I am by no means a Paulite isolationist, nor am I a runaway interventionist.
There has to be some basis in reality, an application of common sense in what we as a nation decide is important to us to warrant putting our military in harms way. Without rehashing the whys and whatnot's of Afghanistan and Iraq, suffice it to say that at that time there were good reasons for doing what we did.
In Libya I see no reason to intervene. I think Palin had a point early on in this case where a NFZ might have made sense, but once everyone let momentum slip and allowed AQ clowns and Talibangers and that ilk to infiltrate into the ranks of the rebellion I think any effort on our part at this juncture could be another Clinton in Somalia type fustercluck! Intervening for "humanitarian" concerns is BS. We have no compelling interest in Libya, the Europeans can argue different, so let them deal with it! This was my main opposition to intervening in Kosovo. Not our damn problem, that was a European issue 100%.
And if people want to go down this humanitarian road, well, you better up recruitment in every nation a thousand-fold! Practically every damn nation in Africa is in one civil war/humanitarian crisis. The Middle East, Central and South America, Central and South East Asia...let's intervene in every damn humanitarian crisis!
And where is the MFM & Dem Pol's in hammering the Dear Leader? Where's all the constant bombardment of quagmire, why, when, how, how long, and exit strategy for this case, huh?!
At this point in time we have no business getting involved in this.