Log in

View Full Version : Civilians in Libya killed by NATO forces



19th June 2011, 23:09
BBC
Nato has admitted "a weapons systems failure" may have led to civilian casualties in Sunday morning's air strike in the Libyan capital, Tripoli.
In a statement, the alliance said the intended target of the strike was a military missile site, but "it appears that one weapon" did not hit it.
The Libyan government earlier said Nato bombed a residential area, killing nine civilians, including babies.
Nato is enforcing a UN resolution to defend Libyans from pro-Gaddafi forces.
'Family killed' "Nato regrets the loss of innocent civilian lives and takes great care in conducting strikes against a regime determined to use violence against its own citizens," said Lt Gen Charles Bouchard, commander of operation Unified Protector.
"Although we are still determining the specifics of this event, indications are that a weapons system failure may have caused this incident," he added.
The statement said that more than 11,500 sorties had already been conducted and "every mission is planned and executed with tremendous care to avoid civilian casualties".
Nato later released a video statement (http://www.natochannel.tv/).
Our correspondent says the incident could prompt questions about what Nato is achieving in Libya - not least by Nato members who never agreed with the operation.
Sunday's attack, in one of Tripoli's poorer neighbourhoods, happened shortly after midnight, Libyan officials say.
They say that nine people were killed, including two babies, and another 18 people injured. It is not possible to verify this claim independently.
The BBC's Jeremy Bowen, who was taken to the site by government officials, saw two bodies being removed from the rubble.
Scores of men were working alongside the emergency services, pulling at sections of rubble and looking for bodies.
Our correspondent was then taken to a Tripoli hospital where he was shown the bodies of two men, a woman and two babies, who government officials said had been killed in the strike.
Rapidly shifting lines Libyan Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kaim said the incident represented a "deliberate targeting of civilian houses".
Nato spokesman Wing Cdr Mike Bracken earlier told the BBC he did not know the exact location of the building Libyans accuse the alliance of hitting.
The building is about a kilometre away from a military airfield, which has often been targeted by Nato.
"Those areas that might have been claimed to be residential by the Gaddafi regime in the past have turned out to be being used as C2 nodes [command and control centres]," said Wing Cdr Bracken.
The incident came shortly after Nato "regretted any possible loss of life" from an accidental air strike on a rebel column near the oil refinery town of Brega on Thursday.
A rebel spokesman said it was to Nato's credit that it had admitted that mistake, which he said was understandable given the rapidly shifting front lines of the conflict.
It would be regrettable if civilians had been killed by a Nato air strike in Tripoli, he added, but praised the alliance's overall accuracy record throughout the campaign.
Nato's mission - to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya to protect civilians using "all necessary measures" short of a ground invasion - began in March in response to Col Muammar Gaddafi's violent response to a popular uprising.
The intervention was mandated by the UN, and led by France, Britain and the US until the end of March, when Nato took over.
Having initially been given 90 days - which would have run out on 27 June - the mission has been extended for a further 90 days.
Libyan rebels hold a third of the country in the east and pockets in the west, including Misrata, although Tripoli remains under government control.


Since they're saying "there may have been some casualties", we really know there is many.

Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk
19th June 2011, 23:24
We were right all along, as usual. This was more than a no-fly zone, and the intervention has probably killed more people than the initial threat to Benghazi that apparently inspired the intervention in the first place. Welcome to war, no revolution here I'm afraid.

Ocean Seal
19th June 2011, 23:45
So when is everyone going to stop with the "gak Qaddafi apologists ZOMG" line. Because seriously we did see this coming.

Geiseric
20th June 2011, 00:02
This doesn't change the fact that Ghadaffi would have still been attacking civilians had it noot been for NAtO. However i'm not pro-nato, nor am i pro-rebel at this point. the chances for working class control of the chaos are still at 0 percent, so i dont get why people here are still picking sides.

Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk
20th June 2011, 00:14
I'm not picking sides. Its those that were cheerleaders for the 'no-fly zone' that I am criticizing. We expect MLs to side with regimes like Gaddafi's, but I do not expect those on the libertarian side of the left to support western intervention. Genuine communists support the working class and only the working class, no sides in this war represent workers therefore those who picked sides should be ashamed of themselves, as they are apologists for the wars of the ruling class.

Geiseric
20th June 2011, 02:57
Muchos gracias senor. my thoughts exactly. CHEERLEADERS FOR GHADAFFI, THIS DOESNT MAKE YOU CORRECT IN SUPPORTING A DIFFERENT RULER. IT MEANS ONE OPPRESSOR FOR ANOTHER.

t.shonku
20th June 2011, 03:49
US is dropping bombs on Libya and killing civilians, but please don't blame Mr Obama after all he is trying to liberate Libyan people just like Bush tried to liberate the Iraqis back in 2003 by dropping bombs on them.

This war is Humanitarian , this for peace, yeah peace of graveyard , oil cartel and globalist want that kind of peace built on grave of everyone

scarletghoul
23rd June 2011, 12:20
OK so now we know that 1) gaddafi's forces had not been attacking civilians as was claimed in the run up to the intervention, and 2) NATO bombs have killed 100s of civilians. there are many other things worth mentioning (lynching of blacks, gaddafis offer of elections etc) but these 2 points alone make it clear that anyone who doesnt support the Libyan people (whether or not you like their leader) in their fight against imperialism is a complete nob head

The Intransigent Faction
3rd July 2011, 04:54
OK so now we know that 1) gaddafi's forces had not been attacking civilians as was claimed in the run up to the intervention, and 2) NATO bombs have killed 100s of civilians. there are many other things worth mentioning (lynching of blacks, gaddafis offer of elections etc) but these 2 points alone make it clear that anyone who doesnt support the Libyan people (whether or not you like their leader) in their fight against imperialism is a complete nob head

Oh please. Missing the point yet again! If you truly support the Libyan people, then you wouldn't support "their leader" any more than you support NATO. The lesser of two evils is still evil, and the enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend. It is precisely because of our support for the Libyan people that we support neither oppression by NATO nor oppression by native Libyan oppressors.

agnixie
8th July 2011, 01:32
So when is everyone going to stop with the "gak Qaddafi apologists ZOMG" line. Because seriously we did see this coming.

When people like threetune and zenga zenga stop lionizing a fascist.