Libya Superthread

Snipers are ground units. But it was men and women fighting on the ground, and the men and women partisans fighting behind enemy lines that won the war.

yeah no. the USSR did you mass ground attacks but they also had to keep the German air power distracted, i large part of those mass attacks had massed air-cover to keep the Germans from bombing the Russian troops/tanks. in modern war if you don't hold the sky's and your a military you don't attack, because if you do you will get picked off by the enemy's air-cover.

Serbia fooled NATO just by simply leaving trucks on the road. NATO has just recently realized their numbers for the actual amount of kills and vehicle destruction is even bigger than 10x's their original estimate.

okay and what does this have to do with your original wrong point? sounds like your changing topics

Showing that airpower can easily be overcame just by putting a truck on the side of the road....

becuase yes putting a truck on the side of the road with block air-power that moves in 3 dimensions.

are you really trying to argue that fact that air power plays little part in the winning of war? it's the base of all modern military's, not the north Korean military- because i said modern not cold war hand-me-downs

France has totally gone beyond the UN Resolution mandate by simply air dropping supposedly "Defensive Weapons" to unarmed civilians. Wouldn't surprise me if Britain and America are doing the same. It's good to see Russia and China criticizing NATO for breaking the UN resolution mandates, but obviously NATO have gone far beyond the UN resolution now.

Actually the mandate stated they could do anything but use ground troops.

So they can nuke Gaddafi?

No that is covered by other things.

You can not pass a resolution that says they can do anything.... Hell, they are already breaking international law by joining in on a civil war.

With all means neccesary to stop atacks on civilians. Thats what the resolution says. Throwing a nuke is not a mean to accomplish that. Therefore it is not allowed.
Also this has become irellevant as of today. Ghadaffi made a big mistake by threatening Italy,UK and France with atacks on their soil and therfore enabled the self defens paragraph under the un chart. As of today Ghadaffi and Ghadaffi loyal forces can be deemed threats to security of those Countries wich enables this countries to take imidiet action against him and his forces even with means that are not in the Resolution. Even a full scale invasion would be legal but unlikely except theres a bomb going up in this countries.

Gaddafi now ants to attack "homes, offices, families," which we can assume he wants to kill innocent people until NATO seizes it's involvement. I think this might result in even more bombing of Tripoli.

Video evidence of him saying this please?

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/afric ... 16313.html

Oh to Europe. Well Europe has been bombing and killing civilians, targeted civilian killings as in the market just recently. So Gaddafi can not strike back at a nation?

Oh, more of this "eye for an eye" bullshit from you?

What gives Europe the right?

These nations don't purposefully "target" civilians. I don't deny that they probably don't give a shit about collateral damage and probably work with shaky intelligence, but they aren't "targeting" them. Why would a country purposefully use MILLION dollar missiles/equipment to eliminate civilians? There's absolutely no benefit tactically/politically.

The bombing of Civilians in Tawergha market? An area with no military presence? Only African supporters of Gaddafi. I'm sure their family's are A-OK with NATO bombing markets.