med
 
Top