An interesting piece from France24 about alleged Qatari sponsorship of the rebellion in northern Mali.

The first accusations of Qatari involvement with Tuareg separatists and Islamist groups came in a June 2012 article in respected French weekly the Canard Enchainé.
In a piece title “Our friend Qatar is financing Mali’s Islamists”, the newspaper alleged that the oil-rich Gulf state was financing the separatists.
It quoted an unnamed source in French military intelligence saying: “The MNLA [secular Tuareg separatists], al Qaeda-linked Ansar Dine and MUJAO [movement for unity and Jihad in West Africa] have all received cash from Doha.”

Taken from here:
Is Qatar fuelling the crisis in north Mali? - MALI-QATAR - FRANCE 24

Recently the trend towards questioning Qatari foriegn investment has extended to the UK, with questions being raised in the media there about the level and type of investment Qatar is making in the country. It is undeniable that 'Qatar foudation' is sponsoring a lot of media. But its a good bet that western governments will be a bot more wary about what they allow Qatar to buy in the future if it is playing the same sort of double game against Europe that Pakistan played against the US. The attempt by Jihadists to draw a link between the recent Algeria siege and the conflict in Mali already joins the dots Qatar is laying down to direct attacks against westerners and western interests.

Originally Posted by Partizan

Yes of course they woudl like to have German and foreign boots on the ground. They are after all puppets. I find it odd that after that long winded response in which you once again trying to justify Western neo-colonialism, you support Islamist and AQ in Syria while opposing similar forces in Mali and the Sahel. Do you see the double standards applied there?

This isn't about fighting Al-Queda or supporting 'democracy' in the Sahel, this is about getting and tightening a geo-political stranglehold on North and West Africa, (France's sphere of influence) that will make not benefit the citizens one iota, in fact as we are seeing already it is making the lives of the people worse. All this nonsense about AQ/terrorists is just a bloody smokescreen.

I support democratic forces in Syria, but nuance (and common sense) seems lost on you. I'll try to keep my responses shorter from now on so as not to stretch your attention span to the breaking point.

But instead of repeating the same talking point without actually backing it up in any way, shape, or form why don't you address the points? Why don't you explain why France's intervention, by all accounts, was improvised and an action of last resort. Why don't you explain why the plan was for the Africans to do it, instead of France until it became obvious that Mali was going to fall? Etc.

You note that it's already becoming worse for the civilians. Worse than being under the Islamists?

Originally Posted by Justinian

I support democratic forces in Syria, but nuance (and common sense) seems lost on you. I'll try to keep my responses shorter from now on so as not to stretch your attention span to the breaking point.

But instead of repeating the same talking point without actually backing it up in any way, shape, or form why don't you address the points? Why don't you explain why France's intervention, by all accounts, was improvised and an action of last resort. Why don't you explain why the plan was for the Africans to do it, instead of France until it became obvious that Mali was going to fall? Etc.

You note that it's already becoming worse for the civilians. Worse than being under the Islamists?

Do you really think that the Saudi and Qatari backed, so called Syrian opposition are really all democrats. In areas under FSA control, Christians have been ethnically cleansed and Sharia law introduced.

Some democracy that.

Originally Posted by Partizan

Do you really think that the Saudi and Qatari backed, so called Syrian opposition are really all democrats. In areas under FSA control, Christians have been ethnically cleansed and Sharia law introduced.

Some democracy that.

I didn't say they (meaning every faction in the opposition) were all democrats now did I? Still not willing to address the points about Mali I see.

Originally Posted by Partizan

Yeah great stuff indeed with the Malian Army murdering and torturing at will.

Yeehhaaaawww. One can hear the laptop warriors spunking all over themselves.

So are in favor of Al-Qaeda and other Islamists conquering West Africa? Do you not think they should be stopped?

Originally Posted by Partizan

The people of Timbuktoo will soon find out that their so called liberators will become an occupying force.

As I said before -"occupying Mali with 5 000 troops?" And whats in Timbuktoo that sooooo valuable..shouldn't they be "occupying" the oil fields

Originally Posted by Partizan

The intervention by France has made the situation alot worse now with Islamists especially Al Queda threatening to destablise the region and target France itself. Le Sauce has gone headstrong into something that could blow up spectacularly in his face.

Al-Qaeda? That doesn't even exist?

Originally Posted by Partizan

That didnt stop the NATO powers taking liberty with Libya to bomb and topple the Gaddaffi regime and hand that country over to warlords which has plunged Libya and the Sahel into a state of near anarchy and is now a breeding ground for Islamists and al Queda. ?

Anarchy? Another view
Libya Today: Glass Half Full? | Reinventing Peace

Originally Posted by Partizan

I find it odd that after that long winded response in which you once again trying to justify Western neo-colonialism,

"Long-winded"=painstaking and comprehensive.

Originally Posted by parentheses

This video may interest you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnKPimzibnY

TheRealNews

Originally Posted by IvoShandor

As I said before -"occupying Mali with 5 000 troops?" And whats in Timbuktoo that sooooo valuable..shouldn't they be "occupying" the oil fields

Mali is the new frontier for oil exploration in the Sahara. Not surprising western troops want to get there before the Chinese

Originally Posted by parentheses

Mali is the new frontier for oil exploration in the Sahara. Not surprising western troops want to get there before the Chinese

You see by pointing out those simple facts like I have done, the likes of Ivo and Justinian simply ignore it.

Originally Posted by Partizan

You see by pointing out those simple facts like I have done, the likes of Ivo and Justinian simply ignore it.

Let me quote from an article I posted earlier in the thread:

Where oil and gas are concerned, talk of Mali’s “oil wealth” is premature: while Mali has potential reserves, it has zero proven reserves, and despite its government allocating 700,000 square kilometers for drilling since 2005, no wells have been drilled yet (see Jeune Afrique). No major multinational energy companies have even bought drilling rights in Mali: the only companies who have are Italy’s ENI, Algeria’s SONATRACH, Canada’s Selier Energy, and a few other minor players with high risk tolerance. Even before the present conflict began a year ago, the Malian Sahara’s remoteness and chronic insecurity made it a no-go zone for most investors. Military intervention will not change that for the better.

Behind Mali’s conflict: myths, realities & unknowns | Bridges from Bamako

Still not willing to address any points made, I see.

Edit:

According to Algerian officials the attack on In Amenas was being planned for two months. Which would put the start of the planning somewhere in November. Obviously France had not yet intervened at that time, nor had the Security Council authorized an intervention. This would indicate that France's intervention was used as an excuse, but that in reality France's intervention only influenced the timing of the attack and was not the reason for it.

It should be noted that, in the words of Geoff Porter:

Algiers also cautioned that any military approach to the instability in northern Mali was likely to only escalate the conflict and raise the likelihood of Islamist terrorist attacks in Algeria.

This would be a tacit admission by Algerian officials that this attack would have come even without the French intervening in Mali. While it may have raised the likelihood of these attacks, the Algerian officials seem to tacitly concede that this one (at least) was already going to come.

The attackers moved in from Northern Mali, again indicating why the area must be brought back under government control.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...tages?page=0,0
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...958509588.html