Ed US Cluster Bombed Misrata?

[Caustic Logic]

? (was supposed to be in title)

Alright, there's been much noise about the Gaddafi regime's human rights violations. One crime that seems to have slid a bit from the public radar is the deadly cluster bombig of Misrata by Gaddafi forces, April 13-15.

Here's the CT version, backed up with research (someone else did) that I invite a critique of. The model of cluster munition (normally mortar-fired) was the MAT-120, per its company never sold to Libya as earlier claimed, only to NATO forces. So the CT is NATO (US vessel off the shore with cannon adapted to fire mortar-style munitions) shot these things in to give one more black eye to the government there. And only later noticed they used the wrong model that doesn't even implicate Libya after all?

My own blog post as an entry point:
http://libyancivilwar.blogspot.com/2011/06/whose-cluster-bombs-fell-on-misrata.html

The actual stuff is explained in these articles by "Human Rights Investigations":
http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/05/23/destroying-misrata-to-save-it/
http://humanrightsinvestigations.or...-bombing-of-misrata-the-case-against-the-usa/
http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/05/27/admiral-james-stavridis/

and a couple others. I think it looks pretty good, and said so. So there's motive for someone to try and show what's wrong with the research.

Off the bat I'll concede saying it was US is major speculation but the question is, how good really is the case for it being Gaddafi? And if it was even remotely anyone else ... why?

 

[Greedo]

Couldn't they have obtained the munitions elsewhere?

Somebody please debunk this.

http://www.jeteye.com/jetpak/097aa2fe-60cc-44ca-9b4c-e20c75edb925/

ETA: About the time thing - Couldn't it simply be that the camera was set for a different time zone?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Adapted a 'cannon' to fire mortar munitions?

What's out there the 'Black Pearl?

Why not find out what ships were off the coast and what their guns were. Offthe top of my head it would only fit the US 5 inch.

120mm Mortars have a range of up to about 8,000 metres and a low muzzle velocity, they 'lob' their ammunition and fire in elevations above 45 degrees.

American ships carry a 125mm (5 inch) gun which would fit your Mortar round but it has an even higher muzzle velocity and the round again would be destroyed or damaged if fired. They are designed to be effective against aircraft and have a high muzzle velocity to punch the shells up to high altitude . Mortar ammunition woudln't survive.

If you reduce the muzzle velocity to allow the round to be fired you will cut the range back to about 8000 metres again.

Royal Navy ships have 114 (4.5 inch) guns

French Ships carry 100mm guns, even worse for your idea.

 

[Eddie Dane]

Adapted a 'cannon' to fire mortar munitions?

What's out there the 'Black Pearl?

Why not find out what ships were off the coast and what their guns were. Offthe top of my head it would only fit the US 5 inch.

120mm Mortars have a range of up to about 8,000 metres and a low muzzle velocity, they 'lob' their ammunition and fire in elevations above 45 degrees.

American ships carry a 125mm (5 inch) gun which would fit your Mortar round but it has an even higher muzzle velocity and the round again would be destroyed or damaged if fired. They are designed to be effective against aircraft and have a high muzzle velocity to punch the shells up to high altitude . Mortar ammunition woudln't survive.

If you reduce the muzzle velocity to allow the round to be fired you will cut the range back to about 8000 metres again.

Royal Navy ships have 114 (4.5 inch) guns

French Ships carry 100mm guns, even worse for your idea.

Aha!

That means the Israelis are behind it!

 

[Andy_Ross]

Also isn't the MAT-120 a Spanish product, not US

 

[Greedo]

Aha!

That means the Israelis are behind it!

DAA DAA DAAAAAAAAAAAAA

 

[Travis]

Considering there is no precedent for the US to massacre people for public relations purposes while there is precedent for Gaddafi to attack his own civilian population and there is a precedent for "friendly" munitions to end up on the black market I'd say this idea is not exactly parsimonious.

 

[Debaser]

Royal Navy ships have 114 (4.5 inch) guns

114 x 4.5 inch guns?????

I'm surprised anyone dare take the RN on with that amount of firepower on each ship...



Aside from that, if anyone should care to do a Google for 'libyan technicals' or somesuch they'll find a cornucopia of (not very standard) weaponry highlighting the incredible inventiveness of humans when killin' needs to be done.

 

[catsmate]

Adapted a 'cannon' to fire mortar munitions?

What's out there the 'Black Pearl?

Why not find out what ships were off the coast and what their guns were. Offthe top of my head it would only fit the US 5 inch.

120mm Mortars have a range of up to about 8,000 metres and a low muzzle velocity, they 'lob' their ammunition and fire in elevations above 45 degrees.

American ships carry a 125mm (5 inch) gun which would fit your Mortar round but it has an even higher muzzle velocity and the round again would be destroyed or damaged if fired. They are designed to be effective against aircraft and have a high muzzle velocity to punch the shells up to high altitude . Mortar ammunition woudln't survive.

If you reduce the muzzle velocity to allow the round to be fired you will cut the range back to about 8000 metres again.

Royal Navy ships have 114 (4.5 inch) guns

French Ships carry 100mm guns, even worse for your idea.

Correct. There is no way for high velocity naval rifles to fire mortar rounds; the latter are thin walled rounds designed for low velocity firing.
Frankly this entire story strikes me as complete rubbish written by someone with no knowledge of the weapons involved.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Considering there is no precedent for the US to massacre people for public relations purposes while there is precedent for Gaddafi to attack his own civilian population and there is a precedent for "friendly" munitions to end up on the black market I'd say this idea is not exactly parsimonious.

Whatever validity that argument has, the pattern's not broken anyway. No onedied or was even injured in this attack, it seems. I think witnesses swore a couple bomblets blew up, but otherwise they seem to have been mostly duds. "At least three" MAT-120s exploded over the city, seen by many (do they usually blow up bright?), 21 bomblets each, 63 total, at least, and no injuries known by the next day? Just for show?

Gaddafi's history of attacks is of charges like this, never examined criticall. So I'd rather not use past maybes to support this maybe. It's a sort of a fallacy, I argue, and the evidence at hand is what matters.

Black market is the best explanation I think (I mean among explanations that keep the blame on Gaddafi). But it does add a complexity - framing the US for trying to frame him, and the media just says "it was him" and everyone believes it quietly, hardly anyone noticing the weapon is owned by NATO and not that we know by Libya. Can anyone see why I find that inadequate?

 

[Caustic Logic]

Adapted a 'cannon' to fire mortar munitions?

What's out there the 'Black Pearl?

As HRI says:

The MAT-120 ammunition is indeed mortar-fired, but it is a weapon of a specific type which can apparently be used in weapons systems, such as the AMOS or NEMO, mounted in a turret.

It's specified how the 120mm device can be fired, so it can be verified. It's only with this mod that anyone says it'd possible. If you could show that wrong, that'd be a pretty debunkerly thing.

Why not find out what ships were off the coast and what their guns were.

Well, you'd have to consider (?) which are capable of hosting the AMOS or NEMO adaptations, if those are found to make this whole thing possible, as alleged.

From there:

The main ships involved from the United States Navy – ie “supporting Operation Unified Protector, off the coast of Libya” on the 14th and 15th April are attached to the Kearsarge Amphibious Group – Kearsarge (LHD-3) itself was in port in Augusta Bay, Sicily during the nights on which cluster munitions were used in Misrata.
The first ship is the USS Barry (DG-52) which is a destroyer and probably the destroyer spotted by CJ Chivers off the coast of Misrata.

I probably could find these things out, but not the best for lack of base knowledge even or time to find out where you find out, etc. So I bring it here.

Also isn't the MAT-120 a Spanish product, not US

Yes, made in Spain, formally sold to the US and other countries, but not to Libya.

 

[Andy_Ross]

So, what we are proposing is the mounting of a prototype Naval version of the Swedish AMOS/NEMO Mortar system onto a US Warship to fire a couple of Spanish mortar rounds into Lybia just to slightly embarrass Gadaffi?

cool story ...

 

[theprestige]

As HRI says:

It's specified how the 120mm device can be fired, so it can be verified. It's only with this mod that anyone says it'd possible. If you could show that wrong, that'd be a pretty debunkerly thing.



Well, you'd have to consider (?) which are capable of hosting the AMOS or NEMO adaptations, if those are found to make this whole thing possible, as alleged.

AMOS is a mortar. Specifically, it's a twin-barreled 120mm turret-mounted mortar, capable of firing any suitable 120mm mortar rounds. Modifying a 120mm mortar round to be fired by a 120mm mortar is so profoundly uninteresting as to raise the question of why you're referring to it as "this mod" at all.

And, of course, a 120mm mortar round that can be fired from turret-mounted 120mm mortars is still not a 120mm mortar round that can be fired from 114mm or 125mm naval guns (turret-mounted or otherwise).

To put the bomblets from a 120mm mortar round into a 114mm naval gun of the Royal Navy, you'd have to package them in an entirely different casing. You'd have to pack less bomblets, or make the casing longer to accommodate the full 120mm load. Either way, you're now talking about a whole different munition, with a whole different series of part numbers and catalog numbers, and a separate assembly process. A munition, let it be said, for which no evidence has been presented.

To put the bomblets into a 125mm naval gun of the US Navy, you'd need a special sleeve or sabot, or a different casing again. The sabot would have its own part number, manufacturer, and supplier--for which no evidence has been presented. The same is true of the casing.

And all that assumes that the bomblets themselves are suitable for such an application. Having been designed originally for low-velocity mortars (like the AMOS), they may not survive firing from a high-velocity naval gun regardless of the casing.

Have you ever seen a modification to a piece of military hardware? The bureaucracy is mind-boggling. Even something as simple as a tripod for a general-purpose machine gun might have two or three parts, each with their own part number, supply line item, and operator's manual.

Incidentally, while the Wikipedia entry for shell (projectile) does mention cluster shells, it doesn't cite any examples. Google searches for "naval gun cluster bomb" and "naval gun cluster munition" turned up no such example within the first page of results. It appears that the military-industrial complexes of the world, and their fanboys, find such things supremely uninteresting.

On the other hand, there does seem to be a lot of interest in 120mm mortars. Witness the aforementioned AMOS, which is a truly sweet piece of state-of-the-art firepower. Even if you don't agree with me about that, you may find it interesting that the AMOS claims a maximum range of 10km, about 2,000 meters more than the usual 8,000 meter range cited earlier in this thread.

Even more interesting is that AMOS is suitable for use on boats. If you can show evidence that a Swedish shallow-water Combat Boat 90 has been deployed to the Libyan coast, I'd say that would be a big indicator that your claim holds water. Likewise if you can show evidence that an AMOS or other 120mm mortar system has been mounted on any NATO corvette, cutter, frigate, destroyer, or cruiser, and that such a vessel has been deployed to the Mediterranean.

Of course, the AMOS isn't the only 120mm mortar out there. There are others. Wikipedia offers a partial list of 120mm infantry mortars, including the Russian 2S12 Sani, which is in use by Algeria.

Then there's the Russian-designed M-43, a 120mm mortar cited by Global Security as part of the Libyan Army's arsenal. What do you think, CL? Would it be reasonable to assume that Libyan army forces, equipped with 120mm mortars, might be within, say, 8,000 meters of downtown Misrata, from time to time?

 

[dropzone]

...and their fanboys...

I know these guys, and:

1. Their expertise is not to be trifled with.
2. What they know they tell everybody else because their status comes from knowing it first.
3. This is because they are (all together now) FANBOYS.
4. And probably Brits, because they invented the fanboy. Trainspotting? Can the rest of us imagine a more tedious hobby than sitting at a level crossing in ones anorak and writing down the model of every single boxcar that rolls past? Then sharing it with your bros? Living outside Chicago I know one. Of course he's a Brit.

 

[Caustic Logic]

AMOS is a mortar. Specifically, it's a twin-barreled 120mm turret-mounted mortar, capable of firing any suitable 120mm mortar rounds. Modifying a 120mm mortar round to be fired by a 120mm mortar is so profoundly uninteresting as to raise the question of why you're referring to it as "this mod" at all.

Is it built into ships these days, or "turret-mounted" as you say, stuck on later as-needed? If so, that makes it a modification to the ship's cannon, which is what I meant. The cannon can then aim and shoot things it couldn't before. Otherwise, what's the point of fitting it?

And, of course, a 120mm mortar round that can be fired from turret-mounted 120mm mortars is still not a 120mm mortar round that can be fired from 114mm or 125mm naval guns (turret-mounted or otherwise).

??? How about just from a 120 mm turret-mounted mortar, which you yourself describe as "capable of firing any suitable 120mm mortar rounds"? Is the MAT-120 unsuitable? Where are you going here?

To put the bomblets from a 120mm mortar round into a 114mm naval gun of the Royal Navy, you'd have to...

Why point this out? Isn't the AMOS mortar thing what's specified? Who said they'd be fired right from the cannon itself?

Have you ever seen a modification to a piece of military hardware? The bureaucracy is mind-boggling.

This is required to fit an AMOS-type system onto the barrel for even a covert black op like this? Or what? Where are you going here? You've totally lost me.

Maybe I'm confused here, and I admit I know nothing of these weapons, but you say the AMOS is itself basically a mortar, right? It's fitted to the cannon but the cannon doesn't have to do the firing, I thought - it's the shell or bomb that fires itself in a mortar, usually, isn't it? I had presumed the point of using the cannons at all is to use their horizontal and vertical aiming systems for greater precision.

So unless that's wrong, the questions should be only
1) if the AMOS and/or NEMO can, as HRI says, fire the MAT-120.
2) if the these devices can be fitted to the cannons on any of the ships specified as nearby

Unless either of those can be shown wrong, or my reasons for saying so shown wrong, then I'll have to consider what HRI says as un-debunked.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Couldn't they have obtained the munitions elsewhere?

Somebody please debunk this.

http://www.jeteye.com/jetpak/097aa2fe-60cc-44ca-9b4c-e20c75edb925/

ETA: About the time thing - Couldn't it simply be that the camera was set for a different time zone?

As I said to Travis, skipping you, sure. But we KNOW the US bought it right from the company, and there are still other factors to consider like motive, timing, tactics, location (the neighborhood where all the journalists were) and so on to consider.

I refuse to take the time to figure out what that side-argumet is all about - error detection? I get the time-stamps thing ... sure I've seen 9/11 Truthers do that too. I never thought it meant much, because I'm jut not sure...

Also just to note to everyone and no one, I realize my OP was brief and imprecisely worded. Some of the disagreements and confusion we've run into might stem from too literal a reading of that late-late-night missive.

Here's a tip - if you wonder what I mean somewhere, and you can think of one fairly rational version, and one that's just bonkers, try not to just presume I meant the bonkers one, mkay? Get confused, ask.

Peace.

 

[little grey rabbit]

Wouldnt a more simpler solution be that the New York Times journalist or the Human Rights Watch investigator involved just stuck the used cluster munition in their luggage before going to Misrata?

IIRC, no one seemed to have found any bomblets, just the carrier.

 

[Greedo]

Alright, let's look at it this way (btw, this is a great way to debunk many CTs).

So the US (or if you wanna take it a step further, the NATO, or if you wanna go nutty, the NWO) wants to cluster bomb Misrata. And pretend it was al-Qaddhafi, then why would they want to use their own ammo (wich only fits their™ ships with modifications in the first place)? If I'm the evil mastermind and I want to do something and claim it was someone else, I'll make sure to make it believable, i.e. use the enemies weapons (look at real black ops, the S.O.G.-operations in South-East Asia during the Vietnam War). In fact, that is the first thing, that comes to mind, and is done when you would actually perform such an operation.

Also, what ship would that have been? The whole crew would have had to be in on it. That's about 350 men. Also, the whole act of shooting these CBs isn't exactly clandestine. There's a high risk many people would notice.

I'm calling major BS on this one. If it had been a conspiracy, then it would have been done completely differently. If anyone now argues, that they™ planned that too, to make it look like that, then boy, they™ either have to much time on their hands, or you a questionable mental state.

 

[I Ratant]

Paper this a.m. has the US complaining that NATO is running out of ammo after only 11 weeks of fighting, and the US has to make up theshortfall.
I guess by loaning it out...

 

[McHrozni]

Correct. There is no way for high velocity naval rifles to fire mortar rounds; the latter are thin walled rounds designed for low velocity firing.

Would the rifling of the barrels be enough to destroy mortar rounds? It would certainly leave marks on the munitions, which are clearly not present.

Frankly this entire story strikes me as complete rubbish written by someone with no knowledge of the weapons involved.

I concur.

McHrozni