On last night's 'Question Time', the question was asked whether institutional rape instigated by Gaddafi loyalists should be cited as grounds for committing troops to an invasion of Libya.
I would not be fighting in any such war, and will send my son to his mother's avowedly neutral homeland rather then see any bugger ever try to put a gun in his hand to fight for HMG, thanks but no thanks. However, I can think of only one condition upon which British infantry forces, drawn largely as they are from those parts of society otherwise excluded from wider economic activity, could be committed to an invasion of Libya.
That would be on the basis that they would be liberating Libya's natural resources for the benefit of the Libyans, and not for the benefit of BP or anyone else. This could be verified by various BBC camera crews not allowed but mandated to record that any provisional government was using this vast pool of wealth for the benefit of the people, and not for the benefit of donors to British political parties which had promoted the invasion as if it were a second-rate wrestling bill in Clacton-on-Sea.