This time the hawks and the doves, on military intervention in Libya, wear both Republican and Democratic stripes. Those favouring even a limited military operation like a "no-fly"zone can be found on both sides of the political aisle, suggesting that the issue is too complicated for a single-minded, black-white answer.
Those favouring compassion and help under that rubric can also be found in both parties, suggesting that this approach, far less controversial and more appealing to the world comunity, will likely find both budgetary support and the votes needed for action to begin.
Clearly the White House continues to sound the alarm over the violence against his own people by the Libyan dictator, while at the same time keeping "its powder dry" unless and until there is an international move, from the U.N. and/or from NATO (under U.N. auspices) to move into the fray.
Another option concerns the supplying of arms and munition to the rebels, but there is also agreement that, without the normal access to inside information (the U.S. has had an embassy in Tripoli for only the last two years) the U.S simply does not know who the rebels actually are.
While the watching and waiting continue, and more Libyans die in an attempt to wrest Gadahfi from power, we can only hope that both the rebels and the outside world can come to some agreement on how "help" might be spelled...whether with a "no-fly" zone, or a shipment of arms and munitions, or continuing with more hospital and medical support for those suffering and living with the threat of death.