That only works if the U.S. was the only country doing that.  It was not.  Additionally, other countries are big boys.  If they want to do something, they're more than free to push for it.  Which they did.

i really dont understand all this chatter about the mandate.  people cryng that the real mission is to get rid of gaddafi and not to protect civilians...

and i think to myself...what better way to protect the civilians than remove this monster who pretty much admitted he was going to slaughter everyone who didnt agree with him.

Man yesterday I heard that two attacks were called off because civilians were present. However Gaddafi said he was arming 1-million citizens and asking them to come to military bases and be volunteer human shields.

Where do we draw the line of innocent civilian's? In my opinion an armed individual who plans on using his/her weapon on unarmed people, that is not in my opinion an innocent civilian. A civilian who goes out to a military base knowing full well that the base is used to attack unarmed civilians and knowing that the facility is a target for international forces. Is that an innocent civilian?

Now I'm not saying international forces should just bomb the shit out of civilian's. But if they are going to take out a missile base and a group of armed civilians surrounds the base, don't call off the attack the base needs to be taken out to preserve civilian life.

What do you think we should do to stop Gaddafi's civilian militia? I think honestly allies should have bombed the weapons depots to prevent Gaddafi from arming his citizens.

In short is an armed civilian defending a military base an innocent civilian?

There are four reasons or validifications for invading a sovereign nation:

1. Genocide - This is the only reason that by itself gives warrent to an invasion to prevent or stop or punish a understood genocide. (There's more to this as well)

2. Violation of Human Rights - This does not qualify on it's own merit

3. WMD's - Chemical, Biological or Nuclear; unlawful possession or manufacturing of these on it's own does not qualify on it's own merit

4. Unlawful Invasion - This does not qualify on it's own merit for invasion.

Only genocide gives legal right to invade another country, the others usually lead to upon requested aide or embargo or diplomacy or some other action to help find a resolution.

Why do people constantly call this an invasion? Their won't be a single boot on the ground according to current mandate. Infact we are barely invading the airspace with the No-Fly Zone only covering Northern Libya over the cities which Gaddafi is bombing.

Also its hard not to call this a genocide. According to Rebel's over 8,000 protestors have been killed since the beginning of the fighting. If you include the armed rebels your over 10,000 dead. Gaddafi himself said that he would slaughter anyone who opposed him like dog's going door to door, he said he would show no mercy on disenters.

Already in Zawiya it has been confirmed mass graves and the residents say they do not know what happened to the protestors and rebels. I saw an interview with a resident who was asked where the rebels and protestors went. The resident said that they simply vanished. While another interview with a resident said they saw a bulldozer bulldozing bodies. Sounds alot like Nazi Germany to me.

Misrata, residents confirm snipers are picking off anyone in the streets, women , Children and fighters/men.This is an act of Genocide. It may not be racially driven but when you start killing thousands of people stereotyping them as rebels. Killing anyone who opposes you. That is genocide.

But again why do you and others call this an invasion? Their isn't a single known foreign army unit attacking Gaddafi's ground forces or invading the country!

I never said this was an invasion, I'm responding to someones question on why the US DOESN'T just use military action against every country.

For example, when Russia ivaded Georgia their reasoning to the UN was that they had the same reasons the US had to invade Iraq, in other words if the US can do it why can't they?

Different example. Georgia was threatening a recognized semi-autonomous territory. America in Iraq was more of a straight "we don't like you so there," example.

Funnily looking back, all of this 2011 noise might have lead to a popular revolt against Saddam Hussein's Iraq if we had never interfered, though the installation of reasonably successful democracy there might have been what inspired them...

US f-15 down east of benghazi.

"We didn't think it was an American plane. We thought it was a Gadhafi plane. We started calling out to the pilot, but we only speak Arabic. We looked for him and found the parachute. A villager came who spoke English and he called out 'we are here, we are with the rebels' and then the man came out," Hamid Moussa el-Amruni said.

The pilot left in a car with the Benghazi national councill, taking with him the water and juice the family provided. They kept his helmet and the parachute.

the second crew member came down in a different field and was picked up by a helicopter, an account that coincided with the U.S. explanation of the rescue.

The U.S. Africa Command said both crewmembers were in American hands with minor injuries after what was believed to be a mechanical failure.

That's whats on record.

Actually, it's more or less the removal of Saddam that shows how successful these movements may or may not be.

If we never went into Iraq Qadhafi would not have surrendered his WMD's to the US and UK he would have gassed or worse nuked his own people or the people. There's more causing these uprisings than poverty and communication - these people have a will and a rolling success. I mean it's not just Tunisia or Bahrain or Libya or Egypt it's the entire North African region and Arabia, I believe the only Arab country in the region not in some kind of revolt would be Turkey.

Coverage seems to only be going on the ones with large scale protests going on but there are some news outlets touching on the 1000 something people protests.

This does make things easier I think for the US moving along, I had always thought after Afghanistan would be Pakistan and back to Lebanon but Syria has gone into the same internal issues as well.

Reminds me of that a little

Turkey's not Arab, not to nitpick.