Those who predicted calamity in Libya were wrong.
But as much as Western diplomats must be careful not to drop the ball in our dealings with the new government, this is a moment for those who claimed Qaddafi’s fate was none of our business to pipe down. The intervention in Libya was neither reckless nor ill-considered, and the outcome is likely to benefit U.S. interests as much as it does those of the people who have been liberated. - Jonathan Tobin
Obviously those who predicted a terrible calamity in the initial phases of the war were wrong. Of course, there's still a lot of uncertainty ahead, but I will own up to a warning (not a prediction!) that the war could degenerate into a stalemate with Gaddafi clinging to a portion of the country while NATO enforced a no-fly zone over the East. That, thankfully, won't happen. There was also concern about an insurgency - something which remains a possibility, but may not come to pass either.
But the idea that anyone should be chastened in their caution because the rebels have appeared to win the day is silly. Taking the country to war when vital U.S. interests are not at stake is not a good idea even if the U.S. manages to skate by without investing much in blood and treasure.
As for the assertion that Gaddafi's overthrow will be as good for Americans as it is for Libyans, time will tell. It appears that the U.S. may earn some oil concessions, which would certainly serve a U.S. interest.