"BUFDRVR" a écrit dans le message de
...

I'm just telling you what I saw reported around four years ago. You
obviously
have better information than a Libyan defector.

No, I just don't buy it. And do "I doubt" and "I think" sound too
presumptuous to you?

Well, in the case of Libya (a US unilateral strike), it was easier to draw
direct paralells. Libya was not being bombed by a coalition, only the US,
what
effect did it have? No further terrorist attacks against US citizens
(depending
on how you look at Lockerbie.)

Well, I'd like to know how *you* look at Lockerbie. That's precisely the
part I don't understand in your reasoning. If it was not a terrorist attack
against US citizens (200 casualties) and assets (a PanAm B747), how do you
qualify it? El Dorado Canyon operation's military efficiency can be
discussed (I see it more as both a display of long-range strike capability
and a signal of resolution sent to *all* the rogue nations) but, according
to me, it was not the reason that made Libya change its policy about
terrorism, not even regarding the US (once again, I don't believe the
"sorry, we would have cancelled it if it had been possible, for real, but it
was already too late and we had lost our men in the wild" argument about
Lockerbie).

The fact that France denied the US overflight
rights really makes it difficult for any sympathy to to be shared with
that
country if they suffered casulties inflicted by Libya.


No offense intended but it's a pretty lame comment. What were the victims
responsible for? Oh, and there were "only" 54 French citizens out of the 170
passengers from 18 nationalities aboard the UTA flight.
As for the overflight rights, you easily forget that along with France,
Germany, Spain and Italy also refused to cooperate. I guess this fact does
not plead for the "Old Europe" though... :-)


ArVa