Re: Re: Libyan: Qaddafi forces shoot hospital patients

[Guest guest]

Qadafi basically said as much the other day.

I mentioned wounding the opposition the other day. That was meant in military terms as has been observed on the battlefield many times over. However, there are limits to this. Some soldiers get angry at such things rather than put off and fight harder. Likewise not taking prisoners. Killing people in the hospital might intimidate some but it would also push others into supporting the revolt, if not directly at least in spirit, and fire up some of the actual fighting rebels.

Its all a balancing act that requires understanding the situation and the people in question. Still, I think targeting the most aggressive ones or those carrying weapons instead of just anyone will eventually cause the fighters to lose heart. Not only would the leaders and the "heroes" being going down either to attack or being intimidated to remaining under cover, but the larger number of regular people would lose heart as well, becoming afraid to expose themselves to danger. Things like mass slaughter and killing wounded in the hospital will undermine that.

In a message dated 2/27/2011 11:49:47 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, no_reply writes:

If the government has the guns and you don't, no one cares if you're outraged because they can just kill you off. And that is what the government of Libya is doing. You wanna live? Support the government. You wanna die? Then don't support the government. Administrator

[Guest guest]

I think the few friends internationally that Qaddafi had now want to

dissociate themselves with him. It is bad politics.

[Guest guest]

Well, he has managed to get people to wonder if NATO or the US should get involved. McCain is even running around now saying we should enforce a no fly zone over Lybia. OK, with what? It would have to be carriers and they are pretty much all committed elsewhere. Is the US really going to shoot down the Lybian planes and if so, what then? The US military is already stretched to the breaking point and the last thing it needs is another major commitment in a warzone, especially one where they would not find a welcoming reception. Beyond that, if Lybia, why not troops in Tunisia, Egypt or elsewhere? What if we do that and governments very hostile to the US come to power?

Maybe NATO should handle this problem in their own back yard. If they don't, its their problem. We should have made them handle the Balkans back in the 1990's or face a regional war, maybe more if the Russians had jumped in. Again, a European problem for so few of them having effective militaries.

I think the few friends internationally that Qaddafi had now want to dissociate themselves with him. It is bad politics.