Debate:War in Libya?

Proposition
There has been much talk over a war in Libya like wars America already has in Iraq and Afghanistan. I feel that this so-called minor military operation will end up becoming another 8 year plus war.--Mr. Bojangles (talk) 20:12, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * While I was originally a fan of intervention I'm having a lot of doubts.
 * First of all it was too late. If The EU and the US had acted when Gaddafi on the back foot and the rebels were advancing it might have worked out.  But we waited until they were almost defeated and Gaddafi had his act together and was in a position to bring the full might of the state against them.
 * And then we authorised a no-fly zone to protect civilians. OK it's good to keep out of a ground war but what it means is that we can't (officially) support the rebels. Well France can for temporary electoral reasons, but that's a bit odd too.
 * So we look like we're promoting a stalemate, preventing one side from attacking too strongly while unwilling to give too much outright support to another. I'm not saying that we want a stalemate, but that's what our policies seem inadvertently designed to produce.
 * Then there are some other questions:
 * What will we do if the rebels start to take revenge on Gaddafi-supporting civilians?
 * What will we do if the rebels get an air force. There is a no-fly zone - will we shoot them our of the air?
 * And why Libya? Why not Syria? Why not Bahrain?--BobSpring is sprung! 20:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Why not fucking Zimbabwe? Ace of Spades 20:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't hear much about the Ivory Coast either now that you mention it. --Danfly (talk) 20:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Or the DRC or Burma or Somalia or Sudan or Columbia or... ТyUser_talk:Tyrannis 20:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Sudan would probably be worth invading for some oil if it wasn't guaranteed to royally piss off China. --Danfly (talk) 20:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Doubt it

 * Since there are no commitments to regime change or other mission objectives, there's no need to prolong US involvement in the conflict. Even if the conflict in Libya does last that long, I imagine the USA is going to pull out of it as quickly as possible and leave it to the other countries involved, mostly for PR reasons. They'll probably keep a strong intelligence presence in the region and try to influence things in the region through more clandestine and diplomatic methods. They'd be stupid not to, but that's about it. A prolonged war would be a disaster for the Obama administration and they would want to avoid it. --Danfly (talk) 20:37, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah well, so you think the US is OK then?--BobSpring is sprung! 20:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I think they would have a decent strategy. --Danfly (talk) 20:48, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, I don't think any state ever has morality as the dominant issue in foreign policy considerations. --Danfly (talk) 21:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)