This is a more secretive and impulsive war than either of Bush's. Butters is jumping up and down and rubbing his hands together:

"I want to take back criticism I gave to them yesterday and say, ‘you are doing the right thing,'" said Graham. "My money is on the American Air Force, the American Navy, and our allies to contain the Libyans, and anybody on our side that says we can't contain the Libyan air threat -- I want them fired."

Let's listen to the Air Force Chief of Staff Norton Schwartz, shall we? Money quote:

He called the plan to impose a no-fly zone in a few days "overly optimistic" and said "it would take upwards of a week." Schwartz was also clear that while the U.S. military can impose a no-fly zone, that's not likely to stop Qaddafi all by itself. He also noted that to do so effectively might require diverting some resources from the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. "The question is, is a no-fly zone the last step or is it the first step?" Schwartz said. Asked by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) whether a no-fly zone could turn the momentum, Scwartz replied, "A no-fly zone, sir, would not be sufficient."

So when that is insufficient, what do we do then? Hand Qaddafi a victory not only over the rebels but over the US? Of course not. That means a potentially intractable, expensive war without public support or Congressional debate and authorization.

Remind me again: did McCain or Obama win the last election?

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.