The Mole: Immigration is the real issue behind the French willingness to back Cameron on intervention David Cameron, in Brussels today for the EU leaders' meeting to discuss Libya, has one major ally in his campaign for intervention in Libya â French president Nicolas Sarkozy. Itâs not because Sarko is deeply concerned about democracy and freedom for the people of Libya. The issue that's put the Frenchman on Cameronâs side is the purely domestic one of immigration. With the National Front's Marine Le Pen riding high in the polls because of her party's strong line on immigration, Sarko knows his days are numbered if he canât get on top of the issue. And it has become clear in recent days that a victory for Gaddafi will unleash a wave of Libyans, heading north to Europe to escape retribution. Read more: http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/76246...n-to-bomb-libya-muammar-gaddafi#ixzz1HG1uqkHz
I had thought this might have tipped the balance towards intervention after watching a snippet on BBC news about North African Migrants arriving on Lampedusa though I don't believe its the the prime driver. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12662756
Actually I was thinking that Ghadaffy has much to fear from the Brits. They would love to kill him quickly to keep him quiet about the secret oil deal they cut with him to free al-Megrahi from a scottish prison.
And the Brits have much to fear from Gaddafi. They wouldn't want the rebels to capture him and turn him over to the U.S. Obama would waterboard him to find out what deal he cut with them.
I thought Odumbo was opposed to water boarding during his campaign. Or was that just another lie to get the sheeple to vote for him?
False. Gheddafi had agreements with Italy about immigration, and he was effective in controlling it. Sarkozy only wants oil, he wants to replace italian ENI with french Total.
Oh, and in these days thousands of immigrants are coming in Italy from Lybia. Europe and France already said they don't give a $hit, they won't take any immigrant, it's Italy's problem. Steal the oil, and leave the immigrants: welcome to the French vision of a "Divided union of Europe".
You would not have to be a switched on intelligence analyst to sniff out the deal we did the Libya it was plain enough, however the US oil corps were cutting deals before the UK in Libya so it would be interesting to find out how the path was diplomatically smoothed out after blood money was paid out to the relatives of Pan Am 103
The first posts of this thread said "immigration" was the main reason for Mr. Sarkozy to attack Libya and hope for a change in government - this is complete nonsense. Dictatorships value every single person in their country so much so that emigration is forbidden. Democracies, on the other hand, leave people free to do whatever they like to. So NOW that we have something closer to a democracy in North African countries, immigration will be an issue. Despite the fact that the Italian border is the European border, Italy has been left alone facing the issue. MR. SARKOZY, and this says it all, said HE DOES NOT WANT TO HELP EMIGRANT PEOPLE - he'd rather kick them out of France. This man's acting can better describe him as a small pathetic dictator woth of the worst Napoleon. His calling a meeting and deliberately excluding Italy (ITALY IS THE COUNTRY WITH BEST DIPLOMATIC AND COMMERCIAL RELATIONS IN LIBYA, and also the closest country too) says a lot about his intent to bomb Libya and try to change the regime only in order to take control over oil and gas fields. French people, as history says, are very often keen on wars and gaining back power and influence over most areas in the region and this also encourages Sarkozy ravaging the country: personal interests to gain consensus in view of elections in France in one year. Cameron is a beginner and is sticking to Sarkozy's arse God knows why as England will get away empty-handed after war. This is just a French internal matter and a rush to regain control in the area, Italy having a much stronger influence and thriving commercial relations.
I believe Obama is a lot like Nixon. If the President does it, it must be legal. So, waterboarding is OK so long as no one knows about it.