I thought the ‘Libya endgame carries new risks for NATO’ was predictably pedestrian. It didn’t go within a country mile of the real problem for NATO. The TNC ‘fighters’ are a disparate bunch of losers, malcontents and misfits with a huge variety of secondary motivations. At present, they are bound together by the common cause of getting Gaddafi and receiving some kind of prize or reward.
However, as soon as Gaddafi is out of the way the common cause will evaporate and the secondary motivations will surface – along with a great deal of rivalry, jealousy and impatient demands on NATO to cough up some loot and/or status symbols.
I’d bet that NATO isn’t looking very hard at all for Gaddafi because IF he is found NATO’s troubles will quickly become very big and very hard to put a positive spin on. The media only has ‘rebel’ contacts so it will also be hard to keep a lid on the division and discontent.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 1 2011 13:46 utc | 3

and hmm whatever this means
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2011-10-01/Libya-mission/50627142/1?csp=34news

Posted by: somebody | Oct 1 2011 18:53 utc | 5

alexno, you say it yourself:”a militarily feeble revolt has almost taken the country, thanks to NATO air-strikes.”
what happens, when Nato no longer knows where to do the airstrikes as political lines have become very complex indeed?
what does “taking Sirte and Bani Walid” mean, when they are Ghaddafi strongholds, ie the majority there supports Ghaddafi? What is the plan of anti-Ghaddafi to “take” those places, live in a hotel in the center? patrol the streets? enter every house looking for weapons? and after that to start the democratic process?
why was Ghaddafi’s proposal for UN supervised elections never considered? Why did everybody refuse to negotiate with Ghaddafi?
my guess is, because he is politically still strong. how strong is anybody’s guess, but NATO is working for him. Rule of thumb in dictatorships is 30 percent potential support.
how democratic, do you think, will be elections be without a Ghaddafi party?
and in military terms, what does “almost taken” mean in 1,759,541 km2 / 679,359 sq miles of “mainly” desert land?
and what do these tweets mean?
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
@Nalut17feb believe it was planned op bcos at same time as Tiji attack, there was attack on Nalut fighters’ base in #Tripoli #Libya
vor 29 Minuten
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
Nalut fighters then caught by surprise attack of heavy gunfire as they passed Tiji. 1 fighter, Firas Askar, killed. v @nalut17feb #Libya
vor 32 Minuten
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
@nalut17feb : Attacks on Nalut fighters work of “5th column”. Began when Badr woman fired at checkpoint. incident resolved w ppl Badr #Libya
vor 43 Minuten
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
Another group of AlSeaan fighters attacked Nalut fighters’ base in Tripoli. There’ve been clashes btw them previously #Libya v @nalut17feb
vor 3 Stunden
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
Also, a car travelling to Nalut was fired on (as they passed Tiji). Driver managed to escape & headed to Tamazin #Libya v @nalut17feb
vor 3 Stunden
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
From the Nalut fighters, 1 was killed, Firas Khalifa Askar; and 5 were wounded in the area of Tiji #Libya v @nalut17feb
vor 3 Stunden
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
Another group of Nalut fighters who were heading2 Badr 2change shifts, came under heavy fire in Tiji. #Libya v @nalut17feb
vor 4 Stunden
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
Fighters in Badr (near Nalut) came under anti-aircraft fire from car w “AlSeaan Thuwar” written on it. Number wounded #Libya v @nalut17feb
vor 4 Stunden
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
@
@ThisIsHumanity as with any national force, the fighters see it as their duty to do what’s necessary to protect civilians .
vor 16 Stunden
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
Commanders questioned how Belhaj got leadership position in Military Council, & the support he was receiving from foreign countries #Libya
vor 17 Stunden
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
In secret meeting, the 30 commanders told AbdelJalil that their fighters have different political agenda & vision to Belhaj. #Libya
vor 17 Stunden
»
Libya.elHurra
FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
Commanders refused NTC directive to place their forces under command of Military Council, led by Belhaj #Libya aawsat.com//details.asp?s…
vor 17 Stunden

Posted by: somebody | Oct 1 2011 20:15 utc | 7

Well, somebody, I see the pro-Qaddafi claque is still strong. He’s paid a lot of people, and they are still loyally defending him. I imagine the pay is still coming, otherwise you wouldn’t be so enthusiastic.

Posted by: alexno | Oct 1 2011 21:59 utc | 9

alexno, I just refuse to be used to think this fight is democracy against dictatorship.
I also find it strange to be told that countries like Quatar and Saudi Arabia pay for democratic change in the region.
how stupid do you think people are?

Posted by: somebody | Oct 2 2011 5:47 utc | 11

@alexno – to accuse commentators here to be on Gaddhafi’s payroll is stupid and below your usual level of knowledge and discussion.
While Gaddhafi is a dictator he has done quite a lot for his people, developed the country and did not steal at unreasonable levels for his personal gain. That the country and its people will be better under an outside imposed “democracy” is quite unlikely.
Somebody does well in pointing out that that endeavor is anyway more unlikely than “western” “news” reports suggest.
—
And yes, like b real suggest, I did not intend to compare to Somalia’s current state but to the development it took after Barre came down.

Posted by: b | Oct 2 2011 17:39 utc | 13

also alexno, I can see why Sirte and Bani Walid resist – because the situation is not what it is painted as in the political pages of western media – you have to turn to the economic pages to get some variation of the truth –
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/02/us-libya-oil-waha-idUSTRE79117S20111002
seems to me Nato has decided to call it a victory and go …
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a00c7478-ece7-11e0-be97-00144feab49a.html?ftcamp=rss#axzz1Zi0PhLN2

Posted by: somebody | Oct 3 2011 9:42 utc | 15

how pathetic B,
‘While Gaddhafi is a dictator’
havent you learned anything about Libya? the word ‘dictator’ is used to justify any atrocity by the ‘democracies’, who if you note are the ones invadeing africa and the middle east!
BUT as for Gadafi as Dictator, try to learn a bit about Libyan politics:
‘On February 16, 2009, Gaddafi took a step further and called on Libyans to back his proposal to dismantle the government and to distribute the oil wealth directly to the 5 million inhabitants of the country.
Tweet Print version Font Size Send to friend However, his plan to deliver oil revenues directly to the Libyan people met opposition by senior officials who could lose their jobs due to a parallel plan by Gaddafi to rid the state of corruption.
Some officials, including Prime Minister Al-Baghdadi, Ali Al-Mahmoudi and Farhat Omar Bin Guida, of the Central Bank, told Gaddafi that the measure could harm the country’s economy in the long term due to “capital flight.”
“Do not be afraid to directly redistribute the oil money and create fairer governance structures that respond to people’s interests,” Gaddafi said in a Popular Committee.
The Popular Committees are the backbone of Libya. Through them citizens are represented at the district level.
“The Administration has failed and the state’s economy has failed. Enough is enough. The solution is for the Libyan people to directly receive oil revenues and decide what to do with them,” Gaddafi said in a speech broadcast on state television. To this end, the Libyan leader urged a radical reform of government bureaucracy.
Despite this, senior Libyan government officials voted to delay Gaddafi’s plans. Only 64 ministers from a total of 468 Popular Committee members voted for the measure. There were 251 who saw the measures as positive, but chose to delay their implementation.
Given the rejection of the Committee, Gaddafi affirmed before a public meeting: “My dream during all these years was to give the power and wealth directly to the people.”
So…another big LIE falls by the wayside, the false image of Ghaddafi the dictator who robs from his people.
etc
http://english.pravda.ru/hotspots/crimes/25-03-2011/117336-reason_for_war_oil-0/
How often will ignorant people repeat the MSM meme that Gadafi is a dictator? Please learn to be careful with your words.

Posted by: brian | Oct 3 2011 20:54 utc | 17

‘Well, somebody, I see the pro-Qaddafi claque is still strong. He’s paid a lot of people, and they are still loyally defending him. I imagine the pay is still coming, otherwise you wouldn’t be so enthusiastic.
Posted by: alexno | Oct 1, 2011 5:59:09 PM | 9
==================
this rat wasnt paid i see…Alex..you need to be more wary of whom you choose to work for. back in 0107 the first of the massive rallies…according to Alex all these people were being paid for by gadafi out of stolen libyan wealth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iVgGLPAEqg
or was it that gadafi used the Libya oil wealth to help fund their rise out of poverty? King Idris never did that, nor do the EU or US dictators, who sell of their countries wealth to the corporate cronies.

Posted by: brian | Oct 3 2011 20:58 utc | 19

Libya seems to have become Wonderland now featuring Gaddafi as the Cheshire cat
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/03/libya-new-rulers-say-war-won

Posted by: somebody | Oct 3 2011 21:13 utc | 21

The Guardian talks of Libyas new rulers, lets take a look at the Guardian:
http://www.zcommunications.org/a-thought-police-for-the-internet-age-by-jonathan-cook

Posted by: brian | Oct 3 2011 21:25 utc | 23

@ alexno
The only people who seem paid to post at The Guardian are maybe one (or two) of the pro-interventionist crowd. And of course all the people who post the wilfully bent propaganda ATL. I used to post there but gave up – the ATL team simply wouldn’t respond to basic questions such as:
Why no reports from Az Zawiyah, Zlitan, etc?
What reporting restrictions, if any, apply?
And of course my consistent requests that The Guardian ask questions of the govt / NATO regarding clear and direct breaches of Res 1973.
Amazing that the site ATL and (mostly) BTL still refuses to accept that NATO is in direct breach of Res 1973, currently paragraph 3 is being wilfully ignored:
3. Demands that the Libyan authorities comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, human rights and refugee law and take all measures to protect civilians and meet their basic needs, and to ensure the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian assistance;
Maybe we’re talking about different parts of the The Guardian? I’m referring to Live Updates.

Posted by: ahji | Oct 4 2011 18:21 utc | 25

alex:
‘I admit that I’ve been reading the Guardian CiF webpage too much, where paid supporters of Qaddafi are very common. I recognise that it may not be the same situation elsewhere. And “Somebody” has given good comments otherwise’….Qaddafi does have his paid claque; why should he not? ‘
this last line tells us you have no evidence of paid support…A rat tactic:lie and desemble, thats what theyve been using the entire 8 months.BNut it makes you wonder…what Alex is being paid to shill for genocidal jihadis of Benghazi.

Posted by: brian | Oct 4 2011 20:45 utc | 27

re Ahji @25
I’ve read Guardian CiF a lot on Libya, and had much pleasure in reading your contributions.
Evidently you are a partisan on the issue. I find it surprising that you say that the only potentially paid commenters are those on the NATO side, when the threads are dominated by pro-Qaddafi commenters.
Myself I would analyse the pro-Qaddafi faction (perhaps not the right expression) in three ways:
1) Those who are basically anti-NATO, anti-West, who don’t pay any attention to what Qaddafi was. b and most of MoA is of these.
2) Those who are pro-Arab, but are willing to forgive Qaddafi, because he is anti-West. I think Ahji is one of these.
3) Those who pump out pro-Qaddafi propaganda at any price, including reference to evidently false sources such as methaba.net.
Qaddafi has a lot of money; it’s his main resource. To imagine that he wouldn’t do what the Israelis do, is foolish. He has every reason to pay commenters, in order to turn Western opinion. It doesn’t cost much, I would do it myself, if I were him.
As to proof, as brian demands. Yes, it could be done, but I have better things to do in life.

Posted by: alexno | Oct 5 2011 21:23 utc | 29

Re: alexno @ #9
Uh…you forgot one:
4) Those who are disgusted with flagrant breaches of sovereignty, and would rather see the citizens of such a country work it out for themselves.
Nuance – the ‘devil’ is in the details, eh?

Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Oct 6 2011 1:46 utc | 31

outed long ago
as what?
as someone who doesn’t agree with you? Is that forbidden?

Posted by: alexno | Oct 6 2011 11:49 utc | 33