Obama is just talking because he is Obama, and therefore scared of using military force or anything that makes the U.S. look good.  Bush may have been a gunslinging cowboy, but at least he wouldn't have hesitated to drop the hammer on Ghadiffi's forces.

Apparently, too many people who voted for him in 2008, don't know what Obama is. Obama has no military sense what so ever, all he does is talk the talk, commit treasonous acts with our and our allies nuclear secrets (hasn't been confirmed, but wouldn't be surprised one bit if it is true, which is grounds for immediate impeachment), and try to make "peace" with everyone he can no matter how much they want us dead.

The Libyan military presents an almost-nil threat to American forces.  Our airplanes getting shot down by the barely-trained and horribly-equipped Libyan forces is a near-zero probability.

EDIT:  The question here is: does sending American personnel into a potentially lethal situation advance American interests?  The answer is yes.  America has a chance to look like the good guys for once when it comes to military intervention.  There is a U.N. mandate to enforce this no-fly zone, so it isn't unilateral on our part and participating makes us look like we care about international engagement rather than pure self-interest.  Sending planes to help the rebels at this point will make us in the U.S. look like liberators and supporters of freedom for once.

All we need is one carrier group and support from the British and French, then Qaddafi is screwed.

Obama wants to make sure American troops don't get hurt? No, he wants to talk the talk, but not walk the walk, when more American troops have died for the good of all humanity than most nations put together. Words do nothing to stop monsters like Qaddafi, Neville Chamberlain learned that lesson the hard way in the months leading up to World War II, he was the stupid, short-sighted Prime Minister that did nothing to stop Hitler, but he sure thought he was the man of the ages until the war happened anyway.

Yet nobody still is asking... who are these rebels we are supporting? They yell "Democracy", but do they mean it? If they never had it how do they know they want it? Maybe they really mean "We want an Islamic state". Who leads them? Why haven't we heard from them? Momar is no angel, and deserves a terrible fate, but he is also no Hitler and never will be. How many in Libya want him gone? Do we just hear the noisy ones?

Make no mistake, the media is driving this story of "human tragedy". What about those poor protesters in Yemen and Bahrain? So they get their No-Fly Zone and UN resolution too? It seems the countries with the money are again relying on the countries that are broke to do the heavy lifting...again.

As for Obama procrastinating, I agree. He should have said no right away. If the Arabs want this so bad, let them do it.

I agree with your analysis.  And I think we still are blowing it.  True or not, there are stories of the Brits targeting Gaddafi - I suspect over the Lockerbie bombing suspect release.  If he is deposed, he will sing like a canary.

The military did not fail.  They won every battle - the politicians lost the war.

I agree. Politicians also placed severe restrictions on US forces which resulted in many losses (not attacking SAMs untill they are finished - or not attacking at all if they are in XYZ area).

Understood. However if he was worth the effort, I would have searched how to spell his name correctly.  He is a legend in his own mind - and no one elses.

Another example of political involvement, this time in Afghanistan: Troops not allowed to engage the enemy if they put down their weapon, even temporarily. Al Quaida/Taliban fighters would deliberately taunt US forces, take a few shots, set there weapons down, then reposition. Who asks there military to fight with one hand tied behind their back? Only the US.

Scoutdog - It is true that terrible things happen during war. I say good. It's not supposed to be nice and neat. It should be so terrible that it is always the option of last resort, but when it does happen it should be decisive. Because so many precautions are taken to protect civilians, and despots are willing to exploit these causalities to a sympathetic world with propaganda, we can count on more of these types of actions in the future. The enemies base of support is now off limits and many don't seem to mind opposing forces duking it out. Personally, I prefer a president that has experienced the horrors of war. At least they fully understand what they might have to ask our men and women to do.