Some reading, about not-exactly-war-in-Libya: report by Combating Terrorism Center
at West Point, about foreign fighters in Iraq (made in 2007). Figure 3: most of the Al Queda terrorists in Iraq are from Saudi Arabia and Libya, from which 1/3 is from Benghazi. Benghazi is the centre of Libyan fundamentalism and was (is?) always fighting against secular Libya. When Ghaddafi got to power in Libya, his opposition (guys who were also shooting at civilians - but in the name of pro-western king Idris, so they were OK) also settled up in Benghazi. Benghazi fighters are the worst kind of fundamentalists - Wahhabists, who are unwelcome even in Iran (probably because Wahhabism was born in Saudi Arabia, Iran's opponent in world of Islam).
Ghaddafi was against Islamic fundamentalism, for what he took praise even from US - two countries have even co-operated during Operation Iraqi Freedom (involvment of Libyan intelligence)! It is totally opposite with people from Benghazi. Their ideal country is like Iran, but even worse. They're minority in Libya, but now they're in power. That means regime worse for other Libyans, then Ghaddafi was, because the rest of Libyan people are used to live in liberal (in terms of religion/morality, not politics) country. Well, just see what happened to black nomad people who were living in south-east of country. Ghaddafi was first who gave them right to education, but now they're exterminated by new "lords" - because they're not Arabs.
Sorry I disagree, there has been no freedom in Libya for decades.
I agree with you, but new government is just new regime. Thing is that Ghaddafi, who was somewhat obsessed with Marx theories (just like western politicians who were part of 1960s liberal movements), gave Libyan people some basic rights and really big social support. Now there is no other law than Sharia & AK-47, and there's no support because Libyan oil fields were sold to France and other European countries (Chinese are mad, because they bought some of that fields before the revolution broke out).
Do people really expect no transition and immediate dawn of Libyan do-gooderness?
Well, of course that democracy in Libya won't happen in a second, but look at Egypt - military took the power (in Libya military was destroyed), but there was no massive killing like in Libya. That's what I'd call "transition period". It's just like in Poland, instead of civil war there was agreement at Magdalenka signed during famous Round Table
talks, and we had period when communist dictator Jaruzelski was president, but government was formed by opposition. Sorry, but civil war is not "transition period".