| Submit your comments on this article |
| Africa North |
| NATO intercepts Libya-bound oil tanker |
| 2011-05-21 |
| [Al Jazeera] NATO ...the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Originally it was a mutual defense pact directed against an expansionist Soviet Union. In later years it evolved into a mechanism for picking the American pocket while criticizing the style of the American pants... says it has intercepted an oil tanker it had reason to believe was set to deliver fuel for use by Libyan leader Muammar Qadaffy's ... a proud Arab institution for 42 years ... military forces. The ship was intercepted on Friday hours after the alliance sunk eight Libyan warships in an attack said to be the broadest on Libya's naval forces since the alliance joined the conflict. Qadaffy's government is seeking to raise fuel imports for military purposes and to keep civilian vehicles running in areas he controls. International sanctions do not include a fuel embargo. But we turned the ship back anyway? I guess international sanctions, like the UN and the War Powers Act, don't mean what we think they mean. "NATO naval forces can deny access to vessels entering or leaving Libyan ports if there is reliable information to suggest that the vessel or its cargo will be used to support attacks or threats on civilians, either directly or indirectly," NATO spokeswoman Carmen Romero said on Friday. NATO, working under a UN mandate to protect civilians from government forces, also said military and political pressure was weakening Qadaffy's hold on power in what appeared to be a marked escalation of a Western-led bombing campaign. The overnight strikes hit the vessels in the ports of Tripoli, Al Khums and Sirte, and also hit a dockyard facility for launching the fast inflatable boats that Libyan forces have used for attacks around rebel-held Misrata. "The destruction last night of the facility and a significant stockpile of the boats will reduce the regime's ability to sustain such tactics," Perfidious Albion's Major-General John Lorimer said. He said the port was the nearest concentration of regime warships to the port of Misrata, which Qadaffy has repeatedly attempted to close to humanitarian shipping. Mohammed Rashid, general manager of the Tripoli port, told news hounds the coastguard boats were used to patrol Libyan waters for immigrant boats trying to make it to Europe and for search-and-rescue activities. The port official said some damage was done to the port, but it was minimal. A government official later said he feared the NATO strike would discourage ships from using the Tripoli port, reducing imports and driving up prices of basic goods for Libyans. Reporters who toured the area from a distance said a warship could be seen on fire, with flames and plumes of smoke bellowing from the stricken vessel. Rear Admiral Russell Harding, deputy commander of the NATO operation, said the Qadaffy regime was employing more ships in its campaign against rebel fighters. "Given the escalating use of naval assets, NATO had no choice but to take decisive action to protect the civilian population of Libya and NATO forces at sea," he said in a statement. "NATO has constantly adapted to the rapidly changing and dynamic situation in Libya and at sea." In Brussels, headquarters of NATO, video clips from the jets' gun cameras were played showing the bombing of two frigates and a port facility. The two frigates, a Soviet-built Koni class anti-submarine boat and a French-built Combattante class missile craft, were moored at the dock when they were hit with laser-guided bombs. It was not immediately clear whether their crews were aboard when they were struck. "Our aim was not to destroy these ships but to remove their military ability," NATO front man Wing Cmdr. Mike Bracken told news hounds. "They were identified as legitimate and legal targets." Shelling, meanwhile,was heard in the Ghabat al-Qasr neighbourhood of the capital, Tripoli, in the early hours of Friday. I thought Qadaffi had secured Tripoli. No? In some of the latest strikes, NATO hit Qadaffy's forces around 15km east of the opposition-held town of Zintan in the Western Mountains region. The town and the port city of Misrata have seen some of the heaviest fighting in recent weeks. Al Jizz also confirmed there was heavy fighting ... as opposed to the more usual light or sporadic fighting... on the Tunisia-Libya border. Casualty numbers however are not yet known. Three months into an uprising against Qadaffy's four-decade rule, rebels control the east and pockets in the west but the conflict has reached a stalemate as rebel attempts to advance on Tripoli have stalled. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #2 International sanctions do not include a fuel embargo. And yet somehow it's now ok that Oil vessels are selectivly intercepted and denied access to Libyan ports. It kinda makes sense when you think about it. Afterall, UNSC 1973 mandates strict enforcement of an arms embargo. And well, that doesn't really apply to the Gyptians, Quataris, and lord knows who else. The resolution also calls for the establishment of a cease-fire. But you need to understand that it's one of those new fangled one-sided cease-fires. And that bit about preventing mercenary personnel? Yeah, it's helpful if you think of some of those folks as foriegn civilians...armed tourists if you will. But it's all above board. Because UNSC 1973 clearly states; Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial Oh yeah, and that "take all necessary measures" thing helps too. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2011-05-21 13:12 |
| #1 What about food shipments as some will certainly go to Daffy's troops? |
| Posted by: phil_b 2011-05-21 00:18 |