But if any Europeans faced with the duty of intervening try to guilt us into throwing in a division of our own--for just a short spot, naturally, they'll say--because of the horrible humanitarian conditions and civilian deaths?
Well, I'll remind them that Saddam was far worse and much of Europe stood aside in 2003. And as jihadis and Sadrists tried to stoke a civil war in Iraq starting in the latter half of 2006, nobody in Europe called for an intervention on humanitarian grounds as the body count mounted. Indeed, progressives here--those Compassionate Americans whose hearts bleed for (almost) every injustice they see, wanted us out rather than in. Let the buggers slaughter themselves as long as we can just watch from afar was their response to death and destruction. Fortunately, though we got no points from the morality police, we added troops and defeated the jihadis and death squads sent by Syria (on behalf of the Sunni Arab world) and Iran.
Don't forget that just as Europe has the military power they've husbanded so carefully that could be used just off their shores in Libya, the Europeans have the motivation to intervene:
If Libya becomes another failed or semi-failed state on the southern shore of the Mediterranean, rather as Albania has on the northern shore, it will soon be the transit point for another big wave of migration into Europe.
Europe has the means and motivation to act. Let them. Help them, even. But let the Europeans take the lead and risk their own blood on this good deed. I'll cheer them on and wish them the best, have no doubt. Even if the going gets rough.
