Noted the comments below...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110430/...izing_predator
That's consistent with what I've thought from the start: the US effort is less about achieving any specific end state or result on the ground in Libya than about establishing a US position. The administration does not want to be seen in a fully isolationist "doesn't give a $#!t" role, does want to be seen working through multilateral organizations, but does not under any circumstances want to take "ownership" or take over any kind of a lead role that could lead to "ownership". Given recent history it's easy enough to understand why: getting rid of an undesirable government can easily be the start, not the end, of the problems if one accepts that "ownership" role.
Bookmarks