Now, the French gvt did not *intentionaly* jeopardize the lives
of the US crews. For what purpose, and what was the "increased danger" in
avoiding French airspace anyway?

Approximately five additional hours of flight time into a combat zone.

Somehow I think if the roles were reversed, French citizens would not shed
one
tear for the loss of US lives.

Don't bet on that.

Judging from the French reaction to nearly anything the US does, a decision
made by the US that wound up hurting us would be gleefully trumpeted in France.
Iraq today is a good example, French newspapers seem almost to revel in every
US casulty.

Really? I thought all involved planes, bombers and support ones, came only
from bases in the UK and the 6th Fleet's ships.

They did, however Germany was where the operation was planned and controlled
from. That's all that was requested from Germany.

Still,
Spain refused the bombers to overfly its territory, which would have also
drastically shortened the trip

I believe flying over Spain was insignificant as far as time saving went, and
once France denied the overflight, the US didn't even request Spanish
overflight since they had already rejected permission to base tankers at
Moronon AB. I guess you're correct, Spain was as much an inerference as
France, but it was the French who stood out.

But if you look at a map, and as you say Germany provided support, how come
the USAF planners didn't choose an eastern, shorter route?

From Germany, how are you going to get to Libya without overflying France?
Overfly Austria and Italy. Italy may say yes, but I severely doubt Austria
would.

And yet France allowed the UK-based US bombers to overfly its territory
during OIF despite its clear-cut opposition to it...

That seemed bizzare to me. I'm suprised we even asked...


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"