NATO Air Strike Kills Gadhafi's Son and Three Grandchildren

NATO launched an airstrike today that killed Saif al-Arab Gadhafi, the 29 year old son of Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gadhafi, and three grandchildren.

The Libyan Government, through spokesman Moussa Ibrahim says Colonel Gaddafi and his wife were also in the house but unharmed. BBC reporter Christian Fraser writes that a few hours after the explosion:

[W]e were eventually brought to the villa, which was surrounded by reinforced concrete, cameras, and military positions. This is clearly an exclusive neighbourhood. Inside, total destruction.

....It's hard to imagine that anyone could have escaped unscathed, though according to the government spokesman the Libyan leader and his wife were present and are safe and well. But there's no independent evidence they were there.

NATO airstrikes are intended to save civilian lives in Libya. Libya says today's strike was an assassination attempt.

< Ben Masel, RIP | Pentagon Funds Civilian Death Penalty Lawyer for Guantanamo Detainee >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Another (none / 0) (#1)
    by lentinel on Sat Apr 30, 2011 at 08:10:25 PM EST

    Humanitarian aid (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Sat Apr 30, 2011 at 09:03:27 PM EST

    If its true, (none / 0) (#4)
    by NYShooter on Sat Apr 30, 2011 at 10:03:04 PM EST
    I can just imagine how much mileage they can get out a photo: death & destruction, children's bodies on one side vs Obama splitting his sides & ear to ear laughter at the  White House Correspondent's dinner on the other.

    Unfair maybe, but powerful nonetheless.

    I can't imagine (none / 0) (#5)
    by Jeralyn on Sun May 01, 2011 at 01:29:19 AM EST
    anyone would connect the two.

    I can't imagine... (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by Romberry on Sun May 01, 2011 at 10:15:34 AM EST
    ...how anyone who is opposed to senseless war and who knew that this whole "no-fly zone" thing was a lie from the beginning wouldn't.  If it were Bush in the White House, that's the exact juxtaposition of headlines and images that I'd expect liberals who feel that war is a last resort to be turned to only in the face of imminent threat to the United States would make. Why should it be any different with Obama?

    Regardless of what liberals (and Democrats) do or don't do with respect to this assassination attempt which (reportedly) killed these children, I'm reasonably certain that quite a few people in the part of the world where our government continues to be a merchant of death will make the connection. And why not? I can't see where it is at all dishonest or invalid, especially in light of the fact that NATO is under command of a US general, and there is absolutely no way that the White House did not know of and approve of this strike in advance.


    "intended to save civilian lives" (none / 0) (#7)
    by Andreas on Sun May 01, 2011 at 03:57:38 PM EST

    Jeralyn wrote:

    NATO airstrikes are intended to save civilian lives in Libya.

    That was the official line at the beginning of the war. But it was and is as false as the claims made by the Republicans and the Democrats when US imperialism conquered Iraq.