Juan Cole still gets it wrong, or half-wrong, on Libya

In this "open letter to the left" supporting current (and possibly additional?) intervention in Libya, Cole has several things with which I disagree.

First, yes, the AP and other mainstream media may have overstated to some degree the amount of Islamists in the opposition. And, its of "al Qaeda" for Libyans who fought in Iraq may be a bit imprecise.

However, with those claims, I get the impression Cole is trying to sweep any concerns with the nature of the Libyan opposition under the rug. Even if "al Qaeda" is a wrong identifier, nonetheless, a number of fighters in the Iraq war are now back in Libya involved in the opposition. So, too, are other Islamists. It's interesting that after knocking down a semi-straw man, Cole doesn't provide his own actual guesstimates.

I get the impression that the bottom-line issue for Cole is the UN OK, or perhaps, in lieu of that, a NATO OK. After that, whenever it happens, he's OK with being a Wilsonian, realpolitik be damned.

Second, he doesn't further look at the opposition in other ways. How organized are they? How tribalist are they? How well are their leaders likely to be significantly better than Gadhafi?

Third, he erects other straw men as to why some in the left oppose, or at least question, U.S. intervention. Meanwhile, for we pragmatics of the left, he nowhere addresses concerns such as mission creep, exit strategy, funding, etc.

And, speaking of mission creep and NATO, supposedly it's now debating arming the rebels.

So, we've gone from enforcing no-fly zones to actively targeting Libyan artillery, whether anti-aircraft in specific or not, and now, arming rebeles whose cohesion or goals we're not even sure of is being discussed. Wunderbar.

And, way to go, Cole on the UN fig leaf. And, also, Massimo Pigliucci on the "just war" nonsense. Way to go both of you on not thinking this through.