The case for a Libyan No-Fly Zone is, at least in part, based on aesthetics.

I don’t know what we – that is Britain/NATO/the West/Whoever – should do about Libya. But while I think Brothers Korski and Nelson make many valid points I’m not sure that the case for any kind of military action has yet been made persuasively. That doesn’t mean one must be happy to see Gaddafi blitzing the Libyan rebels, merely that the calls to do something or anything seem long on justified emotion but desperately short on practical application.

Andrew Rawnsley
, for instance, asks “Are we content to let Colonel Gaddafi win?” But this is a false question. No, we are not content to let Gaddafi win but few, if any, of the measures proposed seem likely to stop the Mad Dog from destroying his enemies. We may not like the notion of Gaddafi’s victory but are we prepared to prevent it? Having read it three times I can confirm that Rawnsley’s column contains not a single recommendation for anything that might practically be done to halt the slaughter.