Why Libya?No easy answers for Obama,.

As turmoil grips other countries,U.S. intervention raises question over which crises merit action.Washington,in the past month alone,the White House,has formally condemned a repressive government's violence against its own people four time.Libya?Nope.The harsh condemnation were aimed at Syria,Yemen,Bahrain and Cote d'Ivoire.Yet despite the killing of hundreds  of civilians in those four countries,President Obama,has not ordered any military action.Some experts see an inconsistency.Other warn that while Libya,leader Moammar Gadhafi,is alone in threatening to slaughter rebels inside his borders,the United States,and its  allies could be put in an awkward spot if other leaders make similar threats."There is s reluctance to act,"says Sarah Leah Whitson of human  Rights Watch,which advocates  sanctions against other repressive governments."There's a sense that we can't do this everywhere. "Some question why America,should intervene at all-even in limited ways-in this distant land and country,."They argue that there are many places in the world where innocent civilians face brutal violence  at the hands of their government,and America,should not be expected to police the world,,particularly when we have so many pressing concerns here at home.It's true that America,cannot use our military  wherever repression occurs.And given the costs and risk of  intervention,we must always measure our interests against the need for action.