Should the US implement a no fly zone over Libya?

[BlueCheese]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/world/africa/22nations.html

Libya's deputy UN ambassador has broken with Qaddafi is calling for his removal from power. He is also asking the UN to provide a no fly zone to prevent the regime from bringing in foreign mercenaries, and presumably also to stop air attacks on protesters. Should the US do so? (I'm assuming it will take a while for the UN to get around to authorizing one; even if they do so it will likely be the US who carries it out anyway.)

I can see pros and cons to doing so. What does everyone else think?

[notesdev]

1. I think it's a no brainer

Stop that government from massacring the people. Sink ships and shoot down planes if necessary. Give the people of Libya a reason to like Westerners for a change.

[Uzybone]

2. A terrible idea if its a unilateral US decision

one of the more dumb ideas out there.

[malaise]

9. Ditto n/t

[Bragi]

3. Yes, but the U.S should work through the UN

This is why there is a UN. When a government turns its guns against its own citizens, then the UN Security Council needs to get engaged. Gaddafi has to go now. He's done. If possible, Arab nations within the UN should take the lead here, not the U.S. The end result should be a cessation of violence against Libyans, and arrangements for Gaddafi's demise as head of state.

[RC]

4. Libya has oil. Do not send the United States to protect anything there.

[Egalitariat]

11. I agree. US military should only be used when the US has no strategic interests in a country

[kenny blankenship]

5. the UN security council may take this up tonight in emergency session

hopefully there will be no delay or dissent.

[lunatica]

6. This is a case where the UN, Britain, Europe and the US should stop this

It's brutal and blatant genocide.

[PufPuf23]

7. Yes but the USA should only work through the UN.

Hopefully, the process is already underway and will start ASAP.

[Modern_Matthew]

8. Not our responsibility. n/t

[lamp_shade]

10. Oh sure. That would be smart.

:thumbsdown:

[BlueCheese]

12. The reason I wrote the US and not the UN is that the latter tends to move slowly.

Maybe they'll surprise me.

[On the Road]

13. I Agree, the UN is Not an Option

International bodies take way too long. It has to be unilateral.

Perhaps the US could work through another country in the region. Would Egypt have a big enough Air Force to enforce a no-fly zone? Maybe Turkey?

[Poll_Blind]

14. How about we sit this one out and figure out how to put food on tables instead.

The rest of the U.N. can take the lead for a week and the world won't end.

PB