UN - Picking sides in the civil war in Libya

[Dr_Phibes]

Well, they're often at odds with each other, so something consistent would be a starting point. It's this giant mass of contradictions - which is a problem in itself.

[mvscal]

You're talking but you're not saying anything.

[Dr_Phibes]

Strikes me as the policy now is no different than ten years ago, but this one is actually achievable at very little risk. I can't properly articulate it myself, it just seems that there's been this turning point in attitude and it reflects frustration, indecision and a general sense of being lost. 'American Interest' is debatable, in what sense? The general welfare? The market? The national intersest? What?

It's worth being guarded over a term like that.

[poptart]

2007


Question: In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites — a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)

Barry: The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.

[War Wagon]

2007


Question: In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites — a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)

Barry: The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.

Seems to me the Congress was informed and consented. McCain and Liebermann have been making the rounds on the news talk shows for weeks advocating a no fly zone and all that goes with it. They're pissed it took so long.

But I see the contradiction. We smash Libya but allow the rulers in Yemen and Bahrain to shoot their protesters with barely a whimper. But that's different because those are our 'allies' in the war against terrorism.

Heard where B-2 stealth bombers hit Libya airfields. B-2's that are stationed at Whiteman AFB in Knob Knoster, Missouri. That's one helluva' round trip. My guess is they had to refuel inflight 3-4 times.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

But that's different because those are our 'allies' in the war against terrorism.

So was Gadhafi, allegedly.

[Truman]

But that's different because those are our 'allies' in the war against terrorism.

So was Gadhafi, allegedly.

Allies?! Pshaw. The man's practically family...

To our son, the honorable Barack Hussein Obama,

As I have said before, even if, God forbid, there were a war between Libya and America, you would remain my son and I would still love you. I do not want to change the image I have of you. All of the Libyan people are with me, ready to die, even the women and children. We are fighting nothing other than al-Qaida in what they call the Islamic Maghreb. It's an armed group that is fighting from Libya to Mauritania and through Algeria and Mali. ... If you had found them taking over American cities by the force of arms, tell me what you would do?"

[mvscal]

Seems to me the Congress was informed and consented.

Congressional consent is granted in the form of a declaration of war or joint resolution granting specific statutory authority to the president to use armed force not a couple of douchesicles making the rounds on Sunday talkshows.

Got it?

[mvscal]

The Arab League is now on record against tyranny, and the French are finally pitching in their fair share.

Arab League criticizes West's strikes on Libya

TRIPOLI (Reuters) – Western forces pounded Libya's air defenses and patrolled its skies Sunday, but their day-old intervention hit a diplomatic setback as the Arab League chief condemned the "bombardment of civilians."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110320/wl_nm/us_libya

Oh, would care to remind the class what happened the last time we let the French drag us into a war that didn't involve us?

[ADAM]

I could be wrong but this action against MoMo should not have an American face on it...High time some of the Arab League & EU took some initiative...(granted we are the arsenal)

The only opinion I have is that Reagan didn't do enough...Hindsight is always 20x20...

F-111's fucking up Tripoli was awesome!

[poptart]

Seems to me the Congress was informed and consented.

Our constitution is set up so that war is something which is entered into only by consent of ... US, we the people ----> via vote of OUR representatives.

This is our RIGHT under the LAW.

Our rights have just been blatantly violated in a VERY ugly way.


There was no vote on this war that we have just entered into.

The United States has entered into a war because one lone asshole in the oval office decided to take us there.


Libya?? lol

Libya poses NO threat to our nation and it poses NO threat to our military, and yet we have now begun a war with them.

WTF?!?


Agree or disagree with the war action, any citizen ought to see this as an incomprehensible outrage, because OUR government has been stolen from US by a lawless cocksucking asshole.



Begin the impeachment hearings.

[LTS TRN 2]

What kind of parallel universe is this? Avi is complaining about stomping some "sandniggger" ??? He's complaining aboout the U.S. war machine being deployed?....Let's connect the dots....hmmmm...Libya, like Egypt, had been co-opted into playing ball with the Western/Zionanzi alliance. He had become their boy, and now that he's being shitcanned, Avi--and the Western corporate whores and the Zionazis watching very nervously--are saying "hold on..,let's make sure we do everything by the letter."

Well, when we hear Avi or the other seething Tea Baggers actually demand that America stop wasting hundreds of billions of dollars on insanely expensive weapons systems as well as actual illegal invasions, we'll know some waking has occurred.

So let me get this right.

Bad move: Regan attacks Libya in '86
Bad move: Gulf War
Bad move: W attacks Iraq
Bad move: US sends troops to Afghanistan

However:

Bad move: Cliton lauches a few FAIL missiles at bin Ladin
Bad move: Cliton bombs Iraq to try to divert attention from his "I fucked a pig" incident
Bad move: King Coon re-names troops in Iraq "ADVISORS", but leaves a FUCKLOAD of them there
Bad move: King Coon send fuckloads more troops to Afghanistan (which wasn't good when W did it)
Good move: King Coon attacks Libya, when it's a foregone conclusion that the US should leave foreign countries the fuck alone (according to liberals)




Okay - cool. Just so I know what be up!

Extremely simplistic, p-willie, but yer at least connecting some dots. Now imagine if indeed all the "Bad" moves simply hadn't occurred. Other means of diplomacy, international cooperation, etc., but none of the ghastly and calamitous military blunders which make up the list. Great...so now, when it actually makes sense to move on the demented mass-murdering drag queen, it would be universally appreciated--except by the Western corporate plutocrats and the nervous apartheid state, etc. But yeah, you're getting it. Good job.

[mvscal]

[Libya?? lol

Libya poses NO threat to our nation and it poses NO threat to our military,

It certainly will once Mo is ousted. Our stupid, fucked up fried chickenhawk Pres__ent is making war on behalf of radical Islamists.

Gaddafi regime fed names of jihadists to the CIA and to Britain

“Some regimes paint their local opponents as part of a larger terrorist picture but this wasn't the case here. There have been an awful lot of Libyans in al-Qa'ida and among the violent resistance in Iraq and in Afghanistan.”

Even among the rebels now hoping to overthrow the regime are “radical Islamists who would be of concern”, he warned. “I think there's a high chance for people who would alarm us having a major influence should Gaddafi fall.”

Six years on, another leaked cable said that “Libya has acted as a critical ally in US counter-terrorism efforts, and is considered one of our primary partners in combatting the flow of foreign fighters”. The cable, sent from the US Embassy in Tripoli on August 10, 2009, emphasised that the US-Libya “strategic partnership in this field has been highly... beneficial to both nations”.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/gaddafi ... 6025836662

I guess the question here is whether or not Ojiggaboo is deliberately attempting to fuck up our country or is it just weapons grade incompetance?

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

It certainly will once Mo is ousted. Our stupid, fucked up fried chickenhawk Pres__ent is making war on behalf of radical Islamists.

I know. These "radical Islamists" might even do something "crazy" like blow up an airliner...



...over Lockerbie.

[LTS TRN 2]

Like everyone who hates the Bush clan and all it stands for, I'm bewildered at Barry's abdication of the progressive values and policies he'd promised--and his subsequent easy embrace of all things Chimp, including retaining the grotesquely incompetent and disastrous Larry Summers, etc.

Gotta love how Avi is swinging on the nervous nutsack of a mass murderer.

[Truman]

Like everyone who hates the Bush clan and all it stands for, I'm bewildered at Barry's abdication of the progressive values and policies he'd promised--and his subsequent easy embrace of all things Chimp, including retaining the grotesquely incompetent and disastrous Larry Summers, etc.

Asshat. Probably because he didn't cotton to being subject of an old-fashioned coup and being the first sitting President run out of town on a rail ousted by a popular uprising:



Like it or not, Loser, the man IS a politician bent upon self-preservation. A starting line-up featuring the GOP version of the Little Sister's of the Poor is the only reason why BHO even remains in the discussion come 2012.

[upstart]

The Nation of Libya has been attacked by the United States of America. I don't know why. I was a Infantryman in the U.S. Army for 26 years and we always knew why we went to war.

I weep for the dream that is America...


I fear my child will not live that dream.

[Diego in Seattle]

Here's a thought....

If one of the Tomahawk missiles had killed the clown, would Obama be in violation of Executive Order 11905?

[mvscal]

Here's a thought....

If one of the Tomahawk missiles had killed the clown, would Obama be in violation of Executive Order 11905?

He's the Pres__ent, you fucking idiot. He can set aside or ignore any EO anytime he feels like it.

[upstart]

Here's a thought....

If one of the Tomahawk missiles had killed the clown, would Obama be in violation of Executive Order 11905?

I would hope obama told us why he did this before we held him in violation of Executive Order 11905

[Dinsdale]

Here's a thought....

If one of the Tomahawk missiles had killed the clown, would Obama be in violation of Executive Order 11905?

He's the Pres__ent, you fucking idiot. He can set aside or ignore any EO anytime he feels like it.

Diego went and :facepalmed:

[Diego in Seattle]

Here's a thought....

If one of the Tomahawk missiles had killed the clown, would Obama be in violation of Executive Order 11905?

He's the Pres__ent, you fucking idiot. He can set aside or ignore any EO anytime he feels like it.

No fucking shit.

But while he has the ability to ignore the EO's of previous admins, this one might be one he should abide by a little strictly (especially when his political staff is having the SS prematurely pull the magnetometers at campaign stops).

[War Wagon]

Seems to me the Congress was informed and consented.

Congressional consent is granted in the form of a declaration of war or joint resolution granting specific statutory authority to the president to use armed force not a couple of douchesicles making the rounds on Sunday talkshows.

Got it?

I get that you have an irrational axe to grind with a duely elected POTUS. I support his decision and don't give a fuck what you think about it.

Got it?

[mvscal]

Yes, you're a clueless dumbfuck. We get it.

[Dinsdale]

I get that you have an irrational axe to grind with a duely elected POTUS. I support his decision and don't give a fuck what you think about it.

Got it?

Yes... I get that you think the Resident (whoever it may be at the time) gets to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and he (and you) thinks the piece of toilet paper that James Madison at al wrote is just a big fucking joke.


Get the fuck out of my country.


See, when I was pussy-pooped on this chunk of rock, I was guaranteed certain rights.

[War Wagon]

Yes, you're a clueless dumbfuck. We get it.

We?

Speak for yourself you handwringing, agenda ridden pussy. Had Obama not done this, most likely you would have disparaged for that as well.

Such niceties aside, you have to admit the 'shock and awe" phase was quite impressive. On a freaking dime does our military deliver.

And yes, I'm LMAO at you, of all trolls, arguing against military intervention. If nothing else, we have to keep the resources sharp... and stomping Gaddafi is as good an excuse as any.

[War Wagon]

Get the fuck out of my country.

Clownsdale, have you ever voted?

I doubt it.

[Dinsdale]

“The rationale for vesting the power to launch war in Congress was simple,” Biden said in a Senate speech delivered on July 30, 1998. “The Framers’ views were dominated by their experience with the British King, who had unfettered power to start wars. Such powers the Framers were determined to deny the President.”

In his speech to the Senate in 1998, Biden accurately summarized the notes of the Constitutional Convention.

“The original draft of the Constitution would have given to Congress the power to ‘make war.’ At the Constitutional Convention, a motion was made to change this to ‘declare war.’ The reason for the change is instructive,” said Biden.

“At the Convention, James Madison and Elbridge Gerry argued for the amendment solely in order to permit the President the power ‘to repel sudden attacks,’” said Biden. “Just one delegate, Pierce Butler of South Carolina, suggested that the President should be given the power to initiate war.”

Citing Federalist No. 69, Biden noted that Alexander Hamilton, who among the Framers was perhaps the greatest champion of a strong executive, argued that the Constitution gave the president the authority to direct the military in action only after that action was authorized by Congress.

“Even Alexander Hamilton, a staunch advocate of Presidential power, emphasized that the President’s power as Commander in Chief would be ‘much inferior’ to the British King, amounting to ‘nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces,’ while that of the British King ‘extends to declaring of war and to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies–all which, by [the U.S.] Constitution, would appertain to the legislature,’” said Biden.

“Given this,” Biden concluded, “the only logical conclusion is that the framers intended to grant to Congress the power to initiate all hostilities, even limited wars.”

[FLW Buckeye]

I just want to know what policies have been put in place to prevent looters from stealing Libyan antiquities after the bombing campaign ends.

No need...any looting by the locals wouldn't dent the damage done over the last couple of centuries by the Euros.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Christ, that was unfunny.

[mvscal]

The Nation of Libya has been attacked by the United States of America. I don't know why.

France told us to.

[Rooster]

"If nothing else, we have to keep the resources sharp... and stomping Gaddafi is as good an excuse as any." --Wags

For the record, I'd have to say that our present involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan are keeping our resources plenty sharp, thankyouverymuch. No need to over-train our outstanding aviation assests and missle shooters, mmm?

[Moving Sale]

For the record, I'd have to say that our present involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan are keeping our resources plenty sharp, thankyouverymuch.

You mean like Staff Sergeant Quadi Hudgins and Private Brandon Pickering?