British troops may act as peacekeepers if Libya descends into chaos

[jakeXT]

Source: Daily Mail

Hundreds of British soldiers could be sent to Libya to serve as peacekeepers if the country descends into chaos, Downing Street indicated last night.

Number 10 repeatedly refused to rule out deploying ground troops to the war zone to prevent anarchy after Colonel Gaddafi is toppled.

A spokesman insisted a deployment remained ‘unlikely’ at this stage – but the development will fuel fears of ‘mission creep’ and that Britain will slowly be sucked into a long campaign.

Two hundred troops are on standby to fly to the North African state at 24 hours’ notice if needed.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2029013/Libya-war-British-troops-act-peacekeepers-Gaddafis-downfall.html#ixzz1VrGrJ9uX

[Smarmie Doofus]

1. Oy. Yeah. "Peacekeepers". Right. n/t

[PurityOfEssence]

16. Definitely got to keep those oil fields, refineries and pipelines peaceful...

I suppose they can protect the odd civilian here and there, too...

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

2. We will gladly put boots on the ground, to help the Brits

I don't think we have the self-control to stay out of a war. We will justify the "boots on the ground" for humanitarian reasons.

War is great.

:hi:

[karynnj]

5. Obama has explicitly said no to this - as has everyone on the SFRC

One thing that was in the resolution the SFRC worked on, which never went to the Senate floor, was that it included language that precluded troops even in that phase.

[ForeignandDomestic]

14. ........

Winners:

- IMF
- World Bank
- Britain
- France
- United States
- Military Industrial Complex/Contractors oil and otherwise
- Al QAeda

Losers:

- Libyan people, sectarian violence and immovable debt will surely cloud this proud country from this point forward.
- Kadaffi, no tears for him at all really.
- China, had massive investments in Kaddaffi's government and had signed independent oil contracts.
- Dinah, Africa's gold currency will surely be a distant memory now.
- Finally last and not least PEACE was the final loser in all of this!!!

[bongbong]

3. Prediction

And the chaos in Libya will start in 3...2..1. Those Brits will be "forced" to go in and occupy for, well only a limited time, like 20 or 30 years.

WHO COULD'VE PREDICTED IT????

[bhikkhu]

11. Like many things, predicted over and over again; predictably. n/t

[bemildred]

4. Let them deal with "chaos" by themselves.

"Chaos" can look pretty good when a dictator falls.

[rayofreason]

6. Tribal warfare redux...

...and Iraq-like chaos at its worst may be the most likely outcome.

To be honest there are almost no good outcomes in the near future (5 years) in the Arab world. The political culture is too stifled and focused on myth and conspiracy theories, corruption is too endemic, human capital so lacking and also under utilized, knowledge creation and dissemination is almost zero, and besides oil, they have nothing to sell that anyone wants. Meanwhile the prices of wheat will go up, chinese pigs will be fattened for the table as Egyptian peasants starve, and month-by-month, year-by-year, the situation will get worse and worse (especially in Egypt).

Sorry to be such a bummer. I have much sympathy for the Arabs, once a great people, but every trend I see is negative with little short-term hope, except, ironically, perhaps Iraq. At least they have some semblance of representative government, oil resources, and among the best educated population in the Arab world.

[Arctic Dave]

7. Hundreds?

Sounds like just enough to cover oil assets.

LOL. But that is most likely part of the plan, let it descend into chaos so we can reap the result, destroyed infrastructure, sect. violence, massive rebuilding debt, etc.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Cabinet minister: "We do not see any circumstances in which British troops would be deployed ...

... on the ground in Libya"

Defence Secretary Liam Fox and International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell also attended, along with a number of military chiefs, while Foreign Secretary William Hague is returning to London from holiday.
...
Asked about claims of a fightback by forces loyal to the regime, Mr Mitchell - responsible for the UK's humanitarian efforts - said the UK would "to some extent" have to await events as they unfolded.
...
He also insisted the UK's military involvement in the country would not be expanded beyond those "special advisers" and "mentors" currently working with the Libyan opposition forces.

"We do not see any circumstances in which British troops would be deployed on the ground in Libya," he told the BBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-politics-14625484

For the moment, I'd say go with the sourced quote from a senior elected politician, reported by the respected BBC, rather than the anonymous source reported by the RW, highly dodgy, Daily Mail.

[dipsydoodle]

9. Despite the specific reference

I don't think they'd move the Lancers whatever from Cyprus aside from which 200 would hardly be likely to achieve much.

Might however be a good excuse to get out of Afghanistan.

[daleo]

23. Are bookmaker shops taking action on this?

It would be interesting to know their odds.

[pampango]

10. No sign that Libyans want ANY peacekeepers much less Western ones.

Since this whole operation has been done under UN auspices, any peacekeepers (purely hypothetical at this point) would come from the UN.

Politicians seem to be reluctant to "rule out" possible future courses of action even if they have no real intention of following them. They want to keep their opponents guessing as to what they will do next.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8717392/Libya-battle-for-Tripoli-turns-bloody-as-Gaddafi-holds-out-to-the-end.html

The turmoil in Tripoli led to speculation that Western governments might have to deploy peacekeeping troops. Downing Street would not rule out deploying British forces, but said it was "not expecting" to do so.

Government officials said that if peacekeepers were required, the UK would push for African nations to take the lead.

[PurityOfEssence]

20. Not much sign of much of anything at the moment

That's sort of to be expected, though.

Hopefully, the Tribal Councils can draw everyone in and get them engaged, and hopefully the foreign opportunists don't overreach too much right now.

It's a very interesting situation without too many parallels: usually there is more "government" in existence from an overthrown state and more organization of various political parties.

I wish them well, and I hope foreigners keep their meddling in check.

[daleo]

24. Hope away

But the west hasn't kept its meddling in check so far. So why would they start now?

[frylock]

12. if?

[PufPuf23]

13. Evidently Brit SAS are already on the ground.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4970418

[PurityOfEssence]

15. Wouldn't that be a violation of UN Resolution 1973?

Wouldn't such a force constitute an army of occupation?

[dipsydoodle]

18. Technicality

If and when the "Rebels" become the recognised government they can invite in whoever they wish.

Whether or not they will wish to do remains to be seen.

[PurityOfEssence]

19. "...while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory,..."

Text of the document is deliberately vague on whether troops may be there in the ongoing fighting to save the civilians, and I and others had interpreted this to mean that "boots on the ground" were acceptable under this resolution, but the concept of an army of occupation is pretty specifically ruled out.

There's also the very real question of legitimacy for the NTC; who's to say they speak for the people and can invite in foreigners to preserve their oil deals, bank takeovers and other various transfers of property. Just because France blessed them with legitimacy and others followed doesn't give them any legitimacy at all.

Whatever. The embargo was constantly violated, the mandate to protect civilians was stretched to ridiculousness and the very spirit of the resolution trampled by the actions of the last few months, so nothing in the document really means anything anymore.

For novelty's sake, though, here's the full text:

resolution text from The Guardian

[Fool Count]

21. Oh, they will wish to. How else are they going to remain in power?

Certainly not on the strength of dramatic improvement of Libyans' lives
they are about to bring.

[closeupready]

17. Of course they will, LOL. Gotta protect the sanctity of the contract.

:rofl:

[daleo]

22. Try tens of thousands

And not just British.

Remember it when pensions and health care are cut back home. It'll be a nice warm feeling.