>> Is Palin advocating that America put troops on the ground?
Based on your article quotes, that’s unrelated to her stated consequent. Sarah simply stated the conditions of Obama’s actions. BTW, a mission failure is not necessarily complete failure for the West’s long term goals.
I interpret Palin’s remarks to be less FP oriented than to speak to the capacity of the WH occupant.
Actually, that's not accurate. In the particular interview with Greta that I posted, she doesn't specifically give any indication about what her position may be as it relates to ground troop deployment. Why, I'm not sure and I'm not sure why Greta didn't press the point when she initially asked the question "What would you do?".
But, in a March 6 (the weekend of the 6th), some two or more weeks before the UN even approved the No-Fly zone, Palin said the following when speaking to Jeannine Pirro on FNC (the article on this interview is linked in post #16 of this thread)...
""Certainly a no fly zone," Palin said. "I hate to say, jeez, more troops on the ground. You know send more of our brave young men and women over there in Libya. When yes, 41 years of Gadhafi. He’s got to go."
Granted, the quote is in Palinese, so the locutions are more than a bit stumbled, but it's fairly clear that she (at a minimum) is tacitly calling for and perhaps explicitly endorsing troops on the ground, long before the UN even endorsed a No-Fly zone .