There was a time when Libya was stable by its own measure. It was run by a nasty piece of work who had some American blood, and a lot of European blood, on his hands in previous decades. After the invasion of Iraq, he was put in a nice little box and with minimal D&G stayed there.

He was rough to his own people, but not all that much different than what was standard for his part of the world. As the threat changed to our nation, in some ways he became an asset. Our enemy, radical Islam, was becoming his enemy as well.

Well, we and our allies had to have our experiments and theories to play with. With heads still full of “Responsibility to Protect” washed in a POLMIL ether of “Lead from Behind,” we got our United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 and OPERATION ODYSSEY DAWN and parallel allied operations.

Muammar Gaddafi found his end wounded by his own defense team, captured, tortured, sodomized with a bayonet, and then shot in the head. With that done the international community sort of … well … walked away.

Today, the place is another Maxmaxistan of foreverwar, spinning off terrorists and helping to litter the Mediterranean with the bodies of migrants. So, what do we do about it?

I think we first of all need to define, “we.” Libya is inside Europe’s sphere of influence. The international intervention six years ago was not “led” by us, but by the rest of NATO. My preference would have not been to get involved, but thanks to small measures, we let others take the lead with us in support and no small bit of direct action on our part as well.

As such, it really isn’t ours to fix. It should be Europe’s to fix – or at least contain until the locals get themselves in order.

There are some who have other ideas; Emily Estelle over at AEI’s Critical Threats is one;

America’s interests there transcend al Qaeda, ISIS, and other Salafi-jihadi groups. The Libyan conflict has serious implications for the U.S. and its allies in Europe. The war itself exacerbates the migrant crisis that is destabilizing Europe. Russia is also engaging in Libya as part of a larger plan to roll back the influence of the U.S. and NATO in the Mediterranean. Libya is part of Russia’s efforts to woo Egyptian President Sisi away from the U.S. and the Gulf states. It is an important theater of global geopolitics as well as of counter-terror operations.

The current U.S. strategy will fail in Libya, as it has repeatedly in places such as Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. Further, ISIS is on track to resurge alongside al Qaeda.

The U.S. must develop a new strategy in Libya that prioritizes resolving the civil war. We should begin by working with our allies to isolate the country from the regional and global power competitions that are worsening the conflict within Libya. The U.S. should also support changes to the UN-backed unity government that promote inclusivity and reward stakeholders who are willing to compromise. We must keep pressure on ISIS while taking care to support the formation of legitimate armed forces that do not pursue polarizing political objectives or operate within al Qaeda’s orbit.

Others, such as Brookings’ Shadi Hamid think that what exists in Libya now is something to be celebrated.

It is certainly true that the intervention didn’t produce something resembling a stable democracy. This, however, was never the goal. The goal was to protect civilians and prevent a massacre.

Critics erroneously compare Libya today to any number of false ideals, but this is not the correct way to evaluate the success or failure of the intervention. To do that, we should compare Libya today to what Libya would have looked like if we hadn’t intervened. By that standard, the Libya intervention was successful: The country is better off today than it would have been had the international community allowed dictator Muammar Qaddafi to continue his rampage across the country.

There is more by the authors at both of the links, but let me summarize my thoughts; no.

Not just no, but not with a 10-ft pole no. To say we have a less than great record resolving the internal problems in Islamic nations is an understatement. We already have a very delicate and small economy of force operations in Afghanistan and even smaller ones in Syria and Iraq – along of countless other deployments we won’t speak about or are just part of the background noise.

Where there are parties in Libya that show hostile intent towards our interests, or support those who do, then we should take action where appropriate. Other than that, nothing.

No thank you, I think we are full.