The world has changed now, like it or not. Left alone, Gadaffi would unleash mercenaries and massacre thousands upon thousands as Eu /US watched.
That's how revolutions and civil wars go. It's a messy business. It's what these "rebels" signed up for when they picked their fight.
But let's address two other things:
1. Obama has said "regime change" is NOT the goal so he foresees an outcome where Gaddafi stays in power although Obama called for him to be removed a month ago. Huh?
2. Are you willing to accept this New Interventionism standard where we act on what might happen rather than what is happening or has happened?
Obama's a fool. When he said Gaddafi must go, he should've had a plan in place rather than waiting a month. Now we're half-in, without an endgame, and not acting towards regime change all while calling for it!
If Gaddafi isn't removed he will make good on retaliating against the attacking western nations. Maybe with terrorism. This was always an internal matter until Obama stuck his nose in.
Since he clearly saw no rush to act, evidenced by the month of dithering and waiting for UN approval, Obama should've asked for a Congressional resolution. While authorization might not be required yet under the "War Powers Act," it would've been in keeping with the Senator / presidential candidate's stated views on military action and authorization. Not only do we have a fool for a president, he's a hypocrite besides.
Fox News Radio reported Friday our forces would be limited to "logistical support" but a day later we're flying B-2 bombing runs and launching Tomahawk missiles.
I don't like this situation a bit. I feel like I'm being lied to.