[joegrundman]

well, good reasons always make excellent cover for things done for less good reasons.

daffy is gone, which is not in itself a bad thing.

it took a lot longer than i expected it to. at first i assumed the us was chipping in all the way, but after the us left it to britain and france it took much longer.

is it a good thing or a bad thing that it took so long?

i would argue that this has been a good thing.

for several reasons.

one: the world is suffering somewhat from US-fatigue, and despite the obvious fact that obama's opponents will make hay out of his 'leading from behind' strategy, it works well for the us at this point to have achieved its objectives in such a low-key and low-investment way.

two: had it been over quickly, due to overwhelming western firepower, the country would have been a faction-ridden and infantilised populace, resentful that yet again they are reduced to enacting the victim role in a western military adventure.

three: now while western support was decisive, both from airpower and special forces, the military training of the rebels was probably most decisive, and there can be no doubt that the rebels did most of the ground fighting. that it took so long has given them a chance to resolve factional differences and forge a coherent entity.

while it is not obvious that it won't fall into factionalism (and bloody revenge is already apparent), we can be hopeful that the features of pride, self-reliance, and a coherent group will mean that of all the toppled muslim regimes, this one will be the one that isn't followed by disaster.