even though i am sympathetic to that idea, i think it'd be a Huge Mistake for the united states to act unilaterally if only because (a) the lockerbie affair and bombings of tripoli that followed it---the "museum of strength" that ghadhafi appeared before with his cute umbrella, was made from the residence of his that was bombed by the united states---this set up a us (me) against the Big Evil legitimation that ghadafi has not hesitated to use since AND (b) because of the iraq debacle (thanks george) has created an association between the discourse of democracy and american invasion.....and also (c) it's kind of hard for me to imagine how making that move could be the only one given the (apparently true) bringing in of heavily armed mercenaries from chad and niger and nigeria....i can't imagine that the us (or anyone) could simply park a carrier and not find themselves more or less compelled to intervene on the ground to stop the carnage.
because carnage there is, seemingly.
among the more shocking/dramatic eye-witness reports is here, in french sadly:
Libye : "C'était un carnage absolu", actualité Monde : Le Point
among other things he provides an estimate of at least 2000 people killed at benghazi and extensive use of mercenaries to do it. he describes the mercenaries as very heavily armed as "killing machines"---confronting largely unarmed civilians (that's been changing, especially in benghazi). the mitigating thing with what he says in the article is that it's clear he was entirely freaked out by what he experienced (justifiably so) so the account has a phantasmagoric quality to it.
but it's pretty amazing nonetheless. worth dusting off the french for.