After nearly four months of a costly military intervention in Libya to oust leader Muammar Gaddafi, little progress has been made in assuring the quick exit President Barack Obama promised in March.
With no end to the conflict in sight, either, Obama's NATO coalition looks like it could fall apart before Gaddafi's regime does.
Let us know what you think of the US involvement in Libya in the comments.
Many of the countries supporting the efforts in Libya are debt-stricken, and NATO leaders are beginning to realize that fighting at its current level cannot be sustained for much longer.
One of the major backers of the NATO coalition is France, but French Defense Minister Gerard Longuet echoed the impatience with the lack of progress in Libya on Sunday, when he called for a peaceful resolution between rebels and Gaddafi's government instead of waiting for Gaddafi's defeat.
Rebel forces have previously refused to have any such discussions before Gaddafi was out of power, and Gaddafi himself says he is not going to budge and negotiate the possibility of stepping down. Longuet is the first major NATO power to challenge the rebel forces' view.
The State Department responded that NATO forces must keep working to end Gaddafi's 41-year rule, pledging continued support from the US.
Without any results from NATO efforts in Libya, despite NATO countries funneling hundreds of millions of dollars into the effort, the split between two of the leading member countries of the NATO coalition reflects the strain of the alliance.
This Friday, the coalition will gather in Istanbul to discuss the next steps. What do you think about the continued military action in Libya? Do you think the US should stay in until Gaddafi's out, or do you think US support of Libya is beyond our responsibility?