Ahmed Moor supports the western intervention in Libya, at Al Jazeera:
However, large numbers of people around the world appear to support the objectives of the anti-regime forces. Also, the indigenous resistance movement – which requested help – would have been annihilated in the absence of those air strikes...
George Bush and the neoconservatives hijacked the legitimate language of consensus-based intervention for their own ill use.
So activists are not wrong to react cynically when they hear that language today; I don’t believe that bombing Gaddafi is a humanitarian gesture.
But George Bush should not be allowed to legitimise the mechanisms – which are distinct from the language – of global intervention in situations that offend human rights and dignity.
Today, many people agree that the situation in Libya is horrifying. Furthermore, the Libyan rebels requested aid from the outside world.
Those two conditions alone do not justify intervention but they are crucial components of a legitimate international decision to employ force. ..
The potential benefit of successfully backing the rebels will be an increase in goodwill across the Arab world directed at the West. It is not clear if that is a realistic expectation, but it is one appears to motivate Western leaders.