There's a principal of foreign policy I'd like to try out. Let's call it the McCain Violence Advocacy Principal. The MVAP states that in any given foriegn policy situation or crisis, John McCain will advocate the maximum theoretical amount of violence. There will be no one to John McCain's right on the use of the military. So if he can advocate all-out war and 100-year occupation, in Iraq, that's what he does. If that sounds too crazy, he'll advocate a lesser state of violence, like "bombing" Iran. (It doesn't stop with one air strike, but let's not get into that). Note how no one in American politics advocates an invasion and occupation of Iran? "Airstrikes" is as far as anyone goes, and that's where John McCain goes. Now if bombing is too crazy, the MVAP will seek out lesser measures, like "being strong" and "not backing down."
Which brings us to Libya. What's the most aggressive policy possible? A No Fly Zone. Now some may think that a No Fly Zone is something other than war, a mere defensive measure that will keep Libyans safe. SecDefense spelled this out a No Fly Zone is a war. It means bombing the crap out of Libyan air defenses before putting large number of planes overhead. Its expensive and puts a strain on our military. You know that last Country we did a No Fly Zone over? Iraq. One of the reason given for invasion was to end the costly enforcement of the No Fly Zone. A No Fly Zone is a way to back into a full war in Libiyia.
Stay away from the MVAP.