Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Is Gaddafi A Legitimate Target In The Libyan War?

Surveying the damage: Libyan army soldiers stand amid the wreckage of the administration building inside Bab Al-Aziziyah, Gaddafi's heavily fortified compound in Tripoli where 300 people were reported to be at the time of the attack. Photo from The Daily Mail

Libya: U.K. Ministers Contradict Chief Of The Defence Staff Over Legality Of Targeted Strike On Col Gaddafi -- The Telegraph

Cabinet ministers have contradicted senior military commanders by suggesting that coalition forces in action over Libya can legitimately target Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

The Chief of the Defence Staff, Gen Sir David Richards, flatly insisted that seeking to hit the Libyan dictator was not allowed under the terms of United Nations Security Council resolution 1973.

But after Defence Secretary Liam Fox suggested over the weekend that Col Gaddafi could be a "legitimate target", No 10 sources insisted it was legal to target anyone killing Libyan civilians.

The controversy blew up as Col Gaddafi's compound in Tripoli was hit in a second night of coalition air strikes aimed at suppressing the regime's air defences and command and control structure.

Read more ....

More News On Gaddafi Being A Legitimate Target For Coalition Forces

Our top general shot down by No.10: War of words erupts as Army chief says we have no legal right to kill Gaddafi -- The Daily Mail
Is Muammar Gaddafi a target? PM and military split over war aims -- The Guardian
UK government at war with Army over whether to target Gaddafi -- The Independent
Libya: conflict spreads to Whitehall as David Cameron takes on David Richards -- The Telegraph
Confusion over Gaddafi 'targeting' clouds coalition -- The Telegraph
Libya: Removing Gaddafi not allowed, says David Cameron -- The Guardian
Gaddafi 'not targeted' by strikes -- BBC
Obama walks fine line on Gadhafi's future -- CNN
Gaddafi not on coalition target list: Pentagon -- Reuters
Targeting Gaddafi not part of mission - US general -- Reuters
Is Gaddafi himself a target? -- Simon Tisdall, The Guardian

No comments: