i do go fringe CTer sometimes... sorry about that....
but seriously, on this issue, let's look at the facts of what has actually happened...
obama didn't act until kadaffi killed a shitload of rebels. A lot of kadaffis' armies - and air force/tanks/troops, were suddenly all exposed as they advanced and surrounded that final city.
Then, Obama acted with some serious fury, killing an assload of kadaffi's men, ending his air force for years to come, scrapping plenty of tanks and trucks...
Then, he suddenly turned everything over to NATO, which didn't do much, as expected. Rebels and their newfound jihadists that wandered in to help rebels are getting their asses kicked again as they're fighting with toy guns.
AND now that kadaffi is probably about to finish them - suddenly he's sending shitload of predators over, to blow up some moer of kadaffi's guys.
It's almost like the rebels are bait to bring out his forces so we can justifiably and easily kill the. And since they're bait soaked in al-Q remnants, nobody cries for them.
you have two sides in a conflict - both sides are our enemy - killing each other. We don't let either side win - we just give the rebels enough air support and help to keep fighting, and let the army win long enough to expose themselves for more strikes, now with predators.
So forget this being a CT - tell me whyit doesn't really look like our goal is to create and fuel a sitation where two groups of a-holes kill each other. You can cite incompetence, but the longer we see the US only intervene long enough to keep the conflict alive, you begin to wonder...