While I'm at it, I might as well point out that the New York Times is telling the American people that the Libyan rebels are a badly-organised civilian militia who are basically crap at war, and that they can't win.
On the same day, the London Times* is celebrating the truly awesome Libyan rebels' Boy Scout movement, much as the Times has been telling the British people that the rebels are outstandingly brave, and awesome and courageous right from the start of this debacle. You'll notice that none of those descriptors forbid the terms "doomed", "fucked" or "entirely dependent upon French airstrikes".
Now, this whole idea that the Americans have a ludicrously biased, corporate media? I think we need to talk about that.
*Behind the Times paywall. You'll just have to trust that I'm telling you the truth.