Who really benefits from war in Libya?

I thought then that our intervention in Libya was ill-advised and not in aid of those taking part in the Arab Spring, but rather in the interests of Western oil and arms companies and Israeli foreign policy.

Ongoing revelations regarding the financial backers to Adam Werritty, the special adviser to our recently departed Defence Minister who pushed for Libyan intervention, seem to confirm my concerns.

Of course, it does not follow that because Adam Werritty and Dr Fox had meetings with senior foreign governments’ defence and/or intelligence figures and arms industry executives that they were up to no good. But it does not look good.

Now David Cameron tells us that Dr Fox’s decisions regarding Libya were sound, and his bad judgment only applied to his dealings with his chum Adam.

It is difficult to swallow this – six months after our intervention to prevent a massacre of civilians by Gaddafi’s tanks, boats and planes – when the pictures we see on TV are of the rebel NTC using such weapons aided by Nato aircraft reducing civilian areas to rubble.

Rather than calling for a register of lobbyists should our politicians not be calling for an inquiry into the real reasons why we went to war in Libya; and who benefited from it?

Tom Minogue

Victoria Terrace

Dunfermline

Malcolm Parkin (Letters, 17 October) is right to query Liam Fox’s judgment on the RAF base closures.

But also, how on earth could someone not yet 32 when Fox was appointed Defence Secretary, albeit with the benefits of a Madras College education but with a middling degree in social policy and such an empty CV, be considered a suitable top advisor in such a specialised subject as defence?

And why is a non-family person entitled to live rent-free in an MP’s taxpayer-subsidised flat?

John Birkett

Horseleys Park

St Andrews