Libya: Benghazi unrest, to Civil War, to a new government and Gaddafi's death.

[Frodo]

I am probably premature in asking this question, but nonetheless it needs to be asked:

In the event that Gaddafi is deposed and either executed by his people or exiled to Venezuela, what is the likelihood that Libya will be divided back into its precolonial parts: Tripolitania and Cyrenaica? 

[Frodo]

Well the rebels claim to have taken Brega again now, and Gaddafi's former Prime Minister and basically right hand man in his original coup has also defected.

I think it's safe to say the writing's on the wall...

Wish I could say the same for Syria... 

[Frodo]

If the recent reports and rebel claims are true, big things could be happening. Tripoli would now be effectively cut off from supply lines.

Many of the news stories say that Tripoli is cut off, though the map suggests that they should still be able to re-supply from Chad or Sudan via Bani Walid and the south:

Is there a color code key so I have some reasonable idea who is who?  I suspect blue stands for areas controlled by Qaddafi, and brown for rebel-held areas.  I have no idea what the green stands for, unless it stands for contested areas.  

Or do I have the blue and green mixed up?  Please help. 

[Frodo]

Given recent events, it might be time to change the thread title...

^I would imagine blue means contested and green means Qaddafi.

You're probably right.

[Frodo]

With Qaddafi gone, now it's on to Syria...  

[Frodo]

With Qaddafi gone, now it's on to Syria...  

Too little oil.

What Syria may lack in natural resources, it makes up for in strategic importance as an ally of Iran and benefactor of Islamist terrorist organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas. 

Sooner or later, once the opposition unifies and broadens its appeal to Aleppo and Damascus, the United States -though NATO- will intervene there as well. 

[Frodo]

Why do I get this feeling that if Obama had done what so many here preferred him to do, (i.e. abandoning the Libyan opposition in Benghazi to their fates at the hand of Gaddhafi's forces), many of those same people would now be slamming him for a humanitarian catastrophe on his watch when he could have saved them?  

I don't believe in possibility of military intervention in Syria for following reasons:

1. NATO and US are already quite tired with Libya and obviously have little idea what to do with present problem
2. Obama already took a huge political risk in joining intervention in Libya. He's neither gambler nor an idiot
3. No player in the region wants regime change. Israel doesn't love Assad, but don't want to risk losing a predictable neighbour either. Neither wants Lebanon. Saudis and other Gulf monarchies are worried about spreading of the unrests and will sit with the present rulers (hell, Saudis are already scared with Yemen and were with Bahrain). Iran is a close Syrian ally. Iraq is too concerned about it's own fragile security and fragile government to wish any additional meltdown.

Also, the Russians (the primary weapons seller to Assad) don't want to lose a major client.

Also, the Syrian opposition doesn't want outside military intervention, whereas the Libyan opposition did.  And the Syrian opposition controls no territory, among other differences....

Actually there are growing calls within the Syrian opposition for NATO intervention.