In all seriousness, David, the charge of 'sophistry' is a bit rich. What I am saying is perfectly straightforward - that the immediate assault on Benghazi has been averted, but this doesn't guarantee Gaddafi's defeat. What happens next, or eventually, neither you nor I know; unlike you, I don't pretend to know things I don't. On the other hand, what would have happened without the military intervention is pretty fucking certain.
And it is this perfectly straightforward issue which you and others just seem unable to face.
And it seems to me an entirely fallacious leftist canard that because we have not opposed this particular specific thing we are unable to oppose something else later. Why the hell not? Nothing prevents us from criticising the military intervention in Libya, or whatever other 'humanitarian interventions' are proposed or carried out in the future.