Libya, not quite to plan then

[David Johnson]

So here we are, 6 months in.

The original trigger for UK involvement was to help the civilians in rebel-held Benghazi from being killed by the advancing Gaddafi troops.

George Osborne estimated the costs of the operation at the time in the tens of millions.

Now the rebels are entering the town of Sirte, trading rocket fire with the Gaddafi loyalists. Sirte is a town of 100,000. Maybe the blood of civilians in a Gaddafi held town, is much more expendable than in a rebel-held town as far as the Allies are concerned.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15065463

And as for the cost off the operation? Apparently it is approaching ?1 billion.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... ibya-costs

CHeers
D

[Sam Slater]

Name me a war that HAS all gone according to plan.

[David Johnson]

Yeah, I shouldnt have chosen the subject I did and instead just left it as Libya which was the orignal subject I put in.

Cheers
D

[Sam Slater]

Sarcasm doesn't become you, David!

If you don't want to answer my question then I won't pressure you.

[David Johnson]

Sam,

I am not being sarcastic at all. If you choose not to believe that, it is entirely your prerogative.

"If you don't want to answer my question then I won't pressure you."

Pressure me? !wink!

"Name me a war that HAS all gone according to plan."

Depends on what the original plans on all the previous military operations in history were and not being a military historian I am not in a position to answer that. However, I would be very surprised if there wasn't a war which was purely an air operation from Britain's point of view, which hadn't gone considerably more to plan than this one.

Keeping in mind that:

1. The war has not finished.
2. The potentially very much more tricky post-war situation has not begun.
3. It was predicted to cost 10s of millions and the independent assessment is around a ?1 billion and counting.

CHeers
D

[David Johnson]

The stated objective of the British involvement was an humanitarian one to help civilians.

What has in fact happened is that the British have taken sides in a civil war and having failed to assassinate Gaddafi are determined to overthrow his regime completely.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15065463

in which protecting civilians has fallen by the wayside when the civilians are on the wrong side of the fighting as in the case of Sirte which has been bombarded by artillery, rocket propelled grenades and aircraft strikes.

Cheers
D

[Sam Slater]

[quote]I am not being sarcastic at all.[/quote]

Fair enough. My bad.

[quote]I would be very surprised if there wasn't a war which was purely an air operation from Britain's point of view, which hadn't gone considerably more to plan than this one.[/quote]

Maybe, but I doubt it. Even the first Gulf war, where the air bombardment went perfectly, ended up with sanctions that just starved the poorest, left a vengeful dictator in who murdered even more of his people and a second, long-winded land war. In hindsight, it went tits-up. Again, I can't think of a single war that went 'according to plan'. Hence my question.

I'm not disagreeing with you about what's gone wrong, or the predicted costs (though I think helping to emancipate a whole country worth it) by the way. I just thought the point you made was 'picky' and more to do with political point scoring rather than any real fears for Libyan civilians. I realise I could be doing you a really big disservice, but having had experience of plenty of your posts over the last few years I can look myself in the mirror and not blame myself too much for thinking that way !wink!

Here's a reminder of old Libya, before we decided to 'take sides':

[David Johnson]

"I realise I could be doing you a really big disservice"

Correct.

"Here's a reminder of old Libya, before we decided to 'take sides'"

Let's wait until

1. The war is finished.
2. The new government has had a year or two under its belt before we go into the comparisons bit, shall we?

CHeers
D

[frankthring]

David - you and I are both agreed this is a messy little war to get involved
in....But it was never about helping any rebels....it was from Day 1 about
strategically seeing the end of a mad-dog despot and securing long term
Libya`s oil for GB and its Western allies.

[Sam Slater]

It was a reminder of what the Gaddafi regime had done to it's people, not a comparison of what the rebels 'may' do to Gaddafi loyalists.

And as for the plight of civilians vs political point-scoring, I saw no new threads about the tragic uncoverings of mass graves but I do see one mentioning Osbourne and things not going according to plan. In short, "look at what the government are doing wrong!", not, "look at all those murdered people. What a disgrace."

I'm not assuming you don't care but I do suspect I know where your priorities lie.