Libya in new hands

Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

Yes I said the same thing about Bush. There was no legitimate reason for an invasion of Iraq. Saddam Hussein was contained and was weaker than the intelligence estimate. The only reason there should be military intervention is if there is an imminent threat to our national security or that of an ally. Humanitarian reasons are good in theory, but, they have a track record of becoming quagmires. The people who justify the military action in Iraq by saying look how many lives were saved make me ill, because our intervention in that country cost more lives than it saved.

My biggest concern is that the 60 day deadline came and went and no one called President Obama on it's passing. Then congress has the nerve to whine that the President is making them irrelevant.  The President is accountable for his actions and to dismiss it is very dangerous, as it will embolden this President and any that follow. The War Powers act was passed to keep the country from getting involved in such military adventures. You are correct about Presidents breaking the law.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

I had no problem with going into Iraq, the execution was incredibly poor, especially after the war was over.  We were not prepared for it.  About Libya, I have no problem with us being there (my main complaint is we should have started earlier when there was a shot for a quick end). But Congress is being very gutless when it comes to this as it would end up with the most of the GOP voting for Obama and most Dems voting against it or looking foolish for their previous statements.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

George W Bush had to finish his Daddy's war. Period. It was'nt about oil , making Haliburton rich, or WMD's.  It was a complete waste of lives, time, money and the credibility of this country.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

Here you go

'
House Speaker John Boehner is warning President Barack Obama that he may be in violation of the War Powers Act if Obama refuses to ask Congress for authorization to overthrow Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi.

In a letter to Obama today, Boehner noted that Friday is 90 days since U.S. forces first attacked Libyan targets as part of the NATO-led campaign to topple Qadhafi


Boehner also told House Republicans during a closed-door session on Tuesday that GOP leaders may seek to restrict or cut off Libyan funding, although no decision has been made to do so yet, GOP sources said.

Boehner is demanding Obama formally seek authorization from Congress for the campaign or withdraw U.S. forces.

“Therefore, it would appear that in five days, the Administration will be in violation of the War Powers Resolution unless it asks for and receives authorization from Congress or withdraws all U.S. troops and resources from the mission,” Boehner said in his letter to the president.

“Since the mission began, the Administration has provided tactical operational briefings to the House of Representatives, but the White House has systematically avoided requesting a formal authorization for its action,” Boehner added.

“It has simultaneously sought, however, to portray that its actions are consistent with the War Powers Resolution. The combination of these actions has left many Members of Congress, as well as the American people, frustrated by the lack of clarity over the Administration’s strategic policies, by a refusal to acknowledge and respect the role of the Congress, and by a refusal to comply with the basic tenets of the War Powers Resolution.”

Boehner suggested the White House has made one of two determinations: “either you have concluded the War Powers Resolution does not apply to the mission in Libya, or you have determined the War Powers Resolution is contrary to the Constitution.”

Boehner asked Obama to turn over internal administration documents that House committees have asked for by Friday, including anything to do with whether Obama could order the mission without congressional approval.

“I respect your authority as Commander-in-Chief, though I remain deeply concerned the Congress has not been provided answers from the Executive branch to fundamental questions regarding the Libya mission necessary for us to fulfill our equally important Constitutional responsibilities,” Boehner said. “I sincerely hope the Administration will faithfully comply with the War Powers Resolution and the requests made by the House of Representatives, and that you will use your unique authority as our President to engage the American people regarding our mission in Libya.”
Click to expand...
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/06 ... z1PHZEawnm
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

What a non-discussion. You guys seriously think the Americans will completely back out at this point?
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

If Congress orders the President to, he sorta has to do so.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

Forostar said:
What a non-discussion. You guys seriously think the Americans will completely back out at this point?
Click to expand...


No, it's to score political points by throwing back the War Powers Act in the face of the Dems who have always tried to broaden/use it it when the GOP holds the White House (see Grenada, Beruit, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq) ... and to force Obama's hand.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

Three weeks late. Atta boy John. I wonder what they talked about while they were playing golf, LOL?

My question is what the goal of the mission is. What is the exit strategy? Does international involvement go on indefinitely? The war has gone to a stalemate.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

I'm afraid this is just another "Rep-attack" on Obama, coming from the Congress. Let's put him again on a difficult spot, let's again make him a scapegoat, let's again not cooperate with this President.

If there ever was an operation which reason doesn't need to be questioned it was Libya.

Nigel Tufnel said:
The war has gone to a stalemate.
Click to expand...

I agree that things are taking long. And I admit that this operation is also questioned within NATO.
However, I think US national politics are dominating this discussion.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

Honestly, all operations should be 'questioned'.  Its how our gov't is formed, and it should be followed.  Obviously, it isn't followed properly, but if we just said 'oh, this one is ok, don't worry about following the laws', then we would never follow them and it would be a bigger mess than it is.

I agree, we should be doing something about what is happening, but we need to follow the rules we have for it.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

If you start with the premise of anything anyone does in Washington is to score political points (and I think that is a vaild premise), sure this is to put Obama on the spot.  But it does have the side benefit forcing the Administration to outline their plan and sell it to the American people.  If the situation were reversed (with the exact same situation in Libya and a generic GOP president and Obama was in the Senate, he would do the exact same thing the GOP in congress is doing now).  In any case, an internal discussion about Libya and a discussion of the role of NATO (both internal to the US and within NATO itself) may be the good things that come out of this.  Really, Libya was been one of the least political "wars" in recent times ... there was more argument in the US over Grenada.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

At least one Dem joins in

Reps. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and Walter Jones (R-NC) on Wednesday are expected to file a complaint in federal court that is presumably related to the failure of the Obama administration to seek congressional authority for military action in Libya.

The two members are expected to announce the details of their action at 2 p.m. Wednesday. Kucinich released a statement late Tuesday night that said other members of Congress would join the suit.

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/h ... libyan-war
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

bearfan said:
If you start with the premise of anything anyone does in Washington is to score political points (and I think that is a vaild premise), sure this is to put Obama on the spot.  But it does have the side benefit forcing the Administration to outline their plan and sell it to the American people.   If the situation were reversed (with the exact same situation in Libya and a generic GOP president and Obama was in the Senate, he would do the exact same thing the GOP in congress is doing now).   In any case, an internal discussion about Libya and a discussion of the role of NATO (both internal to the US and within NATO itself) may be the good things that come out of this.   Really, Libya was been one of the least political "wars" in recent times ... there was more argument in the US over Grenada.
Click to expand...

Very good point. I am no fan of Mumar Khaddaffi and don't think anybody will miss him. I would just like to here some strategies and goals, and have the military action be legal.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

Obama does not need approval

"Calling the U.S. military operation in Libya "limited," the White House says that congressional authorization is not required to continue involvement in the coalition effort there.

That determination was explained in a 30-page memo sent to Capitol Hill on Wednesday, just shy of the 90th day of the engagement of U.S. assets in the Libya campaign.

"
....

"Given the important U.S. interests served by U.S. military operations in Libya and the limited nature, scope and duration of the anticipated actions, the president had constitutional authority, as commander in chief and chief executive and pursuant to his foreign affairs powers, to direct such limited military operations abroad," the memo states.

"The president is of the view that the current U.S. military operations in Libya are consistent with the War Powers Resolution and do not under that law require further congressional authorization, because U.S. military operations are distinct from the kind of 'hostilities' contemplated by the resolution’s 60 day termination provision," it continues.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la ... 5480.story
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

All in all, this is definitely a good thing for the War Powers Act - it could help to define what is and is not in the President's scope. I think the idea of suing him is interesting indeed. Let's find out what's legal! I'm very interested to see the outcome of this case.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

That is what he says, but he is the one in violation. I don't believe it reads as limited scope. That can lead to dangerous foreign pursuits. It was originally written to keep Nixon from bombing Laos and Cambodia during Vietnam.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

Over the years, more and more power has moved from state to federal and at the federal level to the Executive Branch ... that trend started in the 1870s, but really picked up steam in the 1930s and again in the 1960s. 

I think we would be better off it that trend were reversed ... Congress is certainly within their right to ask for a War Powers resolution here and the one piece of leverage they have is funding.
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

Meanwhile in Tripoli....

img_606X341_1306-libya-gaddafi-chess.jpg


Gaddafi playing chess two days ago with the head of the international chess organisation (FIDE)
 
Re: Allied Forces at War with Libyan Regime

LooseCannon said:
Let's find out what's legal! I'm very interested to see the outcome of this case.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Let's find out who knows the laws of his country (best).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top