Coalition in Lybia or the Sarkozy's failed poker game?

lapinschous1

New Member
Good evening.

Currently watching France 24 i realize that my president's atempt to take the leadership of the coalition has failed because of berlusconi and the arab league.
So , if the NATO would take over command , what would it mean? Everyone knows that without the US , NATO is paralysed . However, NATO has been chosen to command although the USA have stated that they won't involve more means to support the benghazi's rebels... that doesn't sound clear to me...
 
Good evening.

Currently watching France 24 i realize that my president's atempt to take the leadership of the coalition has failed because of berlusconi and the arab league.
So , if the NATO would take over command , what would it mean? Everyone knows that without the US , NATO is paralysed . However, NATO has been chosen to command although the USA have stated that they won't involve more means to support the benghazi's rebels... that doesn't sound clear to me...

Complex issue.
French not leading it doesn´t mean French won´t keep contributing.
Along with European nations including GB.

Alot of nations stand by to send troops as soon as the leadership and mission objectives are clearly stipulated. Alot of countries have already sent advanced teams to protect citizens and/or interests in the region.
French has been and will most likely keep contributing to the mission with or without the leadership role.

MHO.
//KJ.
 
Hmmm, yeah, these two were pretty obvious in my mind... I was looking for something more subtle, maybe saving face after what happened in Tunisia. Or something like that.

But I'm sure that the little man wants to give the country a show to get elected.
 
Back
Top