More Words, Deeper Hole

No, the Libyan operations were (nominally, at least), authorized by the Security Council (Resolution 1973 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/17/un-security-council-resolution)); the fact that military operations were run by NATO isn't relevant[*].

A better analogy is Kosovo in 1999, where any Security Council action was blocked by Russian and China, for reasons similar to the Syrian situation (i.e., Milosevic was doing things in Kosovo similar to what Russia had done in Chechnya, and what China would want to do if the Uighurs or Tibetans ever tried a serious uprising).

[*] Strictly speaking, it was a subset of NATO countries, plus Qatar, the UAE, and Sweden, not the whole alliance itself (e.g., German forces did not take part), and the initial military actions were under an ad-hoc French/British/US leadership, not NATO itself.