Questions

At what point do we admit that the humanitarian mission is over and that the US, UK, and France are functioning as the rebel air force in Libya?

The rebels have used the coalition air raids, which reversed the government's advantage, to launch a blitzkrieg to the west, regaining all the territory -- and more -- they lost in the counter-offensive Gaddafi launched with tanks and artillery two weeks ago.

It appears that the western coalition has hit targets around Gaddafi's hometown of Sirte as the rebels approach. Will we provide close air support to the rebel effort to take Sirte? Can we do something like that and still stay within the UN mandate? 

On a related note, is it just my perception or is it amazingly quiet when it comes to info about Libyan casualties? There are hints here and there. I read a WaPo story yesterday that mentioned "a dozen" dead government troops at the same time as it described a road "littered" with burned out military vehicles. We read about our jets hitting tanks and other armored vehicles, but each of those vehicles had crews and perhaps passengers. How many are we killing everyday? 

I mention casualties not to try to win any sympathy for Gaddafi's troops, but because for eight long years we have been told that killing people creates more enemies, more insurgents. Do the men we are killing not have families and tribes? Won't they want revenge? Why was that a problem for the US in Iraq but not now?

It may very well turn out that President Obama is doing the right thing and everything will work out fine. Perhaps when he addresses the nation tonight we will get some answers. But this whole thing strikes me as an example of Ready-Fire-Aim from the administration and the implications for the future are not good.

If Gaddafi stays in power now, we look weak. If we provide the air support that the rebels need to overthrow Gaddafi then we exceed the mandate and good luck getting China or Russia to abstain on the next one. That door will be closed. If we succeed in removing Gaddafi, how much do we help the new government with the inevitable insurgency that it will face? If we end up enforcing a stalemate, then how many on both sides die in a protracted civil war?

I know I'm not the only one unhappy about how US involvement has developed and the seeming lack of an overarching strategy here. President Obama better have some answers tonight or the shit is going to hit the fan.