Libya Intervention: Days not Weeks. How about years?

The last sentence of this story may say it all..."would allow limited US strikes on Libyan targets for one year or for as long as the NATO-led campaign against strongman Moamer Kadhafi's forces lasts."

The US has the money to stay there for as long as it takes (whatever "it" is), right?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/07/05/senate-abandons-authorization-of-libya-conflict/?du

Senate abandons authorization of Libya conflict

WASHINGTON — The polarized US Senate hastily abandoned plans to vote Tuesday on a symbolic resolution authorizing the US role in Libya after a Republican insurrection to demand action on the country's debt woes.

"We've agreed, notwithstanding the broad support for the Libyan resolution, the most important thing for us to focus on this week is the budget," Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced as he scrapped debate on the measure.

-snip

"We should not move to a vote on Libya -- and to a discussion on Libya, which frankly is almost academic at this point -- until we debate the crucial issue facing the United States Senate, and that's the issue of the national debt."

The largely symbolic resolution, whose fate was unclear, would allow limited US strikes on Libyan targets for one year or for as long as the NATO-led campaign against strongman Moamer Kadhafi's forces lasts.