Since when is the mission to oust Qadaffi?!?
Since, like, always - or something. And, if you have something to say about it, you're probably a troll - or something.
Qadaffi has to go, never mind how that happens or who makes it happens, how long it takes, or how much it costs. That's the mission, and we better be "in it to win it".
Since the President of the United States said it was, before he changed his mind.
The point being: if you are going to put troops in harm's way, it must be for a specified objective. To say that the mission is one thing, and then to backtrack on it days (or even hours) later is a tremendous disservice to those putting their butts on the line. It's one thing to change the scope of the mission based on serious deliberation and reflection on any changes in the situation, it's quite another to say "oops, never mind".
The mistake being made by some commenting on this thread is conflating separate statements and comments Palin has made into a policy position she has never actually put out there. She advocated for a no-fly-zone as humanitarian support for the rebels -- certainly a position that can be (and has been) argued about in its own right. However, her comments about "in it to win it" are not necessarily indicative of any policy position that says she would have ordered troops in to remove Quadaffi (pick a spelling, any spelling) in the first place, but rather that if the POTUS makes that a "go" mission that he then follows through with seeing that the mission be completed.
Now, it's quite possible that Palin may indeed believe that committing troops to remove Quadaffi is the right thing to do. But if so, it's not a position she has stated or advocated for in public, and anyone who suggests that she has is making a logical leap without foundation.