This dissertation aims to analyse the discriminations, exclusions and violences producted by discourses that constituted the intervention and the operationalization of a no-fly zone (NFZ) authorized in 2011 for the protection of civilians in Libya. The analysis follows from a series of closures and limitations contained in the mainstream and dominant literature on the intervention, which preclude a reading that takes account of the violences producted and legitimated by discourses and practices in the Libyan intervention. In view thereof, the dissertation adopts an understanding that discourses not only construct the representation of the subjects identity, but also create the conditions of possibility to the accomplishment of certain actions. Therefore, in the case of the intervention in Libya, the different discursive articulations present in the academic literature, political discourses, international media, and official documents will be analysed in order to understand how the authorization of a no-fly zone for humanitarian purposes can be read as from a constitutive ambiguity since the same speeches and practices that enabled and legitimated actions for life and the protection of civilians also authorized a set of violences, exclusions and discriminations.