What I don't understand is how people can be simultaneously opposed to Bush's invasion of Iraq and supportive of Obama's bombing of Libya. Any military intervention in the affairs of another country under the slogan of "Let's remove that nasty dictator and liberate the people!" can only be based on the belief that one knows better what that country and those people really need.
The idea that there is "good interventionism" and "bad interventionism" is, in my opinion, deeply flawed. Either you believe that your superior military strength allows you to meddle in the affairs of others, or you don't. But it's very hypocritical to criticize it when it's done by Bush and support it when the same thing is done by Obama. And, please, don't tell me that Obama and Bush have different intentions here. We cannot possibly know anything about their intentions or motivations. All we know is that the bombs are dropping and the people are dying because somebody from a different continent decided they know better.
I just read a joke on a Russian website on this subject:
"Why is Obama bombing Libya?"
"Oh, he just wants to get a second Nobel Peace Prize."