Here are some questions (and possible answers) that we made on the conflict in Libya. Why does the international community has moved only at the last possible moment and in any order? More than the "coalition of the willing" that is attacking Libya appears to be the 'army of reluctant "between distinctions, exceptions and partial commitment, only two weeks ago it seemed that only a little push to dislodge the dictator would have been done (albeit with the bad), but seemed to lack the fundamental motivation: an official document that would allow the act or resolution which took away the doubts about action without the "cover" (or umbrella) impartial, the United Nations (perhaps sheet the former with the U.S.
to attack Iraq without waiting for the UN). The French have moved to first, surprising almost 'allies'? France is a race for European leadership intervention (and as an alternative to America), and Sarkozy has achieved international visibility (great pride waving French flags in Benghazi, where the philosopher Henri Lévy recently and would be back would convince the French president of the goodness of intervention) and good prospects for post-war affairs.
Why does the U.S. maintain a profile so low? For Obama, Nobel Laureate for Peace 2009, open a third front (after Afghanistan and Iraq) is not considered strategic (also on the home front) and you do not want to expose too much with the Arab world with which it seeks dialogue, in addition to directly (and physically) in the conflict would increase the tension in the anti-American as the time of Bush.
In short, a risk more than one occasion. Because Italy is the country that lose the most and could also earn less? It is on the war front, under the blackmail of a military response of the dictator or terrorist. Do not have a favored position with respect to a new government post-Gaddafi who could take power in Tripoli.
What is the strategy of Qaddafi? Right now stand, tighten the ranks of his supporters, to gain time and advantage of the cracks that open in the coalition: at this rate, time plays in his favor. , March 22, 2011 
to attack Iraq without waiting for the UN). The French have moved to first, surprising almost 'allies'? France is a race for European leadership intervention (and as an alternative to America), and Sarkozy has achieved international visibility (great pride waving French flags in Benghazi, where the philosopher Henri Lévy recently and would be back would convince the French president of the goodness of intervention) and good prospects for post-war affairs.
Why does the U.S. maintain a profile so low? For Obama, Nobel Laureate for Peace 2009, open a third front (after Afghanistan and Iraq) is not considered strategic (also on the home front) and you do not want to expose too much with the Arab world with which it seeks dialogue, in addition to directly (and physically) in the conflict would increase the tension in the anti-American as the time of Bush.
In short, a risk more than one occasion. Because Italy is the country that lose the most and could also earn less? It is on the war front, under the blackmail of a military response of the dictator or terrorist. Do not have a favored position with respect to a new government post-Gaddafi who could take power in Tripoli.
What is the strategy of Qaddafi? Right now stand, tighten the ranks of his supporters, to gain time and advantage of the cracks that open in the coalition: at this rate, time plays in his favor. , March 22, 2011
- Coming to their Sensis: of Aussies, scams and the Yellow Peril (25/03/2011)
- Sensi hails Roma derby victory (14/03/2011)
- Roma president Sensi: New coach installed today (21/02/2011)
- Sensi Star from CCC (18/03/2011)
- Roma President Rosella Sensi Admits New Coach Decision Will Be Made On Monday (Goal.com) (21/02/2011)
No comments:
Post a Comment