The adoption of the hastily introduced UN Security 1973, in the view of some on the left, represents a calculated project of western powers to "recolonize" Libya. We believe, however, that there were a variety of motives. One of these was the prospect of chaos and mass refugee flight from Libya. Another was the pressure of popular opinion in the Arab world demanding that the impending slaughter be halted. Almost certainly, this pressure was a factor in the decision of China and Russia not to veto the resolution, and in the abstentions rather than "No" votes of Brazil, India and Germany.
That article is very much in the middle of the left in a global sense (not US-wise, which middle of the left is right of the global center).
Being a total pacifist, I do disagree with the militancy of the article, of course.
One thing I wish to point out though besides that is that aiming the spotlight upon hypocrisy is never an exercise in futility. The remnant will inherit the New Earth and be consistently moral, which necessarily includes non-violent. This bears restating until fruition.
Calling souls to consistency is part of being a Christian. The closer to consistency the better. However, violence will hold souls down. Consistently non-violent is part of the highest path.