A spokesman for rebel forces in Libya claims that they have captured Moammar Gadhafi’s hometown of Sirte, the gateway to Western Libya, currently the stronghold for government forces.
(A note on spelling: Earlier I labeled this city as “Surt.” To best give English equivalents of Libyan words, I find you just have to pick a spelling and go with it. However, with virtually every news source out there using “Sirte,” I’m changing.)
The spokesman said that the rebels moved into the city in the middle of the night and encountered no resistance. There have been reports of military vehicles leaving Sirte on Sunday headed west.
Gadhafi has called the abandonment of other cities to the rebels a case of “tactical retreat.” Fighting has continued in western Libya, in cities like Misurata, where pro-government snipers have shot at residents.
Both sides have made claims during this civil war that have turned out untrue in the end, so we should not automatically accept the statement of a takeover of Sirte until there’s some independent verification. But both the UK Telegraph and ABC in Australia are running the same report. And the Reuters reporter in Sirte saw the convoy of vehicles leaving the city.
The apparent victory in Sirte came after massive nighttime bombing of the city by the NATO-led coalition. This shows the military operation moving into a new phase of tactical air support and not enforcement of any no-fly zone to protect civilians. It’s not like Gadhafi’s military forces were threatening massacres while leaving the city to the rebels.
If Gadhafi is having his military retrench to the west, he could be trying to lay a trap for the poorly trained, ragtag rebel force. But they do have the coalition airstrikes to contend with – and they are systematically taking out Gadhafi’s armor.
The US Navy has reduced the firepower arrayed against Gadhafi, with one of the ships from which missiles have been launched leaving the area. NATO’s command role doesn’t mean US involvement will cease – indeed in many key ways NATO is effectively the United States military – but the reduction, coming right before a speech to the nation by President Obama on the situation, is meant to portray a pullback.
Both Hillary Clinton and Robert Gates intimated on yesterday’s morning talk shows that the Gadhafi regime may be vulnerable to collapse from within as key officials abandon the longtime Libyan leader. But this could be nothing more than disinformation.
UPDATE: Agence-France Presse says that Gadhafi loyalists used machine gun fire to repel the attack on Sirte, and the rebels have pulled back to Bin Jawad.




59 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Now I wish those news sources would standardize on Gadhafi/Qadaffi/Kadafhi!
Gawdaffyduck.
Didn’t we do a regime change in some place called Iran last century?
Put some shah guy, we liked, in kinda charge so how did that work out for us ?
At least we’re not using ground troops, since they proved they can’t fight their way out of a paper bag . Change we can believe in !
Prediction (I’m usually wrong..)..they will announce sometime today that Gaddafi has either left the country or been wounded and/or killed; all before Barry’s speech this evening. It’s already a done deal one way or the other.
Must be the “shock and awe” portion of the NFZ.
A war of aggression for regime change. This is just so ten years ago, yet here we go into another war when we haven’t finished up the other two major wars.
As long as you are Surtain I have no problem. I do agree that the news media should settle on one spelling for Momar Quadaffi.
I like Demi’s version. ;P
Moi aussi.
The only reason we didn’t get a Presidential speech on the pressing National Security problem of
Afghanistan, Iraq, PakistanLibya last Thursday or Friday night was………..Sweet sixteen. Got to see how those picks played out you know.Glad you are here.
I left you a note downstairs at #71. I had to step away from the computer for awhile and did not respond until way late in that discussion.
You are absolutely right, they are certainly trying to discredit Professor Cronin.
Sorry for the ot everyone.
Who are the “rebels.” I have yet to see anything definitive on that subject. If I’ve missed it, would appreciate a link.
Some allegations that a few may be AQ, hotly disputed.
I also understand there are tribes in Libya. Have seen some reporting on which sides tribes stack up on, but again, nothing that strikes me other than guessing.
Also have read (early on) that some of Gaddafi’s “forces” (not clear whether those were poorly trained, poorly armed part, or his much better trained loyalists) flipped. How many & who? Have they flipped back? Or flipped flopped?
IOW, it sure would be “nice” to know who the coalition is supporting.
Collateral damage?
Anyone ready for a good Monday dose of nausia?
Looks like Jaun Cole’s got some great company.
Which leads me to wonder who is behind the whole ME domino effect…now Gibbs is considering a job at Facebook…where it all started supposedly…remember when the former Bushie guy, I’ve temporarily forgotten his name, ended up with Google…Makes me wonder..I have a vivid imagination. Surely just a coinkydink..
Sirte’s Gaddafi’s home town; it’s going to be defended nearly as heavily as Tripoli itself. It was expected that the rebel advance would slow down there.
Gibbs at facebook? That could be very interesting…
Maybe Facebook is one of the “tools” that Gates referred to yesterday..
Or a sign that yet another over-the-hill dysfunctional U.S. industry has captured the USG. Doesn’t seem to take long these days to go from tech giant to USG welfare queen.
“President Obama said the following of Gibbs’ return to the private sector ; “I think it’s natural for him to want to step back, reflect and retool. That brings up some challenges and opportunities for the White House – but it doesn’t change the important role that Robert will continue to play on our team.
http://news.lalate.com/2011/03/28/robert-gibbs-facebook-position-being-pursued/
I’ve been searching for you to thank you for the tumeric advice.
I’ve been at it for a a couple weeks and feel great.Thank you.
I love this community.
Oh thank you! I’m so glad it’s helping. Sure helps me!
The MSM continues to suppress the fact that up to 25% of every tankful comes from repressive dictator led oil producers which were enabled by the Clintons who palled around with the Saudis, Khadalfi’s son and the Mubariks resulting in a record setting increase in imported fossil fuels during the Clinton administration. The Clintons are painfully silent about the slaughter in Bahrain in past weeks by Saudi troops. Why is that one would ask? Is it that the Clintons have received over 20mmm in “speaking fees” and “foundation contributions” from the Saudis since leaving office.
It is shameful that the Saudi and Bahrain dictatorships are part of the embedded infrastructure of the US.
The “kill team” story hits MSM on same day as Barry will speak…so that story will quickly disappear when Gaddafi goes…funny how that works.
tjbs, there is absolutely no parallel between Iran the 1950s and Libya now. There was no popular uprising against the democratically elected government of Mosaddegh; the chaos was entirely orchestrated by our cia in support of dispossesed british oil.
One of the good points of this Libyan uprising is that there is no ‘leader,’ it really seems to be a popular movement. There was no ‘leader’ in Madison when the popular uprising started, but nobody on the left was asking if the demonstrators should be supported.
There have only been a couple of us at this site that have supported the intervention. Mike Diaz did, to my mind, an extremely cogent and passionate plea for protecting the rebels. We were not credited with having any really good basis for intervention. Now that Professor Cole has made an eloquent statement in favor of intervention, I suppose he is to be condemned as someone ignorant of reality.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0325/Political-strategy-in-Libya-US-and-others-must-recognize-a-rebel-government best I could find quickly, read somewhere they are keeping some names sercret for fear of being murdered by Gadafi(they aren’t in safe areas)
A study by Brian Fishman and Joseph Felter, published in 2007, found that 19% of al Qaeda members or those cooperating with al Qaeda were from Libya. They were known as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.
http://bdnews24.com/details.php?id=85819&cid=2
This CNN article pinpoints their location as being in northeast Libya which is where Banghazi and Darnah are located.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/12/20/iraq.main/
The names of the rebel leaders are starting to emerge; most prominent among them is Mustafa Abdul Jali, former justice minister.
http://www.u.tv/News/What-next-for-the-Anglo-French-forces-in-Libya/752ad08c-eea6-41e2-9e17-9d4bc315dc75
http://ntclibya.org/english/ duh, I should have known they’d have their own website!
“One of the good points of this Libyan uprising is that there is no ‘leader,’ it really seems to be a popular movement. There was no ‘leader’ in Madison when the popular uprising started, but nobody on the left was asking if the demonstrators should be supported.”
I wouldn’t equate what’s going on in Wisconsin with treasonous activity.
“Mike Diaz did, to my mind, an extremely cogent and passionate plea for protecting the rebels.”
This is being sold a humanitarian protection of civilians, not taking sides in a civil war. Lying about war is so Bush-like.
seems mostly to be doctors,lawyers,judges,etc. But George Will basically says the rebels are just ignorant savages itching for tribal wars and Andy Stone (whoever he is) basically says they are all AQ. My guess is somewhere in the middle and if the Libyans ever get to pick their own leaders I myself don’t care.
By the way, the LIFG — which was an anti-Gaddafi group well before it hooked up with Al Qaeda — is not the only opposition group, nor is it even the most important. That role, as it has since 1981, belongs to the decidedly secular National Front for the Salvation of Libya:
How important is the NFSL? One of their members, former Libyan army colonel Khalifa Hifter, is now the head of military operations for the Libyan National Council, the rebels’ leadership group. And no, the NFSL is not affilated with Al Qaeda.
Thanks for all the info in one place. I’d heard there were other groups out there. Can’t have too much info imo. I’m not ready to sell the Libyan opposition short yet.
Meet The Press
Mar 27
Gates and Clinton discuss U.S vital interests
When they’re asked about vital interests as it applies to this new Libya war, Gates and Clinton drop the “stopping a slaughter” meme and give us:
* Libya is not a U.S. vital interest
* It is in the U.S. interest that Tunisia & Egypt not destabilize because it might have an influence in Europe
* Europe supported the U.S. in Afghanistan after 9/11 (that again) so the U.S. should support Europe in Libya
* Disruption and instability in Libya is bad and “seen by our European friends and our Arab partners as very vital to their interests.”
It will be interesting to compare these Libya “vital interests” with what Obama says today about why the U.S. went to war illegally with no concept of how it might end.
The NFSL is important, for sure. And no, it’s not aligned with al-Qaeda but with the U.S. and Israel.
The National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL)
we’re all just one big family! or not.
9/11 is the all-purpose enduring reason for anything military, even Libya.
Thanks David.
I’m sure they only used humanitarian bombs on the city. /s
Seems like the no-fly-zone has turned into an unlimited bombing campaign with targets that go well beyond anti-air assets on the ground.
If the CIA would just shake a leg with the inbound pallets of $100 bills, then maybe we could finally identify who was on our side.
The “rebels” have been targeting blacks throughout Libya: http://somalilandpress.com/libya-rebels-execute-black-immigrants-while-forces-kidnap-others-20586
Libya has some form of democracy under Gadhafi, it will have none under the rebels. Under the rebels it will have a Saudi and Bahrain-type Islamist government … the kind the US tends to support.
THIS is all about the oil…. again…….
I just read several articles that specified the “rebels” have taken control of two major oil ports and are already making deals with Quatar to put oil on the market in a week………
Pretty quick when there’s oil involved, guess that’s why they didn’t invade the Congo with 100′s of thousands slaughtered.
But if you listen to mainstream (biased) news, you almost never hear the magic word spoken: OIL……..
Obama has failed to be a leader of progressive change, typical sell-out with a smile.
“I’m not ready to sell the Libyan opposition short yet.”
You’re wiser than all the people frantically trying to equate helping a genuine populist movement, with Iraq and Afghanistan.
My only concern is that Obama might be playing for another worse-than-useless stalemate, instead of actually taking a chance with the rebels.
It appears that they just might be able to take over without anything more than the airstrikes to suppress Ghadafy’s air force and armor. If that’s so, the main course for a lot of chicken littles on here, is going to be crow.
And, as always, it’s interesting to note how little concern there was about us getting into “another mid-east” war, when it looked like Mubarak might be able to hang on. All we needed to do was sever the tie between he and his military. And that is precisely the situation in Libya. Whether or not Obama and the rest of the coalition of the cautious will pursue this, or allow it to happen, is another thing.
“This is all about the oil…again.”
That’s nonsense. The west has had practicall uninterrupted access to Libya’s oil. We had it, only briefly interrupted, way back in April of 1986, after Reagan bombed Ghadafy’s compound and killed his adopted little daughter and shot down two Libyan planes. And it’s flowed ever since.
Would anyone like to explain how allowing an independent and populist government to take over in Libya is going to increase that access?
Be my guest.
I would hardly call these “rebels” populist. Their main gripe with Gadhafi is that he’s advanced secularism in the country as well as stating that nonMuslims should have the right to visit Mecca. The western media tends to overlook this sort of thing and concentrate on unconfirmed “atrocities” by Gadhafi’s forces.
Also, there’s no denying their Al Qaeda ties, even coming from the mouths of their own commander (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html) or the fact that they have Al Qaeda’s support (http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=212003).
Of course, Gadhafi’s biggest crime in the west’s opinion is not allowing foreigners to control Libya’s oil wealth.
let’s see if I have this right: Libyans that went to a foreign land (Iraq) to fight agaisnt an imperialist invader (the U.S.) are now back in their own land fighting to help the imperialist invader (the U.S.) or we’re bombing the guy that was selling us oil so we can buy it from al Qaeda?I need a Teabagger to help me with this. And if you have a very strong stomach go to You Tube(or to many other more solid sources) and you can find many clips of Gadafi’s atrocities, but I know you probably won’t cause that doesn’t fit your nonlinear narrative. I’ve heard good points not to get involved but these aren’t them. And thanks tanbark, you also show wisdom.
I find myself agreeing with probably 90% of the FDL community. But I must say I’m disturb when some start with a conclusion that fits their ideology then go seeking evidence to back up their certainty instead of letting the evidence lead to a conclusion. And it’s stunning to see some using the Pentagon, Col. Gadafi,right wing papers etc. as sources of so called credible information to back up their infallible view as they see it.! Strikes me (sadly) as mirror image of Teabaggers.
Wow, you sure do a lot of posturing without actually saying anything. For all your frothing at the mouth, you can’t seem to dispute anything, except by going “well, Gadhafi is a bad dude.” But, it’s pretty funny that all the alleged accounts of his “atrocities” are coming from fundamentalist rebels (who are targeting him for being anti-Islamic) and the Pentagon. What makes them any more reliable than reports of the rebels targeting blacks and American airstrikes killing hundreds of civilians (America’s track record shows the US knowingly targets them).
Seriously, you haven’t offered anything but pants-wetting, mouth-frothing anger akin to Tea-baggers and Neo-cons.
Thanks for the link. We only seem to be getting peek-a-boo looks at the rebels which in itself is worrying. But if they tend to be as backward as the group highlighted in that article then we’d be looking at something along the lines of 1980′s Iran.
Read DK for a day and you wouldn’t even know there’s a new US war (or is it a intervention or police action?) in Libya. It’s more fun to talk about those zany Republiclowns I guess.
What a non-answer, of course it is hard for you to explain non-sensical reasoning. As to “atrocities” please check out Amnesty Internation, UN Human rights org. etc. And yes they cover atrocities from BOTH sides. I never said the “rebels” were saints.I offer you facts and you offer smears that just demean yourself.
http://english.aljazeera.net/mritems/Documents/2011/3/29/2011329113923943811The%20Interim%20Transitional%20National%20Council%20Statement.pdf sounds like AQ to me! For those who suggest: rebels=AQ may I suggest Fox News where: all muslims=terrorists.
DK, you’re not very good at this. I looked at Amnesty International’s Libya section and low and behold, no confirmed “atrocities” by Gadhafi’s forces. Only allegations of disappearances and rapes that sound strangely like the propaganda used against the Iraqis in 2003. It’s also pretty interesting that Amnesty spends a lot of time condemning the African Union while at the same time ignoring rebels’ attacks on blacks and other perceived pro-Gadhafi agents. Essentially, Amnesty itself is admitting it’s going on unconfirmed reports on alleged atrocities. Not even the bombings by Libyan forces have been confirmed.
As for the UN Human Rights Council, the group, including the US, offered Libya heavy praise for its constitutional framework, openness and modernization. It’s actually rather silent on the issue of Libya … who it did not suspend from the body (the General Assembly did that).
As for my “non-answer” (sic), you never offered a question. Just rambling insults without actual refutation of news sources. You’ve got “get Gadhafi” blinders on and already have your mind made up, sort of like a fundamentalist Christian whose made up their mind about evolution.
Fine, I’ll dumb down the question so you can understand it. You insinuate the Libyan rebels are AQ that fought agaisnt the U.S. in Iraq (from what I hear that is cause they thought we were imperalist infidel invaders) and now you posit that these same AQ Libyans are fighting to help us invade their own country. I see a contradiction in that argument. If you don’t that says more about your logic than mine. Take my questions as insults if you like, Ill just sit here in my frothy urine soaked pants LMAO.
as to your other points. I’m ok that A.I. has no credibilty with you.(thankfully it does with all who care about human rights)2. I could care less what becomes of Gaddafi.3. I have an open mind and admit I could be wrong. 4. I don’t cherry pick facts and BS to support an already reached conclusion.
“strangely like the propaganda used against the Iraqis in 2003″ got a link where AI said anything like that?
better yet, just read the AI report instead of reading INTO the report what suits you.
Now you’re just being silly. Most of us were alive and aware in 2003 … I’m not going to waste minutes of my life digging up old articles because you are either too young to remember or suffer from sort of memory problems.
Now you’re just putting words in my mouth, a tactic that’s pretty popular with Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity types. No where did I say that A.I. didn’t have credibility, A.I. self-admits that there’s no confirmation of the reported atrocities. So, can you actually come with anything of substance instead of offering faux outrage in hopes that it distracts from the fact you’re not offering anything of substance?
Hey, facts are facts, doesn’t mean you have to like them. You’re the one that’s looking silly in not accepting them.
Theory: A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. It’s called the “theory of evolution” for a reason. But I accept it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kfc5eibgGm0&feature=player_embedded Watch this film and tell me it’s just a theory.If you don’t want to believe your lying eyes that’s ok. By the way I’ve been around over 50+ years and called bullshit and protested against the Iraq war before it started. And you’ve yet to explain why or what would motivate AQ to help us invade another muslim nation. Do you suppose it’s a trap? Sneaky devils.
On reflection I’ve realized I have a bad habit of expecting folks to be open-minded and willing to reason but it’s dawned on me again that no matter what evidence I post here your(Dystopia Joe) mind is made up and all the proof in the world won’t change it.imo One thing we probably have in common is that I bet we both wish ALL the killing would stop. And my apologies for being so sarcastic, I just get angry when I see those young kids gunned downed like rabid dogs and one shouldn’t let their emotions cloud their conduct. We’ll just have to disagree on this I guess, but no hard feelings I hope and best of luck to you.