Bad News Folks.

The bloody conflict in Libya is in a sand trap.

A peace initiative peace failed this week when rebel forces refused cease fire terms.   Qaddafi wanted to stay, the rebels said NO WAY.

France and the United Kingdom are blaming a lackluster effort by NATO (the official organization running the no fly zone) as partly at fault.

NATO disagrees and has provided evidence of its success, such as the video above. Danger Room’s Spencer Ackerman notes thought that PR stunts like this can backfire as

NATO wants a propaganda win to show that it’s going to take the fight to the dictator. But every day Qaddafi hangs on makes the bombardment of an idling tank look impotent.

But there is something else to consider…

Unlike Egypt’s Mubarak, who was part of the governmental machine, Qaddafi IS the government of Libya.  Robert Kaplan, at Foreign Policy, wonders if Qaddafi

is not fighting about any particular issues, per se, but about a vision of honor that strikes us as primitive, connected as it is to region, tribe, and territory.

So… should the West be doing more? Andrew Sullivan doesn’t think so because President Obama is fighting a “half-war” which

inherently requires time to work – like the incremental but relentless isolation of Iran. And since the alternative is either to abort the mission or escalate it into a second Iraq, Obama’s patient minimalism is the best option we now have.

Do you, our readers, agree that patience is the best option?

Or should NATO do more? Will we ever see peace in the Middle East?

We have no idea so we’re looking to you.