Oops

Micah Zenko has a very discouraging piece in the online magazine Foreign Policy , in which he lays out all the reasons why we goofed in assuming that Britain, France, and the Arab League could topple Qadaffi in "days, not weeks" of U.S. assistance with the no-fly zone. Didn't work out that way, did it? Here's his final, downbeat paragraph:

Qaddafi is most assuredly a vicious tyrant, and his ouster is a worthy goal. But it will not be achieved through incremental aid to the rebels and intermittent decapitation attempts. Yet we are where we are. Given its current level of commitment, the United States should continue to use its military capabilities to support the no-fly zone, monitor and publicize killings of civilians by Qaddafi's forces or the rebels, and respond with direct force to prevent or mitigate any mass atrocities. More importantly, however, the administration should work toward a negotiated end to the civil war, while starting to plan for the U.S. military assets, humanitarian assistance, and financial aid required to keep any peace.

Sounds like the Yugoslavian intervention at best, Iraq at worst. Blue skies! -- Dan Ford