Talk:Fourth Battle of Brega

Merge

What about merging this article and 2nd Ajdabiya article into Third Battle of Brega? (Or some other name, but keep it all in a single article.)

IMO all these actions represent a single continuous fight for the control of the Brega district. From hindsight, the incursion into Ajdabiya looks more like strategic defense-by-tactical-offense designed to give non-combat forces in Brega few days of calm to dig in and prepare long-term defensive positions. Destroying a bunch of rebel vehicles being just a nice benefit (We do not know whose tanks NATO bombed). I am just speculating here, but the "attack" on Ajdabiya seemed too light-hearted to me to count for a "Battle" ...Ihosama (talk) 22:30, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

What "Brega" means in military rebelspeak

We are again edit warring about what did the rebels mean when they said they could not enter Brega.

We are again in the same situation as in the 3rd Brega article. Let's not make the same mistakes again. Let's analyze what the rebels said then, and what was independently confirmed.

From that article I believe that rebelspeak We have entered/captured Brega means We have entered/captured New Brega.

That is the only way the rebel claims can be even considered WP:RS. We either assume good faith (then Brega == New Brega) or we need to dismiss rebel claims as far as their military advances go.Ihosama (talk) 22:46, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Brega is spread out over a large area, but can be defined as three areas. The eastern most area is New Brega and is a community 10 kms to the east of Brega. This was captured by the rebels on April 16.

The outskirts of Brega proper is bounded by the Univeristy on the East, followed by an industial zone, refinery and port, and finally residential old brega on the west. The complex geographic makeup of Brega, does lead to confusing articles. We can assume that the rebels control New Brega, and are now fighting for the university on the eastern edge of Brega Proper. (source google maps, high resolution) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.192.50.113 (talk) 00:14, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Except for that one source, which by the way has been proven unreliable since last time a battle was on for the town the site claimed the rebels had captured Brega five times :P, no other independent news sources confirmed that New/East Brega had been captured. 99 percent of independent news media doesn't mention New (East) Brega or West Brega and they even quoted rebels themselves on the front they were only on the outskirts of Brega and not in it. We need to stick to the sources we have and not make up things or it could be OR. Besides, even Al Jazeera stated that there was only fighting in eastern Brega earlier today (noting about a capture) before reports came in the rebels were repelled. And later Al Jazeera confirmed that and I quoute the source Meanwhile, NATO has continued its air assault on Muammar Gaddafi's forces in the eastern town of Brega. Rebel forces are reportedly advancing on the oil town, as they push on from nearby Ajdabiya. On a dirt track off the main Brega highway doctors and a surgeon prepare for the next wave of casualties despite all the talk of help on the international stage. They still haven't entered it. Eather the west or east side. That one report, since it was posted on a rebel website, was most likely propaganda, and pointing out once again that site has proven to be unreliable in the past. The university is beside the highway and, according to the map, it seems it overlooks a crossroads that leads to East Brega which is north-northeast of the university. By all logic they would need to secure the university before moving on to East Brega. In any case, the situation will be more clearer in the morning. Wait until than, but still continue sticking to independent sources and not propaganda by eather Gaddafi or the rebels. Good night all! EkoGraf (talk) 00:54, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

First, I did start this section purely to get a bit of a consensus what "Brega" means when a source cited some rebel commander of when rebel media report on fighting. The current situation on the ground is completely different topic.

Second, You might remember me being the first one noticing the inconsistency of (international media) reporting when one takes the real geography of Brega into account. It seems to me that mass media editors just see Brega as a single dot on the map not realizing its geography. Thus when they cite rebel commanders they do not realize that "entered Brega" in fact means "entered New Brega". It was not once the rebels claimed to control "Brega" while noting that Loyalists are still dug in the University. This clearly indicates that when rebels speak of "Brega" they have "New Brega" in mind.

We should not blindly fall for the apparent ignorance of the english-language press and assume Brega is just a dot on the map. But, if we indeed choose to act as most mass media, then i.e. libyafeb17 needs to be summarily dismissed as a BS site.

In sum I prefer to assume good faith (the whole issue being a cultural misunderstanding coupled with journalist ignorance) instead of disregarding a possibly useful source.

Third, You shall consider reaching some kind of consensus yourself. Both Zenithfel and you are running on thin ice with edit warring over this.Ihosama (talk) 15:47, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Wait what? Who said anything about edit warring? This is the first I have heard about this. Me and Zenithfel are in constant contact on our talk pages. EkoGraf (talk) 19:10, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry bout that. Was not watching your talk pages ... maybe we shall discuss the articles on their talk pages ... Ihosama (talk) 19:56, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Has the battle really happened yet?

Rebels claimed to be launching an assault on Brega and they were reinforcing their position on the road, and advancing toward Brega. But they came under heavy rocket fire and now it appears clearly that they lost very quickly the ground gained and that Gaddafi forces are now kms away of Ajdabiya and shelling the city. The current fourth battle of Brega lasted less than one day and never really reached Brega it seems. It is enough to call an entire article for that? Should we merge it with the 2nd battle of Ajdabiya? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geromasis (talk • contribs) 11:41, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

There is a lot of confusion about today events, but from what I understand and from what is written in AJ live blog [1] battle on vicinity of Brega (no independent confirmation of where the fight is really taking place exists since journalists are not allowed behind military checkpoints) still continues (1:16pm As fighting continues for Brega, home to several oil facilities, forces loyal to long time leader Muammar Gaddafi skirt that body of fighting and attack Ajdabiya from the south.). From what I understand rebel forces attacked yesterday location around New Brega (east) and at morning part of loyalist forces were able to flank them from south and attack vicinity of western gate of Adjabiya. Simply said they didnt attack or pushed back rebel forces which are fighting near Brega but flanked them and shelled western gate of Adjabiya while forward units still continue to fight loyalist forces in Brega. They´ve done this before (when they flanked Adjabiya where fighting still raged on one day before beginning of airstrikes) so it´s nothing new. Please take in mind that this is my point of view of these events as they were presented in several medias and that we should wait for more reports to pop out so we can make a clear picture about what´s really going on there. --EllsworthSK (talk) 15:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

See my suggestion on top. This whole fighting between Brega and Ajdabiya is a single continuous battle, complete with tactical retreats and tactical offensives of both sides. The best naming would be something like "Battle for Brega-Ajdabiya road", IMO we can settle for 3rd Brega until either rebels take (real-and-confirmed) control of (the whole of) Brega or Loyalists are again (firmly entrenched) in Ajdabiya. Let's stop creating new "battles" out of thin air.Ihosama (talk) 15:47, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Ellsworth, the rebel commander itself said that his forces had pulled back under an attack of Gaddafi forces. The fight does not continue in Brega if the rebels pulled back to Ajdabiya. I can agree with the merging with the second Ajdabiya article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geromasis (talk • contribs) 16:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Pulled back where? From New Brega to vicinity of it or to Adjabiya? All journalists now left Adjabiya so we do not have clear picture about the situation there, in fact we know nothing about it, we only know what rebel fighters said to journalists and that is that G forces flanked them from south and shelled western gate of Ajdabiya with no NATO aircraft to be seen. The end. We should wait for more sources and as for merging, I agree with lower opinion that late march offensive, 3th Brega, 2nd Adjabiya and 4th Brega should be merged into one article (Fight for western Cyrencia). --EllsworthSK (talk) 16:45, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

The update on the AJE Live Blog giving Younis's report of withdrawal comes before the 1:16PM update describing fighting simultaneously in Brega and Ajdabiya. Merging all four articles is a ludicrous idea; the result would be too confused to actually make for an intelligible article. The aftermath of 2nd Ajdabiya and this battle should be merged, I think, but merging all events from late March to now is insane. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 16:52, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Agree and disagree. 2nd Ajdabiya was itself just a short incursion lasting barely a day and a direct aftermath of 3rb Brega. These three articles are very much intertwined and merging them would reduce a bunch of duplicit text while still keeping the size manageable. Merging with Late march rebel offensive, which itself came to be as a merge of several "battles", would be absurd though.Ihosama (talk)

We know the attack was halfway to Brega. It was reported yesterday. So they did not even reach Brega it seems. That's why I asked if it really happenned. From confirmed and reliable sources, they have just advanced toward the road (confirmed by AFP, Reuters) then they were attacked halfway (same sources) and now Younis say that they have pulled back and Gaddafi forces are in the position to shell Ajdabiya. The situation seems quite clear for me if we take account only the press agencies and the confirmation of the rebel commander. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geromasis (talk • contribs)

I propose that this fourth battle of Brega be merged back to 2nd Battle of Ajdabiya, only if the bombing of Ajdabiya continues tomorrow, and that article be renamed to Battle of Brega-Ajdabiya road, since yes it seems that 2nd Battle of Ajdabiya was just a raid into the town and not a real battle for the city (a BBC reporter called it just a raid). However, I am against merging the Late March rebel offensive and Third Battle of Brega with this article, because those were two totaly separate engagements. The first being a series of small-scale fights during a failed rebel offensive on the west of the country and the second being a full-scale battle for Brega which ended in another rebel defeat and loyalists consolidating their control over the city. EkoGraf (talk) 19:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Agree with EkoGraf on this one. 2nd Ajdabiya and 4th Brega should be combined into one article about the various battles and skirmishes along the Brega-Ajdabiya section of the Via Balbia. 3rd Brega was a comparatively large and reasonably well-defined battle, and so should have its own article. Merging the LMRO is completely out of the question; it itself is the product of merges, as Ihosama has noted. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 19:34, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Agree too.Ihosama (talk) 19:58, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, this is interesting...

Latest update from AJE Live Blog April 17 (1:16PM) on the situation here paints very interesting picture of the fighting here: "As fighting continues for Brega, home to several oil facilities, forces loyal to long time leader Muammar Gaddafi skirt that body of fighting and attack Ajdabiya from the south". Did the withdrawal order from Younis come after this? Or are there two cities being simultaneously attacked, one by each side.

Also, where should we put the information about the skirmishes along the Ajdabiya-Brega road? Should they remain as an incongruous "aftermath" of continued fighting to the ended 2nd Battle of Ajdabiya? Should they be included here? Should they have their own article? ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:55, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Mechanized Warfare means a spread out battle: Merge some articles

4th Brega? Really? I know I have been speaking to a wall here for awhile, but I will say (again) that this is a single Mechanized Warfare battle for Western Cyrenaica. Will it take until The Battle of 9th Brega before we finally decide to start merging some of these battles? ArcherMan86 (talk) 16:00, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

This is the first situation where we really see a substantial bleeding-together of these engagements. Mechanised warfare can still produce distinct battles; it's been around since WWI. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 16:05, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Fully agree it is a spread out mechanized battle. However there were some wery distinct phases:

• 1) rebels (then more like armed demonstrators) took control of the Cyrenaica cities
• 2) rebels feel high so they go on a Let's-march on Tripoli offensive, Gov forces have (it is apparent now) orders to fire only in direct self-defense and either withdraw or hide themselves when outnumbered.
• 3) around the time rebels reach Bin Jawad, Pro-Gaddafi forces receive new ROE so real fighting starts, but local lightly-armed militia is easily overpowered by numerically superior rebels
• 4) the Libyan army joins the fight driving rebels all the way to Benghazi, capturing all the smaller cities in the process
• 5) NATO starts bombing Libyan army forces throughout the country, they try to hold out in Ajdabiya but when it becomes clear they cannot resist the NATO bombing long-term they do a tactical withdrawal all the way to Sirte
• 6) After ambushing rebels (again) feeling high, they take full advantage of the surprise (and the weather depriving rebels of air cover) and run rebels all the way to the gates of Ajdabiya, however deciding not to repeat their mistake in trying to hold it, they stick to securing Brega and their supply lines, trying to prevent another Ajdabiya debacle.
• 7)the spread-out mechanized battle for the Brega-Ajdabiya area, the gateway to Cyrenaica, starts

All these actions were pretty much separate with different character and different objectives. We cannot lump all of them together into a single "Battle of Cyrenaica" article as the whole conflict can be qualified as Battle for Cyrenaica, the other scenes just sideshows compared to this one.

IMO only the points 4-7 can be considered a civil war, those before were just the prelude. However all of them deserve some kind of a military analysis/article.Ihosama (talk) 17:00, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I would agree in principle. Individual clashes do need mention, but they can be their own sub chapter in a more unified wiki page. Clashes of greater significance can of course have their own page, but by and large what we are witnessing is the normal back and forth inherent to a mechanized battle over a wide and open area. At the rate we are going, we will have dozens of battle pages by the end of the month. ArcherMan86 (talk) 17:12, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

My view too. No more than ~5 articles are needed to cover the coastal campaign ATM. However the fighting for Brega-Ajdabiya was so far the biggest and longest of all engagements of this war. If any engagement deserves its own article, it is it.Ihosama (talk) 17:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

NPOV tag

Well, this article based on only rebel claims, and completely ignoring goverment reports, and lacks independent verification.

Like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7THQ-Ep8FT0 Or this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nUn2299IGU

There is a lot of TV coverage, which is contradicts rebel reports.

TNC reports are proven to unreliable. For example according to them, Brega is occupied in the first day of the battle, and the secod day too, and surprise, the third day again. So it is imperative to mention that most of the information on this article is one sided, and lacks independent confirmation.

It looks like rebel forces has been badly beaten by goverment troops, even lost their supreeme commander during the battle. But there is no sign any of this in the article, which is looks like TNC PR.

War correspondence is a weapon of war itself. So claims of belligerent parties (rebel, or goverment) can not be trusted. Including NATO which is clearly deeply involved in this conflict. Kalpet (talk) 22:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

In essence I agree, but we do what we can with the sources that we have. My opinion is that the battle should be closed in a few days and declared eather as indecisive or loyalist victory because there has been no new fighting at Brega for six days now. EkoGraf (talk) 03:39, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

It is clear now, that this offensive was unsuccessfull. They lost cca. a batallion strenght in manpower, and dozens of vehicles, without any significant gain. I agree, that resources are limited, but suspicious sources can be marked in the text, and there is other sources avilable, for example goverment video feeds. For example it is clear now, that the rebel claims about the retreat of government forces, and the encirlement of Brega, are lacks any credibility. Kalpet (talk) 12:56, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Kalpet, another honest ‘spokesman’ for the Gadaffi regime, which as we all know is a bastion of truth and justice for the last 30 years. Brega an area 20km X8km is surrounded, Eastern brega and the university are in NLA control, a major demining operation is underway – with limited independent verification to support. See http://wikimapia.org/#lat=30.4232167&lon=19.6497345&z=13&l=0&m=b&v=1

[ V’s Kalpet version of events ] – no battle, rag tag group of disorganised and now leaderless rebels, never went beyond 40 mark, Gadaffi in full control of Brega, not surrounded, 500+ rebels dead, no mines only excuse for failure. etc etc.. As limited reporters allowed into zone – its easy to attack credibility of “news” but wait and time will tell my friend.Windandsea (talk) 20:14, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Rebel casualty reports coming from Ajdabiya hospital which is monitored by international media, so they considered trustworthy by war standards. Last numbers i aware, is some 150 dead, and 700 hospitalized (serious) wounded which is cca. a battallion strenght. The 500+ dead, and apparently the death of Younis is goverment PR. Kalpet (talk) 08:21, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

if you have viable sources to back your assertions up to 150 dead and 700 serious injuries then please provide and update this article, otherwise 54 dead, and 303-503 injured stands. Many of those injured are the result of mine blasts - minor injuries with most already back at the front. Its shrapnel from rockets and mortars, close quarter fighting that cause series injuries, and not a lot of that occurred compared to the Zliten front. Also the NLA in the East have received much more body armour for their troops then Misrata, plus the use of armoured personal carriers within the advance should reduce the serious injuries tally. Windandsea (talk) 18:54, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, check this Al Jazeera coverage. 623 Wounded, and 72 Dead. http://aljazeera.com/news/africa/2011/07/201172161918114981.html. And this is a pro rebel medium. And please explain to me, why brother to hospitalize soliders with "minor injuries". Rebel forces reportedly have field hospitals, so minor injuries treated on the field, and only serius cases hospitalized in Adjabija. --Kalpet (talk) 20:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Rebels have themselves confirmed they have pulled back from the town and are anywhere from 5 to 20 kilometers from the town. And if it were only 300 loyalists left as they claim (in a town of only 7,000 citizens) logic dictates that the town would have fallen by now. It is obvious by now that what the rebel council in Benghazi says is contradictory with what rebel commanders on the front say. A rebel commander said a few days ago that they are now facing 1,000 loyalists in the town. So eather they lied that there were only 300 or they lied that the town was surrounded and the loyalists got another 700 reinforcements. I am inclined more to belive rebel frontline commanders than rebel politicians or generals. In any case, the battle has obviously ended by now and should be closed with the result eather being a stalemate/indecisive (town partialy surrounded but still held by loyalists) or loyalist victory (rebels failed to take the town). EkoGraf (talk) 21:44, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

After 4 months of conflict, very few civilians remain in brega as many prior articles and direct accounts from formal residents support. Brega as you know is a prise oil/income asset that neither side wish to destroy, but which Gadaffi has promised to annihilate if lost to NLA. As NLA claim to surround the town, are removing large quantities of mines that would impede a rapid advance, and attempting to win over the reported poor moral of loyalist soldiers through defections/capture seems a more logical approach and sound strategy to this analyst. The 300 number maybe low balling it, but really how many troops does it take to set explosives in highly sensitive oil refinery and pumping equipment. I recommend waiting until this Saturday before concluding this 'battle', as progress is still being reported around brega south/south east[eg process of surrounding brega via the taking khourguidh 2 days ago.] http://wikimapia.org/#lat=30.3473614&lon=19.8743105&z=15&l=0&m=b&v=1 Windandsea (talk) 22:39, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Well. Basicly. You can not remove mines *without* combat, except you control the whole area. Minefields are guarded by protocol. So this claims are very suspicious. More on this subject below, in the "Battle over?" section. Kalpet (talk) 08:21, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Really, with a 10km or more zone of mines around brega, and with most of KF MLR's and Tanks eliminated in brega, want remains are KF troops and they don’t seem to eager to fight, very frustrated and with dwindling supplies. They can only protect within a 1 to 2km zone by heavy machine guns and RPGs etc, beyond that it’s the mine fields stopping NLA digging in close to Brega for the next push.

The Washington post did a great article on demining operation in Kikla earlier today, with Sappers removing 1,000’s anti-personal mines over prior few days. In my country it’s a war crime to use these against another country, and against your own people its just madness –as they will be around to haunt and kill Libyan’s for decades to come. Windandsea (talk) 18:54, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, maybe, but not likely. Do you have any independent verification for your strong claims about beaten and demoralised KF troops in Brega? Because this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nUn2299IGU is strongly disagrees with you. Is this one looks like a victory celebration for you? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc3WGyxLxzI Most likely the rebel forces were badly beaten by goverment troops, and they created this magical minefield story to handle the PR fallout. No doubts mines are present in the area, but the numbers are exaggerated. The cause of the delay in the rebel offensive is the major defeat last week, so now, they wait for reinforcements. And no, i don't sympathize with Gaddafi, but the facts are the facts. --Kalpet (talk) 20:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

About use of mines. They are very ugly weapons, capable of kill even long after the end of war. Unfortunately in Libya both parties use them. http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2011/07/19/landmines-libya-technical-briefing-note?print I sense a lot of emotion in you, toward the subject. Is it good idea to edit this article with such amount of emotion? --Kalpet (talk) 21:18, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

It's already been exactly 7 days since the last direct clashes between rebels and loyalists occured, seems most editors belive that the battle is over (see talk below). We can wait another 5 days, I have no problem with that, but if a majority of editors want to close it now I have no problem with that eather and support it. And personaly belive nothing new will happen in the next five days, I may be proven wrong and that a shift in lines occurs, but that is my oppinion. EkoGraf (talk) 00:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

References

Abdul Fatah Younis death

Is there any independent source about this case?--Vojvodae please be free to write :) 11:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Maybe he is alive. http://www.arabstoday.net/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16770:death-of-adbul-fatah-younis-denied&catid=20:home-also-in-the-news Kalpet (talk) 13:06, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

If official source say that he is not dead I believe that we should change this in all articles.--Vojvodae please be free to write :) 14:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I concur. Kalpet (talk) 15:57, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

He is allegedly arrested today in Benghazi by a military task force, headed by Gen. Jala Dogheili.[2] What is going there?! --Kalpet (talk) 11:56, 28 July 2011 (UTC) "The arrest order was given by the Transitional National Council of Benghazi on the basis of information about younes recent secret contacts with the Qaddafi government."[3] --Kalpet (talk) 12:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

TNC press conference now: It is official. He is dead. --Kalpet (talk) 20:20, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

He was eather killed two weeks ago at the start of the battle, like it was originaly reported, and they postponed to announce it so the rebels won't loose moral. Or, he was realy killed today, but, by all accounts, he was most likely killed by the rebels themselves, since he was originaly reported to had been under arrest for possible continuing ties with Gaddafi, and now they are trying to pin the blame on Gaddafi supporters. Because, if he was killed by loyalists, why was it initialy reported that he had been arrested for alleged continuing links to Gaddafi? It would have been a major embarasment for the rebels if it came out that their top general leading the war was still a loyalist, undercover. EkoGraf (talk) 22:26, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Battle over?

Few days there are no any reports about fighting, si I think that we can close this battle, and star again battle on Brega-Ajdabiya road.--Vojvodae please be free to write :) 11:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Even better: let's do what should have been done initially = move content to B-A article and do NOT create new "battle" article next time NTC decides to engage in a new (PR) offensive.89.102.1.194 (talk) 18:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

That is good idea, but it seems that only few contributors support that approach. This war is not over so it is very hard to decide how to organize articles, especially about battles. We have probably ten articles Battle of about low level engagements, with small number of troops, short duration and no importance in overall situation. We will have a big task to rewrite main article and organize content when war will be only historical event.--Vojvodae please be free to write :) 19:20, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I am for closing this battle and the result being eather indecisive or stalemate (rebels managed to partialy surround the town but loyalists still hold it) or loyalist victory (since rebels failed to capture the town). However, I am against it being merged into the previous Brega-Ajdabiya article because those were previously mostly skirmishes and raids against both Ajdabiya and Brega. This was a full-blown battle/offensive. EkoGraf (talk) 21:38, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Maybe, as result of battle we can write something like: Pro-Gaddafi victory in Brega; Stalemate around the town?--Vojvodae please be free to write :) 06:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, evidence contradicts. The goverment video (July 21.) - the one with the burned out rebel vehicles - is filmed at the Bethan exit (20km from Brega in the coastal Highway) indicates that goverment troops control that point, which is confute reble claims of (partal) surrounding of Brega by rebel army. About mine clearing operations, i recomend caution. According my limited military experience, the standard use of area denial weapons, like minefields is to lay, monitor, and destroly everybody with direct, or indirect fire, who attempt to pass, or disarm mines. So waiting for mine clearing *without* heavy fighting is very unlikely. Usualy vanguard blown a path trough the minefield with heavy fightings (and losses), before the main force move trough the cleared path. Only after the invading army secured the area, second line troops will clear the field. The other thing is the number of mines. Without modern mine laying vehicles, to lay 45.000 mines manualy, you need cca 15.000 manhour. (100 engineer for 3 weeks) An operation of this magnitude, without detection by nato or rebels, is very doubtfull. For context: In the korean DMZ some 10-20 million land mines waiting. So if rebel claims are true, then Brega has ten times more mine density than the half century old, and 250 km long Korean DMZ. So imho there is a lot of rebel PR here. (And goverment too of course :)) If you want to close this article now, then this was a humiliating rebel defeat. But, there is some indications, - like the Younis interview - that there will be another rebel attack in the next few days, so i recomend to wait a few days. Kalpet (talk) 08:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

OK. Probably situation will be clear in next few days.--Vojvodae please be free to write :) 10:47, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Reason beeing? Videos which are emerging [4] [5] and articles [6] [7] [8] says nothing about end of the battle. How many reports did we have from Misrata frontline during last two months? Sometimes weeks pasted without single article about fighting in Dafniya or Krarim area yet no one closed the article. Adding stalemate is ok with me since reports does not suggest some major push after what rebels siezed part of Brega and partially surrounded it from east and south, however fighting is still ongoing and no report suggest otherwise. --EllsworthSK (talk) 14:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, in this region, rebel reports are proven to be very unreliable. In contrast, for example, nafusa rebel reports, are mostly proved to be reliable. Your linked video is about some desert fighting, far outside (>20Km) Brega. This article is about the siege of Brega, not about the battle of Brega–Ajdabiya road. But about your question, the reason is, that there was no major operations in the vincinity of Brega in the past few days. On the other hand, i just see some chat on twitter which suggest that maybe the rebels attempt another push towards Brega. They claimed, that landmines cleared, but i do not trust in this story. Imho. minefields was cheap excuse, to buy some time to regroup, and reinforce the beaten rebel army. To clear a path so quickly (remember they reported 45.000 mines, with double density than Korean DMZ) wihout any battle event is very unlikely. But as i mentioned, there is some chit-chat about a renewed offensive, so i recomend to wait for confirmation. For now. --Kalpet (talk) 15:51, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

True, it is result of different military strategies and region and it shows that Nafusa rebels or Misrata rebels do not fall under command of Benghazi and are "merely" consulting their progress and tactics with NLA military HQ. As for number of mines, reports were that captured regime engineers provided this number of laid mines and their density is questionable (wether those minefields are between for example New Brega and Old Brega, wether they are also laid on road between oil fields south of Brega and so on). But back to Brega, this video [9] for example shows rebels in residential complex of New Brega and there was Al Jazeera Arabic report from Brega frontline somewhere on youtube which I now cant find which was shot on so-called point 60 some 10km east of Old Brega (where airport, oil factory and port is located). As for twitter reports after that Sirte hoax I pay no attention to those although it is true that this battle was first reported on twitter and nearly day later in newspaper. As for estimates of number of loyalists in industrial complex rebels also do not know exact numbers, most what they say are guesses based on scout groups reports and chatter on radios (which may be very well misinformations by regime forces) so I´d let them be for the time beeing. And rebels never announced that they have captured Brega, in fact military spokesman denied it several times. Those were reports of either Press TV or Al Arabiya which turned out to be wrong. Anyway as for original topic in all cases of previous rebel push towards Brega we closed the article after Reuters or someone else reported rebel withdrawal to point 40, so far nothing like that happened and till that won´t happen we can add stalemate as result of the battle but I would certainly not close it just yet because of no major gain by neither side in recent days. As I wrote in my previous post, same thing happened in Misrata frontline or in Nafusa mountains but we didnt close neither of those two campaigns. --EllsworthSK (talk) 17:06, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi! About minefields. There is no direct evidence about them, so only deduction helps. Sub rosa planting 45.000 mine around brega is highly unplausible. Even the Korean DMZ does not have that much mine/km2. My bet is max. 4-5000. And rebel claims contradicts with standard military protocol for minefields. Of course there is a chance of unprofessional use, but if rebel claims about their big problem with mines are true, then we can assume that they are used properly. So in one way, or other, their claims are problematic at best. And how the heck they count them? About Brega claims. The town on this video [10] is definitely not New Brega. I do not recognize it, but way to small for it. New Brega is a big residental area with a few thousand residents. This is New Brega: [11] [12] [13] as you see video evidence is clear. Brega is firmly in goverment hands. And there is another video: [14] this one is has been recorded here: [15]. So no dubt, rebel claims about street fightings in Brega are not reliable. But there is a lot of uncertenaty, so some wait can not hurt. But if there is no development the it is time to switch back to the road battle, because it seems, this is where the actual fight takes place. --Kalpet (talk) 18:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

About minefields - as I said, 45 000 comes only from rebel reports which are giving as source regime engineers, but there is no way to know for sure how many and where those minefields are. However I dont find it much important in context, word "many" mines is completely enough for this article. As for Jamahiriya TV reports - regime TV has a history in broadcasting archived footages and selling them as real deal (for example right before bombing campaign started they played "live" footage of Younis returning to Tripoli and hugging Gaddafi which was in fact several months old), on contrary earlier journalist reports talks about Brega as a ghost town from which civilians were evacuated either to Ajdabiya and Benghazi or Sirt, there is no way that children would remain in New Brega which was build for Sirte Oil Company workers which left in February after what Brega oil facility halted its procution because of unrest. Anyway as I wrote before, adding stalemate is alright with me but closing the article because we haven´t heared anything for a while now seems stupid to me. If rebels will retreat and end their combat operations we´ll know just as several times before. No need to get things overcomplicated. --EllsworthSK (talk) 01:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, goverment TV reports from Brega contains scenes where it is mention recent events, so it is clear that they are not (fully) pre recorded. And the parts where the reporter talks about recent events, front of New Brega main gate (which is clearly recognisable) or in the Bethan exit area, are very conclusive. On the other hand, i am pertty sure, that the children on the film, are transported in from sirte, or pre recorded. But, it does not change the fact, that Brega has no sign of any battle, and the TV coverage(s) filmed after the rebel attack, so it is clear that rebels did not reached Brega. About the battle. No battle, without casualties. The only permanent hospital in the area, available for rebel forces is the Ajdabiya general, which is monitored by international media. No casuality reports means with great confidence, that there was no major combat event. --> Battle is over. --Kalpet (talk) 09:28, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

There is a difference between on the one side Misrata and Nafusa article and on the other side the Brega article. Those two are campaigns, while Brega is a single battle/offensive. Campaigns can go on far longer than battles/offensives, that's why we didn't close those two when there was no fighting. However, if there is no major change in the next few days this article will warrant a close. There have been no reports of fighting at Brega for nine days now, since July 19 (day of the big ambush). Also, that video that showed rebels in supposedly residential Brega can't be confirmed as legit since the rebs could be using the same tactic as the libyan government and use recycled footage from their earlier takeover. Also, how do we even know that's Brega in the video? o.O EkoGraf (talk) 01:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The village on this video [16] is Bethan [][17][18] about 40 km southeast from Brega. And i agree, the battle is over with goverment victory. --Kalpet (talk) 09:06, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Hehe, guess that makes my point. :) Thanks Kalpet. EkoGraf (talk) 16:29, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree the battle is probably over. Like the other time, the rebels launched an offensive on Brega with a lot of good hopes then they started to take heavy casualties, with reports stating a lot of amputations due to mines. The last day they took more than 25 death and pulled out of the town. Each time they meet heavy casualties they retreat. The lack of clashes despite rebels claiming there are on Brega outskirts means they are in fact way outside of the city. This is not the first time rebels claimed to have taken Brega when it was clearly not the case. --FreemanSA (talk) 16:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I believe this should be added to the article [19] Libyan rebels also said they had moved closer to Brega, and were now positioned 5 to 7 km from the east of the oil town. Fighting at Brega had slowed over the past two weeks as the rebels struggled to defuse hundreds of thousands of mines planted by Gaddafi's forces. Rebels said they planned to advance soon on Brega, where some 3,000 heavily armed government troops remain positioned. however I dont think it is sufficent to change battle to ongoing and also I dont know how would we add it into the Aftermath section. Any idea? --EllsworthSK (talk) 15:03, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Also [20] Meanwhile, in eastern oil town of Brega, rebels say a "surprise" should be expected in the coming days. "We are in the suburbs of Brega and I can see its lights sparkling in the short distance. Expect a surprise," said a rebel, who was involved in exchanging fire with pro-Gaddafi troops in that city.. --EllsworthSK (talk) 15:14, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

So now , one guy come 2 days after the discussion ended and the consensus was reached and can revert back what was decided by editors saying that nobody objected his change? I smell that soon the same editor will change it in rebels victory soon when they will once more claim to have retaken the city while it's not the case. --FreemanSA (talk) 14:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually its two guys. And Im sure if you´d ask several other editors they would agree. Consensus, on which I agreed after Younis death as well, was that since there is a significant lack of reports strenghtened by rumours about rebel forces retreat to point 40 after Younis assassination that article shall be closed if no other reports will pop out. They did, they are sourced and they are part of the article. Frankly if it´d be up to me I would merge this whole article with Battle of Brega–Ajdabiya road just as 2nd Ajdabiya was but editors had other opinion. Also please refrain from personall attacks, assume good faith and keep in mind WP:3RR. --EllsworthSK (talk) 14:58, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

What is happening now are just rebel raids into Brega, not a total battle for the town and not a continuation of the previous battle (there was two weeks of non-fighting in between). Also, check todays source [21], the rebels said they maid a raid into the eastern residential neighborhood before pulling back. I think that proves finaly they don't hold New Brega as they claimed. What is happening now has its rightfull place in the Aftermath section....And by the way, FreemanSA is not alone in his opinion. It's two against two. :D EkoGraf (talk) 17:28, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Maybe change the title of the Aftermath section to "Continuing Raids" or some such until we see how the situation develops. If another offensive is launched, this could be described in two phases of one battle. 97.75.142.190 (talk) 13:53, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

With a two-week break? EkoGraf (talk) 20:27, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

The battle is still going on if the rebels are still trying to take the town. In World War I nobody moved it was essentially a stalemate, but the battle was still going on. The battle is not over until the rebels are pushed out/away from the town completely without being able to get back in. 122.105.134.153 (talk) 21:13, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

"... battle is not over until the rebels are pushed out ..." which is EXACTLY the status quo of |Brega for the past 4 months! No, scouting raids that are allowed in, only to be gunned down, do not count.

Just try putting the rebel claims of "fighting in Brega" into context and they break like a house of cards. BTW this is _NOT_ a WW1-style static campaign. Even the defenders of Brega are pretty often using mechanized counterattacks, ambushed, etc.89.102.1.194 (talk) 23:25, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Regardless of weather or not the battle is over I would question if it should be called a Gaddafi victory since the rebels did gain ground (not sure if they have the city surrounded)perhaps something like Gaddafi tactical victory would be more accurate?71.195.122.131 (talk) 07:29, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Support "Gaddafi tactical victory" per 71.195.122.131's explanation, and EkoGraf, okay, you've got a point with the two-week break. This is why we should have an Eastern Front (Libya) or similar page, IMHO. 97.75.142.190 (talk) 15:45, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

They didn't gain any ground in the city itself. They initialy claimed to had almost total control of the town, which was later found to be untrue. Than they claimed to had control of the eastern residential district, now they say they are conducting raids into eastern Brega and than pulling back. So again untrue that they took control of it. They have neather surrounded the town (western route still loyalist controlled) or taken control of any part of the town. The rebels claimed that only 300 loyalists were left, than they said later 1,000 were still in the town, and now the news reports are back on the 3,000 figure. No major fighting for two weeks now. So the rebels didn't score any strategic victory. The loyalists managed to defend the town. There is a difference between a battle/offensive and a campaign. This battle is over for two weeks now. You may not like the outcome, but that is how it is. Concencuss was reached. So please, skirmishes and raids are not a battle/offensive. If a new battle starts we open a new article. That's how it goes. Thank you. EkoGraf (talk) 15:56, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I've changed the page away from "pro-Gaddafi victory" (perhaps temporarily) as while its been two weeks in Brega, its been less than a day on Wikipedia since the last opposing argument was posted. For my view, that the rebels failed to take the town (at least for now) is not OR, but calling it a "pro-Gaddafi victory" is a bit presumptuous and perhaps premature. --Yalens (talk) 16:00, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

It seems to me that you are playing with the words. Should I change the Battle of Misrata outcome in "Loyalists fail to capture Misrata" ?--FreemanSA (talk) 16:27, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't know. The issue here is that the edit that was made by EkoGraf attracted my attention mainly because it was based on a consensus which was necessarily there. There is a difference between Misrata and Brega though. In the case of Brega, there has been a long history (long as in many months) of continued NTC raids into the city, the larger ones of which could be considered separate battles. Regarding Brega, what constitutes a "separate battle" has been contentious in the past. Now it is being said that if the rebels (who are -still- at Brega's outskirts) stage another attack, that would be a separate battle (exactly what was avoided on wikipedia in the past). In the case of Misrata, the Gaddafites have been fully repelled, and the battle is now over other sites. But this is off-topic. You can change it back if you want, its not a major deal. But nonetheless....--Yalens (talk) 16:37, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

My opinion is that the current activity (or lack of activity) belong the the article of Brega-Ajdabiya road as a new phase of it more than as a part of 4th Brega. --FreemanSA (talk) 16:41, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

The only reason i suggested changing the end status of the battle from pro-Gaddafi victory to something else is because just below that it says that the rebels did gain some ground. I think a good analogy might be operation market garden in WW2 when allies gained ground but failed at all there objectives. (Wikipedia called that an "allied operational failure")71.195.122.131 (talk) 21:37, 4 August 2011 (UTC))

Again, however you try to word it differently, the loyalists were victorious in the end by defeating the rebel attack on the city. Don't understand what the problem is now. This was a full-on battle for the city and different from raids and skirmishes. If there is a new battle than that is a new article. Current raids and skirmishes are not a battle for the town, by any definition. EkoGraf (talk) 23:05, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree that Gaddafi clearly won the battle but having looked at other battles on wikipedia there are more specific ways of labeling them that may apply to this battleMonteMiz (talk) 23:24, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I also think that the battle is mainly over, except for the occasion of rebel skirmishes in the area, but in the results section, I think that the part about pro-Gadhafi forces repelling the rebel attack should be removed, because they didn't repel the attack, the rebels retreated and were halted by thousands of randomly scattered mines. Instead, it should say that the rebels retreated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.187.185.194 (talk) 06:31, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

They did repel the attack. Are the mines neutral or a natural event? No. They are part of Gaddafi forces strategy and it was successful. The rebels did not retreat for nothing. For the last day of the battle we had, Gaddafi forces attacked and the rebels took heavy casualties, more than 25 killed and over 100 injured. After that rebels pulled out and no news of new clash came. That's what I call repeling.--FreemanSA (talk) 16:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Why did they retreat? Because they were repelled by the loyalists using the mine-field and thanks to that rocket attack the final day that killed 27 rebels. They retreated for a reason, because they were repelled. EkoGraf (talk) 17:28, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry FreemanSA and EkoGraf, you guys are right, the reason the rebels retreated is because pro-gaddafi forces repelled the attack. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.187.185.194 (talk) 20:55, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for any confusion from my post. At the time, sources were saying that the rebels 'had' advanced somewhat into parts of Brega. That seems less than clear now and fairly unlikely, so the description under "Pro-Gaddafi" victory matches all reliable sources we have. So... my comment would be, should we, instead of bickering over how long a break should be for it to be considered a separate battle (I agree with EkoGraf, 2 weeks is too long to qualify it as the same battle), or how many people it takes to make a battle and not a clash/conflict/raid/luau, or anything of the sort, why don't we make an Eastern Front (Libya) or Brega-Ajdabiya Campaign or something of the sort so we can at least plug this information in there? There's too much time between events to say they're the same battle, the previous offensive was it's own event and didn't succeed in its objectives. There might be another battle, but these raids (and even many of the raids that constitute the Battle of Brega-Ajdabiya Road) could very comfortable fit into an article with a slightly larger scope. 97.75.142.190 (talk) 20:16, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

References

Younis's death?

Have general Younis killed in action by government forces or by NTC forces?--Vojvodae please be free to write :) 08:39, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

No reliable information. My bet is on Khalifa Hifter. --Kalpet (talk) 09:41, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree, most likely a faction of the NTC killed him. Their official statemant was he was killed by an unknown group. Oh my God what an embarrassment it would have been for them if it came out that possibly he was a double agent hehe. EkoGraf (talk) 15:23, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

We should wait for some official statement.--Vojvodae please be free to write :) 16:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Thats not true, official statement was that he was gunned down in Benghazi by Gaddafi revolutionary guards. Check Al Jazeera Live Blog, they have there translated Jalils press conference. So no, official statemant is not that he was killed by an unkown goup. Morever he was not killed in action, nor during battle of Brega. --EllsworthSK (talk) 16:25, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Official statement [22][23] he was killed by the rebel secret police, the February 17 Brigade. So would you please stop having so much faith into what the rebels say? It has been proven by now time and again that in this war they are as much liers as the loyalists are. And I don't trust eather of them (loyalist or rebel) until I hear independent confirmation from Reuters or some such. EkoGraf (talk) 00:07, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I have just found another evedience of a media hack. First watch this reuters video [24] then read our article about the mines in the video. T-AB-1_AP_mine then check the color of the mines on the video. Well. Gray means practice, toy, harmless. The real thing looks like this: [25] --Kalpet (talk) 08:59, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk like this more belongs on someone's talkpage or sandbox, since we're treating it more like a forum here. Oh well. In any case there are so many possibilities that we should just wait for more info to come out. Some possibilities:
1. Younis was a Gaddafite double agent, and the NTC was going to arrest him and figure out, so Gaddafites killed him to prevent them from getting info.
2. Younis was caught up in some factional struggle within the rebel military.
3. Younis was killed by members of the Gaddafi fifth column to diminish rebel morale, or (4) to try to cause disunity by igniting tribal rivalries (which if its the case, seems to be working).
5. Younis was killed by rebels who happened to have a personal vendetta against him.
and so on... get the idea? --Yalens (talk) 22:09, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah. Especially those "hundreds of thousands" mines were priceless ... I do not doubt for a minute that loyalist employed them, but definitely not on such a scale.89.102.1.194 (talk) 23:29, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I believe this should be merged into Battle of Brega–Ajdabiya road just as was done with 2nd Ajdabiya and previous rebel attempts to re-take Brega. Rebels may have prepared for this for a longer time, mass bigger offensive force and train more recruits however if the battle in which loyalist forces were able to occupy suburbs of Ajdabiya should be part of that article I fail to see why this shouldn´t. --EllsworthSK (talk) 15:38, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

I strongly and completely oppose--FreemanSA (talk) 17:13, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

• I also totaly oppose All of the fighting during the Battle of Brega-Ajdabiya road were skirmishes and raids. THIS was a full-blown battle/offensive, completely different from those incidents. EkoGraf (talk) 17:23, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

• Strongest possible oppose. This is in no way comparable to or part of any of those skirmishes and raids. It is very much its own battle. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 18:24, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose. This is has been discussed already and it was the same result. It's not going to happen. --Yalens (talk) 21:58, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Comment. This is the '4th', and has an 'outcome'. Which means surely there's a 5th article coming? Getting kinda funky there. They've been pushing up & down this coast for months, is it really a new battle each time the line leaves/enters a city? And even if it is....surely they don't all need separate articles, I dunno the precise policy, but I bet there's something about not covering events in ridonkulous detail just because they're in the news right now.... 92.16.123.230 (talk) 14:04, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose. See above. User talk:Grant Bud However I'm not sure if we should call this as a finished battle. Although the initial push failed, this was still a battle for Brega, not a battle for the road, so incorporating what might otherwise be called the 5th battle of Brega into this one is probably more logical.

Younis not killed in action

I tried to removed the killed in action tag, but i dont think i did it correctly. in any case younis was not killed in action but arrested and murdered later after the timeline given for this battle at the top of the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.20.168.107 (talk) 10:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

If you do remove the killed in action tag, put something else that lets people know that he was killed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.187.185.194 (talk) 04:12, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Renewed Fighting

Fighting in Brega restarted today, the battle hasn't quite ended yet. [26] If you still don't think its the same battle because of the lull in fighting, just look at the battle of Brega-Ajdabiya road and how long that took. 70.187.185.194 (talk) 21:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Please read the previous discussions, we have been over this. The Brega-Ajdabiya road thing was a campaign, not a battle, there is a big difference, campaigns last over longer periods of time with pauses, battles/offensives are one continues thing. There has been no fighting at Brega for three weeks since the battle ended. And what is happening now can't be called a battle. At best a skirmishes. 02:31, 10 August 2011 (UTC)EkoGraf (talk)

Ok, maybe the main portion of the battle is over, but what's happening in Brega are more than just minor skirmishes, this is a rebel offensive, and it should be addressed as more than just the aftermath. To quote the advances, "Mohammad al-Rijali says rebels forces advanced Tuesday into Brega..." How about changing the result to say "Pro-Gaddafi victory; ongoing skirmishes." And to address the no fighting in Brega since the battle "ended", the rebels just started fighting in Brega today. See the link I posted in my earlier comment for proof. And I'd be more than happy to post new articles/links about Brega whenever new developments occur. 70.187.185.194 (talk) 03:38, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Rebels said that they were positionned 5-10 km of Brega and they have claimed advancing since 5 days now and still have not reached the city? It seems more like some skirmishes than a battle for the moment. --FreemanSA (talk) 17:31, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Agree with FreemanSA, except the rebels nobody else reported an advance on Brega, nobody, no major media outlets. By all accounts its just another rebel propaganda stunt, most likely, given their situation, to divert attention from the turmoil in Benghazi that HAS been reported by major media outlets. :) EkoGraf (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

The main bulk of the rebel forces are around 5 km from Brega, but the actual front line is closer than that. Even on the 4th battle of Brega page it says that an AFP reporter was taken to the front line, which they said is next to the residential area of Brega, so they have reached the city. And these aren't skirmishes, this is real fighting. The reporter heard artillery duels. Why is this classified as aftermath? This is the real deal, it's a two-part battle. 69.235.80.27 (talk) 20:29, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Journalist were taken on the frontline. Northen one is on the hill overlooking the New Brega, the closest hill I found on Google Maps to New Brega is about 4km east of it, there are some hightened ground little bit closer but I can hardly figure out the exact terrain from satellite images. Anyway I already added the informations from here [27], at least one frontline is confirmed and we know where it is. Also I like to point out this part of the article The battle for Brega has been grinding on for weeks as the rebels make tentative pushes through the approaches to the town, which Gaddafi's forces have strewn with land mines.. So you figure out wether it ended or not, I believe my opinion on this matter is known to every editor here. --EllsworthSK (talk) 21:26, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

The battle is ongoing and has been ongoing for weeks, per WP:RS Reuters (Ellsworth's link above). I am going to alter the article to reflect this. If you disagree, please present a reliable source that says that the battle ended. Simply saying "no fighting reported" and speculating on rebel motivations for reporting advances is WP:OR. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:33, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

There had been a 3-week break between the previous battle/offensive and this one. That one is done and over. If there is a new battle, and thats a big IF considering rebels claimed 20 times by now to had taken Brega, than we start a new article. The fourth battle of Brega is over, the fifth may start, than we start a new article. Artillery duels/skirmishes don't constitute an all out offensive, which was the last time 3 weeks ago. Ellsworth's source talks about, rebel claimed, advances through the minefields along the 20 kilometers of the road, there was no battle for the town itself in the last three weeks. Its obvious that Reuters reporter was talking about those skirmishes and raids that have been ongoing not a full-on battle for the town. Except that Reuters reporter no one has been reporting a battle for the town in the last three weeks, only raids, skirmishes and halting advances through the minefield. EkoGraf (talk) 21:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Eko that´s not true, just check out the aftermath section which will proove you wrong. There was no 3 weeks break, only stalemate. Morever there were reports from week ago which reported continued fighting [28][29] which were lately removed and now we have yet another source. Keep in mind that we have to work with sources which are avaliable, guesses about situation won´t help us a bit, we have to stick to the facts which were reported and not interpret them. As for the claims, for all its worth rebel officials never claimed victory over Brega. Reports about situation of New Brega were largely based on uncofirmed reports largely based on rumours and situation on ground was unknnown. Also speculating about the what really was happening in initial stages would be contraproductive. However no source ever claimed the end of the battle, its ending without providing the source was bordering WP:OR but now we have Reuters correspondent which was on the frontline and confirmed that battle was ongoing and never stopped is crossing that line as artillery positions are always covered by forward gound units. What you just described is largely your perception on what was and is happening from the small amount of reports from which most were not independently verified however if source claims that battle is ongoing and no other source states otherwise (in duration of last 3 weeks) I don´t really see the point of discussion. Still, my opinion is similiar to Lothars, I shall wait for other opinions in order to prevent edit war. --EllsworthSK (talk) 22:05, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

If this is a new battle for the town, which I would wait for at least one more day to confirm, than we start a new article because this may be a new offensive/battle to take the town. New offensive, new battle, new article. Again, the previous rebel offensive on the town was stopped by the loyalists in its tracks, you cant simply deny it. And your statement that rebel officials never claimed victory is not true. A spokesman for the Benghazi council claimed they controlled most of Brega at one point and the French foreign minister himself also claimed the rebels had full control of the town. I have already talked to Lothar, the Reuters reporters statement can be interpreted more along the lines of a battle for those last 20 kilometers of road to Brega than for the town itself. And, for the sake of compromise, I have proposed that we make the Fourth battle of Brega part of the Brega-Ajdabiya road campaign, but still keep a separate article for the battle. And if there is a fifth battle, which this right now may be the beginning of, than we also say that the Fifth battle is also part of the Brega-Ajdabiya campaign. EkoGraf (talk) 22:20, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

First of all, I think this is very much its own battle, and is very different from the Brega-Ajdabiya road campaign, except for the stalemate part. And the fighting occurring right now is very much not a different battle, because there was fighting even when the rebels retreated and when the fourth battle supposedly "ended". There wasn't extreme fighting, but there were clashes. The rebels are simply beginning phase two of the battle, just like previous battles that have had more than one phase, such as the Brega-Ajdabiya road campaign, the battle of Wazzin, the battle of Ras Lanuf, and the battle of Ajdabiya, all perfectly good examples of why the battle of Brega can be, and is, a two-phase battle. But I agree that we should wait a day before we make any big changes. However, I think that the changes that should be made now are, first, changing it to a two part battle, which would have the second part ongoing, and, secondly, changing the result to "Pro-Gaddafi victory (first phase); ongoing clashes (second phase)." 69.235.80.27 (talk) 23:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh P.S., here's a link stating that the rebels are about to move into Brega very, very soon, though it may just be a propaganda to boost morale: [30] 69.235.80.27 (talk) 23:53, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Same claim since 3 months --FreemanSA (talk) 02:17, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree with that. 70.187.185.194 (talk) 02:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Here's a link stating that the rebels are at the gates of Brega, poised to attack, confirmed by an AFP correspondent. [31] 70.187.185.194 (talk) 16:05, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Compromise reached between Lothar, Ells and me, this battle stays closed and as a separate article but we have included it as part of the Brega-Ajdabiya road campaign which is still ongoing. EkoGraf (talk) 18:14, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, sounds good to me. Oh btw, here's an article claiming that the rebels captured a residential area in Brega: [32] 69.235.80.27 (talk) 21:25, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Would give that at least a couple of more days to be confirmed because it seems nobody is taking the rebels seriously anymore after claiming 20 times in the past that they took the residential district. The report itself says It was not immediately possible for a Reuters reporter to verify the capture of Brega and rebels have repeatedly claimed to have seized towns, only to be repelled by Gaddafi's forces. EkoGraf (talk) 00:00, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, let's wait at least another day before confirming anything. I'll post any articles I see regarding the rebels taking Brega. Oh, and for the future, I propose that we stop using this talk page and switch over to the one on the Brega-Ajdabiya road page, just to make things easier, since were not posting any new info on this page anymore. Please agree or oppose, like we did in the merger proposal. 69.235.80.27 (talk) 00:38, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

(this post was originally in an edit-conflict with the above post, being posted at the same time- it counts as Oppose I guess though) In my opinion, the 4th Battle of Brega (if you call that the "fourth") actually ending was questionable, since the rebels had not retreated from the outskirts of the city, and it seems now they have retaken some residential districts as according to Al Jazeera. Either this is the reheating of a "frozen" battle, or this is a different battle. But the way wikipedia has it currently makes it seem like the current fighting at Brega isn't happening at all: this page (the 4th) says the 4th is over, but there is no page for the 5th (which is supposedly being covered by "Brega-Ajdabiya road" despite hte fact that the battle is over the city and not the road). We can't have it both ways. Either this battle never ended, or we need to make a 5th Battle of Brega page (I'm not against waiting just a little, perhaps working on a proto-5th battle page in sandbox... but we need to cover it or at least prepare to cover it somehow). --Yalens (talk) 00:40, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I still believe that this battle is not over, but, for the sake of compromise, I agreed to end this battle and cover it in Brega-Ajdabiya road page. But this is not the 5th battle, by all means, the 4th just hasn't ended. I propose, once again, to make this a two-phase battle, and I need to know who supports me. Sorry, but once again, I ask you to either agree or oppose. :) 69.235.80.27 (talk) 01:30, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I would support two-phase battle especially if that would avoid jamming it onto a page that doesn't describe it (I'm sorry that I wasn't present for the discussion where Eko and Lothar apparently decided that would be the best compromise). --Yalens (talk) 01:33, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

The compromise was a temporary solution, at least as I saw it. I'm more than willing to go back to my previous position (same as your current one) if we get more definitive information. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 04:55, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Considering the rebel's track record on the eastern front about the truth its questionable if there even is a battle for the town, except the occasional artillery duels. Thats why I recomended to wait another day or so. If something has indead happened and it is confirmed I would grudgingly lean toward the two-phase solution. Wouldn't oppose it anymore. But than again, if we did go with the two-phase solution than I would strongly advocate that the Brega-Ajdabiya road campaign be closed at the start of the Fourth Brega battle. EkoGraf (talk) 05:14, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree with EkoGraf, we need to wait until the rebel's claims can be verified by reporters. Give it a couple days. And also I agree that we need to close the Brega-Ajdabiya road campaign, it's been going on for too long. But what should the result be, because it's not a stalemate? I think that the rebels won, since the road's under their control, but I'm not sure. Whatever you guys think.69.235.80.27 (talk) 05:36, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Something is certainly happening more than just "artillery duels", based on some of the recent updates on the AJE Live Blog. The rebels on the eastern front do exaggerate, but I'm willing to bet that a substantial amount of exaggeration can be chalked up to the communication mixups and distortions that can occur in the midst of battle. It may not be 100% accurate and should be viewed with a critical eye, but at least it isn't quite the laughable zenga zenga that Mu'ammar and friends cough up. We'll wait a bit longer, though. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 05:27, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I know we cant use this as WP:RS but for the sake of the argument here are several confirmations that New Brega has been taken [33] [34] (in the beginning of the video soldier says that "it´s 11th August and we´re in Brega"). Also I believe that that AP report about capture of whole Brega might be misunderstanding. --EllsworthSK (talk) 08:59, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

A little less than one month ago, rebels stated that they took Brega and it was very far from the truth as they were in fact defeated and oushed back. The claim that they have done today is even less triomphalist than their previous one and their estimation of Gaddafi forces remaining in the city seems absurd (100 men only). It seems that the wikipedia community has already been abused by some misinformation about the situation in Brega in the past and same errors should not be made again.--Archeopteryx5 (talk) 14:42, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

First of all, I was skeptical from the beginning that what is now the so-called "first phase" was Gaddafite victory. The argument for that is that simply because the rebels failed to take the city that counts as a "victory" for the Gaddafites- however, that is simplistic in my view. When a beseiged city is under attack, the city's defenders have only truly won when the city's attackers not only stop attacking, but also retreat and end the seige in my view (and yes I understand that Brega wasn't really a seige because it came from one direction, but still you get the idea). Second of all, these are not only "rebel claims" any more, as they have been stated as fact by Al Jazeera English and other RSs. There were reports by Al Jazeera of relatively high casualties today. As for the rebels interviewed at the hospital and elsewhere, saying that their comrades had already captured Brega is probably a huge exaggeration, as their estimations are, but their recent memory of fighting in Brega is most likely not. Otherwise, I agree with EkoGraf that the Brega-Ajdabiya road campaign should be closed as it is over. --Yalens (talk) 14:56, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

They captured the residential complex not all of Brega which is divided into three areas IIRC, the residential complex is about 6-8 km from the port and industrial facilities. I don't know if they are already reports about that, but there is already some footage from takeover of that area. Also the whole fight for this city should be gathered in one simple article instead of four or five like now.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 18:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Different periods, different battles. First one was in early March (when the rebels beat back the loyalists and made an unsuccessfull dash for west Libya), second one was in mid-March (when loyalists took the town), third was in early April (when loyalists re-took the town after a brief retreat), fourth is ongoing since mid-July (with no end in sight). EkoGraf (talk) 23:49, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Second Phase over?

The rebel offensive has seemed to stalled and it looks like another stalemate so would the second phase be considered over? Noneofyour (talk) 23:23, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

On the news ticker of the AJE livestream, they claim the rebels have retaken Brega. Obviously, I don't know if that is true, but it is enough to wait a few more days to see what happens, especially in light of the other rebel advances. Fovezer (talk) 02:19, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

All of Brega has now been liberated. (92.7.2.245 (talk) 16:38, 20 August 2011 (UTC))

Rebels have retreated from the industrial zone after heavy artillery fire back toward the residential area. So much for an end to the battle. Guess the stalemate continues. EkoGraf (talk) 17:24, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Have you looked at the source? Xinhuanet has already reported numerous stuff that turned out to be completely false and often blatently pro-Gaddafi. They are not a trustworthy source.--31.17.180.45 (talk) 17:51, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

The rebels are in complete control of all of Brega. The battle is over and won. (92.7.2.245 (talk) 18:45, 20 August 2011 (UTC))

Xinhuanet? Ok, how about the BBC than [35] who confirmed it via a rebel military commander? You going to tell me BBC is pro-Gaddafi? Quoting the source - A rebel military spokesman, Col Ahmed Bani, confirmed that rebel forces had fallen back in Brega. I get it you are all anti-gaddafi and such but POV-pushing has not and will not be tolerated on Wikipedia. Leave your personal feelings at the door when editing on Wikipedia. EkoGraf (talk) 19:01, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

The BBC is left-wing crap. (92.7.2.245 (talk) 19:20, 20 August 2011 (UTC))

It was confirmed by Al Jazeera's Libya Live Blog as well. Is that enough evidence to satisfy you? Noneofyour (talk) 20:00, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

There should be one small correction. The rebel commander said: "We withdrew to the eastern part of the industrial zone." So the Rebels are still in the industrial zone but not in the western part (where the oil terminal is located). This should be corrected as right now it sounds as if they'd completely retreated.--31.17.180.45 (talk) 20:08, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

So in esence by your comment The BBC is left-wing crap. you confirm that you are a right-wing radical who can not stay neutral? EkoGraf (talk) 20:31, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

ABSOLUTELY. I would have killed Gaddafi as soon as he started arming the IRA in 1972. So glad President Reagan bombed Tripoli in 1986. We should have done this many years ago. Oh, and the rebels are still in the industrial zone. (92.7.2.245 (talk) 21:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC))

I agree with EkoGraf on this one, multiple sources have confirmed that the rebels retreated from the industrial area when they came under intense shelling & artillery fire. 69.235.80.27 (talk) 02:49, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, in your last comment when editing the article you said Yes - we are still in the industrial zone. And in your last comment here on the talk page you said I would have killed Gaddafi as soon as he started arming the IRA in 1972.....We should have done this many years ago. So in essence you have proven now that you are indeed also a Libyan rebel. That, in combination with your behavior that you can not hold a neutral standpoint, doesn't give you the right to edit on Wikipedia anymore and if you continue to remove sourced information I will report you to an administrator to be blocked. The essence of Wikipedia is editing based on neutrality and verifibility. On both accounts you fail. And commenting on Wikipedia that you want someone to die (which you said on the talk page of the main article on the war) or be killed (and even you killing someone yourself), is in all ways not acceptable behavior here on Wikipedia and is despicable. EkoGraf (talk) 05:21, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

So is supporting terrorism all over the world. (92.7.26.128 (talk) 14:26, 21 August 2011 (UTC))

That is not for Wikipedia to judge, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. We edit per verified reports from international media, not based on personal opinions. EkoGraf (talk) 21:50, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

I think most would agree Gadaffi is a bad character ekograf but yeah not the place to judge.76.70.40.8 (talk) 01:55, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't realy know about most. Most of the western countries would agree yes, but I don't get that kind of impression from the rest of the world. In any case, this is not the place for these kinds of discussions. EkoGraf (talk) 13:48, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Only Cuba and Venezala regard the mental freak favourably. (92.7.3.54 (talk) 16:19, 22 August 2011 (UTC))

Its amazing how off topic this has come. Noneofyour (talk) 16:23, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Not really since the bastard should have been killed at least 25 years ago. (92.7.3.54 (talk) 17:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC))

On another topic, The rebels just took the industrial zone of Brega: [36] 70.187.185.194 (talk) 17:24, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I believe it said they entered, not took. Noneofyour (talk) 18:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

All of Brega has been liberated by the freedom fighters now. (92.7.3.54 (talk) 18:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC))

Create New Page?

Now that Brega and Las Ranuf have been captured, would it not be a good idea to create a new page and title it something like the Late august rebel offensive - sort of like the one in March? 68.32.79.252 (talk) 19:40, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I would strongly agree with this 81.98.167.142 (talk) 10:22, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Hahaha. Looks like someone's not on the ball.... ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 12:26, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, not a helpful tone, try being polite, then people might like you. Secondly, it was renamed shortly after i posted that. 81.98.167.142 (talk) 19:38, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

1) I don't care one way or another if you "like" me or not. This isn't grade school. 2) While it was renamed recently, the article itself is over a month old. For all the time you spend on the campaignbox, one would think that you would have noticed it earlier. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 20:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

So i missed it, big deal, and so i update the campaign box from time to time, don't you have anything better to fixate on? 81.98.167.142 (talk) 16:46, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Fourth Battle of Brega. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120412104452/http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC110809-0000286/Libya-rebels-dissolve-executive-committee to http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC110809-0000286/Libya-rebels-dissolve-executive-committee
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.seattlepi.com/business/article/Libyan-rebels-claim-they-captured-part-of-Brega-1882431.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120412104452/http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC110809-0000286/Libya-rebels-dissolve-executive-committee to http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC110809-0000286/Libya-rebels-dissolve-executive-committee
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.seattlepi.com/business/article/Libyan-rebels-claim-they-captured-part-of-Brega-1882431.php
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43766539/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120709192049/http://headlines.sakapfetstore.com/English-Libya_rebels_continue_offensive_Kadhafi_defiant/84452621448183811/article_85908730770161710.jsp to http://headlines.sakapfetstore.com/English-Libya_rebels_continue_offensive_Kadhafi_defiant/84452621448183811/article_85908730770161710.jsp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121026064637/http://www.citizen.co.za/citizen/content/en/citizen/world-news?oid=210477&sn=Detail&pid=333&Libya-rebel-advance-slowed-by--chemical--trenches to http://www.citizen.co.za/citizen/content/en/citizen/world-news?oid=210477&sn=Detail&pid=333&Libya-rebel-advance-slowed-by--chemical--trenches
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924085251/http://www.realclearworld.com/news/reuters/international/2011/Jul/16/heavy_casualties_reported_in_libya_fighting.html to http://www.realclearworld.com/news/reuters/international/2011/Jul/16/heavy_casualties_reported_in_libya_fighting.html
• Added archive https://archive.is/20130104193645/http://www.talkradionews.com/news/2011/7/19/battle-for-brega-lingers-amid-push-for-diplomacy-in-libya.html to http://www.talkradionews.com/news/2011/7/19/battle-for-brega-lingers-amid-push-for-diplomacy-in-libya.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Mines+forces+slow+advancing+Libyan+rebels/5142716/story.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111003114125/http://world.bdnews24.com/details.php?id=202393&cid=7 to http://world.bdnews24.com/details.php?id=202393&cid=7

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:18, 5 October 2017 (UTC)