So, is the left denouncing Obama's "unlawful" war in Libya?

[NYcarbineer]

kind of a bossy ***** ain't ya?

It wouldn't kill Mr. T to take his fluorescent red bulbous schnoz out of his ceramic Elvis beer mug long enough to type yes or no.

Even you were capable of that and you're mentally handicapped.

Well, since you seem to agree with me where does that leave your handicapped ass?

Mildly shocked that you're making progress.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Oh.... My..... Goodness. He's gone and done it now. Raised the hackles of his party's extremists.

However as usual, they are wrong. The War Powers Act is clear. The President CAN act militarily, and has 90 days to inform Congress and seek their permission.

I am sure there is a bigger picture involved...somewhere.

Is the War Powers Act constitutional? Seems that the Supremes have never ruled on it.

That means it is, until stricken down.

These moronic goobs are wrong here, just like they were on Boooooosh.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The only vital "interests" in Libya is its oil wealth and I'm pretty sure that someone met with the rebels privately and cut a deal for that oil in exchange help to topple Ghaddafi. I'm so glad I left the damn military, I hated being a pawn in stupid, power grabbing political games.

So you live an oil free lifestyle?

Do we have any moral or legal right to start wars of aggression with sovereign nations simply to assure access to their oil?

 

[NYcarbineer]

One more time: I am going to give this president the benefit of the doubt, with regard to his ordering American military action. I am going to assume, that he has intelligence information the rest of us do not have, and I am going to assume he is acting with a sound military plan and a clearly defined objective. That is precisely the presumption I have accorded to every president, and I will do so again.That applies whether I agree with the man's politics (I do not) whether I voted for him (I did not) or what party he belongs to (not the one I favor).

The president is acting on behalf of our country, He has ordered our military forces into action. I will assume that action is in the national interest of my country, therefore I will support it, until there is clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, or the president violates the constitution. Until and unless that occurs, I intend to support my country, its military forces, and the Commander-in-Chief, whether I personally like him or not. Is that clear?

1. We have no vital interests there.

2. It is an internal Libyan affair.

3. It is at MOST a regional issue, and we are not of that region.

hence, one cannot make a rational case for starting a war, and this is war.

The only vital "interests" in Libya is its oil wealth and I'm pretty sure that someone met with the rebels privately and cut a deal for that oil in exchange help to topple Ghaddafi. I'm so glad I left the damn military, I hated being a pawn in stupid, power grabbing political games.

I thought freeing the Lockerbie terrorist took care of that.

 

[Avorysuds]

I don't think we should be using military action in Libya. Is that what you wanted to hear?

Oh, Please. You know you will vote for Obama 2012.

QFT.

In fact that might be the most true post on these boards for the day.

 

[Avorysuds]

I don't think we should be using military action in Libya. Is that what you wanted to hear?

Oh, Please. You know you will vote for Obama 2012.

Oh please shut up, even after Bush started that bogus Iraq war you Republitards voted him right back in and even fought to keep troops in Iraq.

And by that you mean the wars that most the Democrats voted for and most the non elected Democrats supported. Only to later keep voting for the elected Democrats that voted for it.

So go ahead, vote Obama 2012! You can be JUST like the evil Republicans you JUST made fun of!

Oh, I never voted for Bush or Obama. I did a write in for Ron Paul tho...

 

[percysunshine]

Oh.... My..... Goodness. He's gone and done it now. Raised the hackles of his party's extremists.

However as usual, they are wrong. The War Powers Act is clear. The President CAN act militarily, and has 90 days to inform Congress and seek their permission.

I am sure there is a bigger picture involved...somewhere.

Is the War Powers Act constitutional? Seems that the Supremes have never ruled on it.

That means it is, until stricken down.

These moronic goobs are wrong here, just like they were on Boooooosh.

Sooo....They will be right in 88 days?

It would be an interesting test case for the War Powers Act. I need to stock up on popcorn for this movie.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

1. We have no vital interests there.

2. It is an internal Libyan affair.

3. It is at MOST a regional issue, and we are not of that region.

hence, one cannot make a rational case for starting a war, and this is war.

The only vital "interests" in Libya is its oil wealth and I'm pretty sure that someone met with the rebels privately and cut a deal for that oil in exchange help to topple Ghaddafi. I'm so glad I left the damn military, I hated being a pawn in stupid, power grabbing political games.

I thought freeing the Lockerbie terrorist took care of that.

I thought so too, but my biggest beef with bombing Libya is that we play the good cop role with people we don't and cannot exploit and stay silent without action with those who we do business with. Just look at the example with Angola in the 80s and 90s. The US and South Africa gave vast amounts of aid to Joseph Savimbi and his UNITA group allegedly to combat Communists in Angola even though it was known that Savimbi was corrupt and murderous. The trade off? Savimbi and UNITA were allowed to sell over 3.2 billion dollars worth of blood diamonds and guess who he sold them to?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't think we should be using military action in Libya. Is that what you wanted to hear?

Oh, Please. You know you will vote for Obama 2012.

What does that have to do with disagreeing with the president on this issue?

 

[KissMy]

I don't think we should be using military action in Libya. Is that what you wanted to hear?

Oh, Please. You know you will vote for Obama 2012.

Oh please shut up, even after Bush started that bogus Iraq war you Republitards voted him right back in and even fought to keep troops in Iraq.

Bogus Iraq war my ass! 111 Democrats & 263 Republicans in congress voted to invade Iraq. The majority of US citizens wanted to send troops into Iraq for the entire 13 years before we invaded Iraq.

By choosing to invade Iraq congress & the president followed the will of the people.

Even before the 9/11 attacks, GWB & Cheney Attack Iraq Propaganda, the larger majority of Americans wanted to send in ground troops to remove Saddam from power. Gallup Poll below proves this. Attacking Iraq was democracy in action.

Egyptian Intelligence was in direct communication with Saddam, and Saddam said he had "all the information on WMDs.” Now why would Saddam say this to Egypt if there were no WMD's?

Our "No Fly Zone" in Iraq & our embargo against Iraq was cause for the attacks against us on 9/11. This meant that Saddam & the Iraqi government needed to be dealt with once & for all to set-up a legitimate government of the Iraqi people so the USA would not have to be viewed in the muslim world as a force oppressing that country.

 

[NYcarbineer]

One more time: I am going to give this president the benefit of the doubt, with regard to his ordering American military action. I am going to assume, that he has intelligence information the rest of us do not have, and I am going to assume he is acting with a sound military plan and a clearly defined objective. That is precisely the presumption I have accorded to every president, and I will do so again.That applies whether I agree with the man's politics (I do not) whether I voted for him (I did not) or what party he belongs to (not the one I favor).

The president is acting on behalf of our country, He has ordered our military forces into action. I will assume that action is in the national interest of my country, therefore I will support it, until there is clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, or the president violates the constitution. Until and unless that occurs, I intend to support my country, its military forces, and the Commander-in-Chief, whether I personally like him or not. Is that clear?

1. We have no vital interests there.

2. It is an internal Libyan affair.

3. It is at MOST a regional issue, and we are not of that region.

hence, one cannot make a rational case for starting a war, and this is war.

You DID ask; obviously you didn't like the answer (didn't fit your agenda?). However, there are a couple of other points:

(1) That regime was butchering its own civilians.

(2) It was asked to stop, and did not.

(3) That same regime is a known sponsor of terrorism, including the Lockerbie bombing of an American airliner.

(4) It could be presumed from the above, that there is a legitimate U.S. interest in terminating said regime, on both National SEcurity and humanitarian grounds.

(5) There is a resolution of the U.N. Security Council supporting the measures so far taken.

What is going on inside Libya, who's killing whom, is not a vital interest of the U.S. If such things were, we'd have been in the Congo 10 or 20 years ago, where 2 to 4 million people have died of war related causes in the last decade alone.

Libya reached an accord with the U.S. and the U.K., and whoever else, over pursuing nukes and sponsoring terrorism, in 2003. He has been far less dangerous since than even Saddam was, and the Iraq war wasn't necessary.

We could have abstained from the UN vote and stayed out of it. Like Russia and China did if I'm not mistaken.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Oh, Please. You know you will vote for Obama 2012.

Oh please shut up, even after Bush started that bogus Iraq war you Republitards voted him right back in and even fought to keep troops in Iraq.

Bogus Iraq war my ass! 111 Democrats & 263 Republicans in congress voted to invade Iraq. The majority of US citizens wanted to send troops into Iraq for the entire 13 years before we invaded Iraq.

By choosing to invade Iraq congress & the president followed the will of the people.

Even before the 9/11 attacks, GWB & Cheney Attack Iraq Propaganda, the larger majority of Americans wanted to send in ground troops to remove Saddam from power. Gallup Poll below proves this. Attacking Iraq was democracy in action.

Egyptian Intelligence was in direct communication with Saddam, and Saddam said he had "all the information on WMDs.” Now why would Saddam say this to Egypt if there were no WMD's?

Our "No Fly Zone" in Iraq & our embargo against Iraq was cause for the attacks against us on 9/11. This meant that Saddam & the Iraqi government needed to be dealt with once & for all to set-up a legitimate government of the Iraqi people so the USA would not have to be viewed in the muslim world as a force oppressing that country.

The Vietnam war had 70 some percent support early on too.

 

[boedicca]

Hey NYC, who said this:

"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."

A Clarification - The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan


And how does it apply to Libya?

 

[kaz]

Hey NYC, who said this:

"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."

I do, but I admit that's probably not the answer you were looking for...

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I am sure there is a bigger picture involved...somewhere.

Is the War Powers Act constitutional? Seems that the Supremes have never ruled on it.

That means it is, until stricken down.

These moronic goobs are wrong here, just like they were on Boooooosh.

Sooo....They will be right in 88 days?

No. When Obama asks Congress for approval of this action, they will vote and approve it, and these shrill shill's little issue will be done.

 

[sparky]

reading up on the war powers act ('73 iirc) i found it basically backfired in it's legislated attempt


and Lybia? why should i give a rodent's rear end about it?


we had our civil war, let 'em have thiers....

~S~

 

[percysunshine]

That means it is, until stricken down.

These moronic goobs are wrong here, just like they were on Boooooosh.

Sooo....They will be right in 88 days?

No. When Obama asks Congress for approval of this action, they will vote and approve it, and these shrill shill's little issue will be done.

Or...The shrill shills could challenge the War Powers Act in court. Wouldn't that be a hoot! Think about it. The Act is as much a leash on the legislative branch as it is on the executive branch.

If they bring charges of impeachment, it would be indicted under a Republican House and tried in the Senate with Roberts presiding....

Placing orders for more Orville Redenbachers now...chuckle.

 

[KissMy]

Oh please shut up, even after Bush started that bogus Iraq war you Republitards voted him right back in and even fought to keep troops in Iraq.

Bogus Iraq war my ass! 111 Democrats & 263 Republicans in congress voted to invade Iraq. The majority of US citizens wanted to send troops into Iraq for the entire 13 years before we invaded Iraq.

By choosing to invade Iraq congress & the president followed the will of the people.

Even before the 9/11 attacks, GWB & Cheney Attack Iraq Propaganda, the larger majority of Americans wanted to send in ground troops to remove Saddam from power. Gallup Poll below proves this. Attacking Iraq was democracy in action.

Egyptian Intelligence was in direct communication with Saddam, and Saddam said he had "all the information on WMDs.” Now why would Saddam say this to Egypt if there were no WMD's?

Our "No Fly Zone" in Iraq & our embargo against Iraq was cause for the attacks against us on 9/11. This meant that Saddam & the Iraqi government needed to be dealt with once & for all to set-up a legitimate government of the Iraqi people so the USA would not have to be viewed in the muslim world as a force oppressing that country.

The Vietnam war had 70 some percent support early on too.

So what?

Obama did not withdraw from the Middle East & continues the fight to set up democracy all over the Middle East. Obama continues the Bush doctrine to undermine & topple as many dictators as possible. It is a no brainier to take full advantage of the civil war in Libya that falls gift-wrapped into your lap to set up another democracy. The question is what took Obama so long to back the freedom fighters?

We are either all in or all out of the fight for freedom in the Middle East. Being indecisive, Dithering or waffling back & forth as Obama just did is a recipe for disaster.

 

[washamericom]

i like 'obama is a third bush term... or a fifth clinton term, actually unemployment and inflation were low during bush and clinton, till the democrat congress fucked everything up by driving the car in the ditch (or as weiner says "into the cliff")

 

[theHawk]

Letting a dictator kill his people at his insane whim is not going to be good for anyone in the world.

If Gadafi is allowed to bomb his own people until only his cronies are left what do you think that says to the rest of the countries on the brink of revolution for democracy?

You people just hate anything this president does no matter what it is.

This is a UN action and not a declared war.

Funny how for years you libs lambasted Bush for taking out Saddam, who was obviously killing any of his own people that showed any sign of resisting his regime. All we heard was "he never attacked us", "there are no WMDs".

When did Libya attack us?
Where is their weapons program?
How are they in any way envolved in an eminent threat to the US?

Now suddently "letting a dictator kill his people at his insane whim" is justification for war.

This UN "action" has taken our country to war. And oh by the way, this war is ten times more "illeagal" than the Iraq War, since Obama didn't even bother getting authorization from Congress to take us into this war...something Bush did do. A UN vote does not have any jurisdiction to legally supercede the US Constitution and the President's powers in taking us to war.

And no, I don't hate this President for his actions. Personally I think bombing Muslims is necessary and a move in the right direction. But the hypocrisy from the left on this is just mindblowing.