Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Qbert; doug from upland; usmcobra; Cindy; G8 Diplomat; AdmSmith; Dog; nuconvert; ...
The two competing factions are France and Italy.

France wants to be in command because it wants operational freedom to hunt down Qaddafi fast, on the ground, dig him out, ugly or not. France has had it with Libya's illegals, wants revenge on Qaddafi for the war in Chad, and wants economic control of the future united Libya because of its oil and uranium deposits in the S of Libya.

Italy wants NATO to run the show, knowing that would bureaucratize and drag out the war and search for Qaddafi. Why? Because that would hasten the partition of Libya with Italy controlling the E half that has the oil & refineries they desperately want to control.

Libya used to be a colony of Italy and they want it back to have a presence on both sides of the Med. The French have much more influence in the W half of Libya via Tunisia and Algeria, but the W half has little oil.

15 posted on 03/22/2011 2:04:12 PM PDT by gandalftb (Fighting jihadists is like fighting an earthquake, harden yourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: gandalftb
The two competing factions are France and Italy.

Isn't there an oil pipeline under the Med. into Italy?

That'd be their horse in the race. Not a ligit reason to attack Libya - just wanting to protect that oil from falling into the hands of France or another country,

Will someone tell me again what right we have to interfere in a CIVIL WAR in a SORVEREIGN country?

21 posted on 03/22/2011 2:14:36 PM PDT by maine-iac7 ("We stand together or we fall apart" mt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: gandalftb

Interesting- thanks. I suppose Obama figures he will weasel out and let them duke it out then.


22 posted on 03/22/2011 2:14:44 PM PDT by Qbert ("I seem to smell the stench of appeasement in the air" - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: gandalftb; Qbert
Thank you for your insight. Sounds as though you have a well-informed take on the situation.

Do you have an opinion of what, if any, U.S. interest warrants aggressive involvement of our military? At least any interest so vital that it is worth further inflaming the Muslim world? (I will stipulate inflammation may be built in and unavoidable.)

27 posted on 03/22/2011 2:32:17 PM PDT by frog in a pot (We need a working definition of "domestic enemies" if the oath of office is to have meaning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: gandalftb; AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks gandalftb.


42 posted on 03/23/2011 3:17:15 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (The 2nd Amendment follows right behind the 1st because some people are hard of hearing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson