"I can't see that arming the rebels" would guarantee success. And NATO now says arming them would not be covered by the UN mandate.

Brilliant.

So let's watch them lose in slow motion-- ( Mudcat hand-wringing expertise again is here again in all its glory.)

Rather than doing what needs to be done:



Air support all the time--including when they are attacking Gadhafi's forces.

Recognizing them as the only legitimate Libyan government.

Arming them with weapons at least comparable to those of Gadhafi's forces.

Training them.

And providing intelligence.



And doing all this immediately,   Since time is not on the rebels' side.

The longer we wait to do all this, the more we will hear about how NATO countries can't afford this, and the more likely NATO will give up.

I would in fact hazard a guess that part of Mudcat opposition to helping the rebels militarily is the fact that in the UK the government is Conservative.   Conversely part of the reason some US posters support it is that Obama is in charge here.


Since if the rebels are finally defeated--with the bloodbath just postponed from a few weeks ago--there will be huge recriminations against the Western governments which did not follow through with actions necessary to prevent it.   And those Western governments' popularity with their own citizens will take a huge plunge.

Which is just fine with some UK posters.

And not fine with US posters--though I think US posters who support the rebels probably do so for the right reasons--preventing the bloodbath and preventing Gadhafi from any claim on the $33 billion frozen--which he would then use to build himself a nuclear bomb, among other things.