Algeria - a bit of a sticky wicket.

[Coito ergo sum]

Yeah, fucking Europeans and their not bombing Algeria, soft on terrorism the lot of them!

Not yet. We'll see, though. French military bombing Mali, justified. French in Ivory Coast, justified. Euros champion bombing Libya, justified. I'm sure Algeria is a worthwhile place for Europeans to send their militaries. Must be a good reason, or the Europeans wouldn't do it.

[Audley Strange]

That gas is probably soft on Sharia law, not like good old British natural gas.

[JimC]

The US isn't involved, so, there is bound to be a good reason for what the Euros are doing over there.

Some of the hostages were Americans, I gather...

[Clinton Huxley]

There have reputedly been US drone overflights. The US is sticking its beak in.

[Blind groper]

The Algerians definitely stuffed up. They definitely should have asked for SAS help. However, national pride........


On the other hand, I see no value in serious negotiation. The more you kowtow to terrorists, the more they will go about hostage taking. If the policy was to ensure that every kidnapper, and every terrorist failed to leave the field alive, we would see a lot less such atrocities in future.

On whether the French should be in Mali, that is another story.

[Coito ergo sum]

There have reputedly been US drone overflights. The US is sticking its beak in.

That is a sure sign that it's all about oil and/or has all been orchestrated behind the scenes by the US. Not the current administration, of course, but by other forces in the US that are manipulating world affairs, and the Republicans. The Euros just want to help people, but if the US is involved, it's about world conquest.

[Coito ergo sum]

On whether the French should be in Mali, that is another story.

Of course the French should be in Mali. Just like how the French were right to have been in Vietnam for 75 years.

[Svartalf]

Reminder, we've been asked to come, it's not like we were invading the place and colonizing again.

[Coito ergo sum]

Reminder, we've been asked to come, it's not like we were invading the place and colonizing again.

LOL -- sure, of course. And, the US was asked by the South Vietnamese government to come, and the US was asked by the Iraqi opposition forces to come...

[Svartalf]

The Iraqi never asked you to come, they had no legitimacy... as for SVN, yeah, you were helping a friendly state, I'm not Hanoi Jane.

[Coito ergo sum]

The Iraqi never asked you to come, they had no legitimacy... as for SVN, yeah, you were helping a friendly state, I'm not Hanoi Jane.

...that's only because you're French, and whatever you say about US involvement would have to be said about French involvement before the battle of Dien Bien Phu.

If it's legitimacy that you're looking for, then certainly Hussein's rule in Iraq was never legitimate. Not sure how an Iraqi opposition group could be less legitimate than Hussein's government.

[Svartalf]

Saddam was the acknowledged and official ruler of Iraq, even bush the Elder let him stay in place... He was the only legitimate gummint of Iraq since 1979 (not sure there's anything like a legitimate one since he was ousted, still waiting for a civil war or for Iran to come help the oppressed shi'ites)

[laklak]

Kill 'em all, let God sort them out.

[Coito ergo sum]

Saddam was the acknowledged and official ruler of Iraq, even bush the Elder let him stay in place... He was the only legitimate gummint of Iraq since 1979 (not sure there's anything like a legitimate one since he was ousted, still waiting for a civil war or for Iran to come help the oppressed shi'ites)

Oh, I thought you were referring to "legitimacy." The ability to hold power, and the legitimacy of holding power are two different things.

Iran is already coming to "help" -- that's old news. And, the Shiites were oppressed under Sadaam. Also old news.

[Svartalf]

Hey, Lak, if we kill Malians, who will come and sweep our streets?