think you mean that cruise

• At 14:56pm on 20th Mar 2011, Will wrote:
  I think you mean that cruise missiles are exploding in Libya, not Iraq. To my knowledge America is not launching missiles there.
  
  Complain about this comment
• 2. At 14:57pm on 20th Mar 2011, Curt Carpenter wrote:
  So once again we set out to save innocent civilians from death at the hands of "evil doers" -- by killing them ourselves.
  
  What a splendidly agile approach.
  
  It goes hand-in-glove with what I'm sure will be our eagerness to re-arm the Libyan people once we've finished destroying their current stock of
  weapons -- which, it bears noting, were also supplied by us.
  
  All in the name of Democracy, you understand.
  
  
  Complain about this comment
• 3. At 15:02pm on 20th Mar 2011, BluesBerry wrote:
  It would be ironic, don't you think, if this R 1973 ended up giving birth to Gaddafi's dream of a United States of Africa.
  No doubt the AU is angry.
  The African Union is more than criticizing the launching of military operations by US and European countries on the soverign nation of Libya; it is fist-pimping. This current western action is seen as nothing more than another Iraq - eight years to the day after US-led forces headed across the Iraqi border in 2003 - only the goal this time is get rid of Gaddafi vs Hussein.
  US and British ships and submarines launching more than 115 cruise missiles supposedly against air defenses, which makes one wonder how 50 civilians died and another 150 got wounded.
  In Canada, CBS news reported that 3 B-2 stealth bombers dropped 40 bombs on a major Libyan airfield. I guess this is within the mandate on R-1973 - attacks were designed to cripple Libyan air defenses.
  But the real intention is to force the Libyan leader Muammar from power; this is known as a coup. A coup was most certainly NOT authorized under R1973.
  The African Union (AU) issued a statement stupulating that "any foreign military intervention, whatever its form was a contravenation of soverignty & national security".
  An AU panel is demanding a peaceful end to the crisis; An AU panel is calling for an "immediate stop" to air strikes stressing that it rejects "any kind of foreign military intervention" in the north African country.
  Mauritanian President, Ould Abdel Aziz (a panel member): The situation in Libya "demands urgent action so an AFRICAN SOLUTION solution (can be found) to the very serious crisis which its sister nation is going through."
  A solution must take into account "our desire that Libya's unity and territorial integrity be respected". I doubt that the west will see much importance in this AU statement, or even hear it - too mucxh noise from the cruise missiles.
  The AU committee on Libya is composed of five African heads of state, but the meeting in the Mauritanian capital was only attended by the presidents of Mauritania, Mali and Congo, though South Africa and Uganda were represented by ministers. The panel was scheduled to travel to Libya, but of course circumstances are now unsafe. Gaddafi had asked for the presence of AU monitoring. If that had been able to occur, I wonder what the panel would have reported. What would President Jacob Zuma say?
  Western countries and NATO initially stated that they would not intervene militarily in Libya without the approval of regional organizations such as the Arab League and the AU. I guess they forgot about the AU, even forgot that there are 22 members to the Arab League (and they had obtained only 11 attendees and ultimately 9 approvals).
  In a related issue, the government of Equatorial Guinea said that Libyan reporters had misreported re telephone call between the country's president Teodoro Obiang Nguema and Gaddafi. Nguema who is the rotating AU chairman this year, called Gaddafi to gain guarantees for the security of the AU Observation Committee that was planning to travel there. The South African President was under fire last week because he called Gaddafi. Zuma told Gaddafi that that the AU should investigate the "conspiracy" against him and the world should not believe what foreign media were saying about Libya.
  The Ugandan government on Thursday said it opposes "foreign interference" in Libya and declared it will not freeze Libyan-owned assets in the country.
  I wonder why the west would place such emphasis on 9 members of the Arab League and no apparent emphasis on the entire AU.
  
  Complain about this comment
• 4. At 15:04pm on 20th Mar 2011, Lindsay wrote:
  With all (very considerable) respect to Mark Mardell, who is an excellent reporter: does not the rapidity and apparent efficiency with which co-ordinated assaults have been made against Libyan military 'assets', by American as well as French and British forces, show that behind the scenes there was considerable planning, for days at least, if not weeks? For both domestic and internationally diplomatic reasons Mr Obama had to be seen to be pacific, but surely neither he nor the CIA was going to be bounced by Messrs. Cameron and Sarkozy into action for which the USA was not already well prepared.
  Yours sincerely,
  Lindsay G. H. Hall