NATO and some of our EU Partners have Committed War Crimes in Libya

[DeGaulle 2.0]

I think it should be of more concern to us that the army of one of our presidential candidates deliberately targetted civilians with bombs in and around shops, schoolbuses, hotels, etc.

[MrMee]

The retreating Convoy were entitled to retreat. They were not engaging in an assasult on any civilian population as so NATO had no legal basis to launch a lethal strike killing 25 people in the convoy.

NATO could not have known who was in the convoy. It was sheer chance that it happened to include Gaddafi. If NATO bombed everything that moved, eventually NATO would hit their desired target which seems to have been Gaddafi all along. There was no mandate to execute the leader (or former leader) of the country.

What legal basis had NATO to launch a lethal assault on a convoy of vehicles which was not attacking civilians?

If you are so interested in the laws of war, you should do a reading of them rather than picking up a convenient catch phrase here or there. Then you would know the legal basis that could be claimed regarding the attack on the convoy....and there are a few options. There are several instances in which they would be quite within the law to do what they did AND by the way, NATO very well could have certainly known exactly who was in the convoy.

Take some serious time aside and read Geneva Additional Protocol II (1977)

[MrMee]

This thread is a joke right?

Yes, it really has gotten to that. I'm out of here.

[rash mulligan]

It is O.K. to this as long as there is a Democrat in the White House. If John McCain had done this with Cameron and Sarkozy the media would be up in arms.

[Desperate Dan]

The attack on Gaddafi's convoy retreating from Sirte had nothing to do with the UN resolution of protecting civilians. This was a full scale war by NATO and fellow EU forces on a Sovereign nation. NATO and some of our "partners" from the EU launched a full scale lethal assault on a population who were loyal to Gaddafi. They killed and bombed at will.

There was no legal basis for the murder of civilians loyal to Gaddafi and no legal basis to bomb his convoy ensuring scores of deaths.

NATO jets bombed a convoy of Libyans while their proxy Al Qaeda rebels or British SAS executed Gaddafi.

Who wants a common EU foreign policy which includes France the UK, Italy, or the Netherlands? These countries are guilty of murdering innocent civilians. They had no legal basis to invene in a civil war in Libya as it was not an international crisis.

Does our Minister for Foreign Affairs have anything to say on the legality of NATO actions?

The Irish people should demand a statement from Eamonn Gilmore. If he choses to say nothing, are we not complict by our silence?

Gaddafi's final hours: Nato and the SAS helped rebels drive hunted leader into endgame in a desert drain - Telegraph

The manner of his death will be a ball and chain around the neck of the leaders of Nato, it may take years for the truth to come out, but the next time your TV shows US mercenaries hanging from a bridge or the beheading of a US journalist or the safety of the NATO countries citizens travelling abroad, who will concern themselves. The childish behavior of the secretary of state Clinton can only be described as disgusting. When are these clowns going to cop on to themselves and stop behaving like the people they describe as terrorists.

[publicrealm]

Stupid comment. As it happens most, but not all, arab countries have massive oil reserves. Just to keep you happy I'd fully support NATO bombing the hell out of the Yemeni army first. They have small reserves of oil. Then maybe we can move onto that mass murderer Assad

"Stupid comment". Ouch!

That's me outwitted then.

But before slink off - you presumably don't see any moral issue with bombing a retreating convoy - of an 'enemy' who is relatively powerless (and has absolutely no air power)?

Reminds me of the dreadful massacre of the retreating Iraqi army a few years ago.

Absolutely no military justification.

Of course for the internet wargame generation it probably doesn't look so bad at all (and as far as I know is untroubled by silly issues of morality).

(Notice how I didn't call you stupid?)

[Clanrickard]

The manner of his death will be a ball and chain around the neck of the leaders of Nato, .

Yeah I bet they'll be devastated. Zoo for this thread and the conspiracy nuts.

[Aristodemus]

"Stupid comment". Ouch!

That's me outwitted then.

But before slink off - you presumably don't see any moral issue with bombing a retreating convoy - of an 'enemy' who is relatively powerless (and has absolutely no air power)?

Reminds me of the dreadful massacre of the retreating Iraqi army a few years ago.

Absolutely no military justification.

Of course for the internet wargame generation it probably doesn't look so bad at all (and as far as I know is untroubled by silly issues of morality).

(Notice how I didn't call you stupid?)

That's because I'm not, you are. Are you seriously suggesting that in a war time situation that an enemy retreating should be allowed to do so unhindered so that they may regroup and then resume hostilities? Gaddaffi had his chance. It's not as if he was surrendering.
As for the reference to the retreating Iraqi army, they had pillaged another country and were retreating with their ill-gotten gains. They deserved all that was coming to them. Ask the Kurds if they felt sorry for them in their retreat after what that same army had inflicted upon them.

[floatingvoter2011]

The Libyan NTC has recognised the anti Assad rebels as the legitimate government of Syria. What next, official recognition of OWS as the legitimate government of the US?

[publicrealm]

Are you seriously suggesting that in a war time situation that an enemy retreating should be allowed to do so unhindered so that they may regroup and then resume hostilities? Gaddaffi had his chance. It's not as if he was surrendering.
As for the reference to the retreating Iraqi army, they had pillaged another country and were retreating with their ill-gotten gains. They deserved all that was coming to them. Ask the Kurds if they felt sorry for them in their retreat after what that same army had inflicted upon them.

"That's because I'm not, you are."

Ah but you misunderstand (this much, at least).

The reason I didn't call you stupid is not necessarily because you are not stupid - rather that it is (more or less) a concession of defeat if you gratuitously insult someone who disagees with you.

I prefer reasoned discourse. I happen to believe that hi-tech bombing of a routed rabble is un-necessary (and indefensible) in military terms. Of course if you believe in revenge then 'fire away' - but I would hope most well trained military commanders would have qualms about this.

(and would hardly worry about the rabble 'regrouping' in any meaningful sense).