egafd.com

Is it that they spend their whole lives having their arses licked? Mega Idiot Gaddafi could have had the entire Coalition in the palm of his hand, by simply withdrawing his forces and simply waiting and in so doing emasculating their power in one go for maybe months.

The coalition was indeed "Worried" he might do this.

But, no, the idiot clown launches an attack on Benghazi, so now it's a green light for the Coalition to now wipe out his airfiields, aircraft, tank columns, supply depots and it's so long Gaddafi, his own arse lickers will stab him in the back.

The Coaltion doesn't have to engage his forces in Benghazi at all, just cut all his supply lines.........what a fool!

Why are people like you so two faced?

I take it by your insult, that you are too stupid to see the difference between the International Coalition keeping madman Gaddafi at bay and New Labours/ Blairs attack on Iraq?

Why don't you ask your boss to explain it to you?

"Why don't you ask your boss to explain it to you?"

Calm down, Jimbo, it's a forum, dear. Sometimes people agree with you. Sometimes they don't. Live with it.

By the way, the inflatable house is in the post.

http://bgafd.co.uk/forum/read.php?f=3&i=243759&t=243759

Cheers
D

"Funny how only certain places are deemed worthy of invasion or airstrikes to 'help' the people-like Iraq & Libya by our leaders."

I think I must have missed the no fly zone imposed by the UN during the Israeli bombardment of Gaza.

Cheers
D

One thing that is clear is that the picture on the ground is not clear.

For example, initially the media were showing pictures of one of Gaddafi's planes shot down by the rebels over Benghazi. Then an hour later, apparently the rebels claimed it was one of their aeroplanes that was shot down by Gaddafi.

I seem to recall that the rebels took over a huge amount of armaments from military bases in Benghazi in the early days of the rebellion. This included tanks and heavy artillery. On the news again this morning, it was saying that tanks had been seen in Benghazi, implying that it was Gaddafi's men breaking the ceasefire.

Was it Gaddafi's men or rebels in the tanks? Who knows?

When I have seen pictures of the Gaddafi men in pickup trucks they look in terms of dress exactly the same as the pictures of the rebels to me.

I can see there being a huge number of cockups in this, given the above and also the fact that there a number of different countries involved in the air.

Cheers
D

What's the first casualty of war ? Truth ? Simplistic but valid I think.

True. And there seems a lack of "truth" about what various countries in this allied coalition have actually agreed.

Cameron has made great play about the support of the Arab League in these measures. However apparently the Arab League only agreed to the no fly zone. They did not agree to the bombing of tanks and heavy artillery which has been going on.

A few pictures of civilian casualties from alleged Allied bombing raids and I think we can see the Arab league potentially disengaging, leaving the usual suspects.

Cheers
D

Your quote Jonone is very true. As you say, David, lets watch the cock-
ups unfold.
All of us wanted to see Saddam go.....Gaddhafi go.....dictators are not
much liked anyways.
But there is clearly something nasty in the woodshed. One minute the
West is saying, when the rebels look to succeed, "We must not get
involved" .Now the legitimate Libyan Govt is winning the cry is "No fly
zone and send in the troops !"
If ANYONE should be entering Libya it must be from Arab League
countries but France and Italy (Libya`s main customers for oil and former
colonial powers) are whooping up the hysteria. Britain and USA, with big
contracts at stake, are scheming as well.
It may yet turn out terrific for the West - kick out the dictator, put some
nice chaps in power in Libya, keep the oil flowing and the business deals
just like before.....But if it all goes arse-up - and in war who knows - then
Mr Cameron may soon be joining Blair in the not-to-be-trusted-in-war
bunch.