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

Yea even their BOOOOOOOSH Boogeyman went to Congress. This should have been presented to our Congress for debate & authorization. I don't care if it's a UN Mandate or not. That's besides the point in my opinion. Why are we bombing & killing Libyans? Why are we involved with their Civil War? It just doesn't make any sense.

Neither one of Bush's wars (I support the war in Afghanistan 100% for the record), were DECLARED wars-as written in the constitution.

Just because Bush went to congress, doesn't mean congress declared war (they haven't since WW2). Now we've obviously been to war since WW2-but we've never declared it.

If someone's logic is Obama is disregarding the constitution because congress hasn't declared war yet-therefore Libya is constitutional-that's fine. But that means every single military assualt/war since WW2 has been unconstitutional.

I do agree with you we have absolutely no business in Libya.

And to be fair "da booooosh" as you like to throw around-had a VERY different view on foreign policy than Ron Paul does. You can't brush all Democrats, or Republicans with a broad brush when it comes to foreign policy/wars.

I never claimed War was declared. In fact if they had gone that route,we likely wouldn't be in the messes we're currently in. The process of declaring War is the lawful and right way to go. These Foreign Interventions are completely out of control. My point was that DA BOOOOOOSH did go to Congress for authorization on both Afghanistan and Iraq. I would have liked this President to have gone the same route on this Intervention. It's always wise to go to Congress for debate and authorization. But Declaring War is actually the right way to go if you still believe in our Constitution.
 
Last edited:
Has anyone else noticed how quickly their spin is changing from "Protecting the Rebels" to "Protecting the Civilians?" Ooh what spin. Seriously,how can so many believe such pitiful & predictable propaganda? Next they'll be claiming Gaddafi is worse than Adolf Hitler. "Protecting the Civilians." Yea that's always a good one.
 
How much do you want to bet on that?

Because I am basically not a thief I will warn you before you bet that I can prove that some Republicans opposed our invasion of Iraq under Bush and Afghanistan Dubya.

Actually I was registered Republican at the time and I was very much opposed to our invasion of Iraq and also attempted nation building in Afghanistan. Once there, however, that did not matter as much as giving all possible support to the boots on the ground in harms way. I was not going to attack and denigrate their mission and therefore make it much more difficult for them to accomplish. My criticism has been focused on those things that make it more difficult for our guys to accomplish their mission; not on how we got there in the first place. You can't unring a bell once you ring it. What matters most is what is now and what needs to happen to make now and the future better.

I don't want to put our people now involved in Lybia at higher risk either. But I dang sure think we need clarification on what their mission actually is and how we will know when it is accomplished. Otherwise, I can see us enforcing no fly zones for a decade or more just as we did in Iraq.

Indeed. And Obama has already stipulated that there will be NO "boots on the ground"...So will this be another quagmire crafted by another Statist Democrat?

War is brutal, unconscionable, and one of the most stupid enterprises devised by humankind. But if we are going to engage in it there is certain criteria that I would like to see engraved in granite and no POTUS would dare violate:

1. If we commit the U.S. military to combat action, we better have a damn good reason.

2. If we commit the U.S. military to combat, we will not only know exactly what we intend to accomplish but we will have a clear and certain means to determine that we have accomplished it.

3. If we commit the U.S. military to combat, it will be under American command and it will be with overwhelming force to bring whoever is the enemy to their knees and unconditional surrender as quickly as possible within reason. The PC police will put a large sock in it.

I think that is the very least we can do to respect and support our men and women who put their lives on the line in service to their country.

Whoever said the Republicans would be cheering a GOP POTUS who ordered this particular mission is just spouting contentious partisanship. If it was ordered as vaguely as this mission has been ordered with no clear line of command and no definition for success, I think you would find most Republicans mostly mad as hell.
 
I suspect that if Obama was a Republitards he wouldn't get bashed as much by the right in this forum and I believe he was in a catch 22 as far as criticism from the right on this Libya issue, damned if he does act, damned if he doesn't act, but that still doesn't preclude him from making the best and just decision which would have been not to bomb Libya.
 
I suspect that if Obama was a Republitards he wouldn't get bashed as much by the right in this forum and I believe he was in a catch 22 as far as criticism from the right on this Libya issue, damned if he does act, damned if he doesn't act, but that still doesn't preclude him from making the best and just decision which would have been not to bomb Libya.

I presume that if Obama was a Republican, he wouldn't be nearly so liberal or advocating policies of the far left. Which, ideed, would get him more support from the right.

But he is who he is. I don't think this war is a good idea. And even if it was, I would criticize him for the things I think he is doing wrong.

I wouldn't have thought any less of him if he had not attacked. Others may have. but then others think this assault is a good idea. I don't.

And you know what, the fact that he is going to war isn't what's bothering me. It's his complete lack of leadership on the matter that's bugging me. The conflicting statements beforehand, the unclear objectives, the lack of information and the lack of any attempt to persuade the people or at least clearly spell out to the people, the lack of Congressional oversight, etc.

See, I can respect the decision to go to war, even if I disagree with it. It's the lack of clarity and indecisiveness; that's my problem.
 
We can no longer afford all these wars.

Cost of War to the United States | COSTOFWAR.COM

(Imagine if the taxpayer had the billions spent in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya? We can no longer afford to the cost of empire. All great powers learn this the hard way.)

Paul/Kucinich in 2012

Paul/Kucinich! Now THAT would be an interesting ticket. Personally I'd prefer Kucinich/Paul but I'd vote for that!
 
The Arab League has just withdrawn their support for this Intervention. They were told this would be a "No Fly Zone" but it's clear they're bombing hundreds of ground targets. I said their "No Fly Zone" was Bullshit right fom the start. Looks like the Arab League just caught on.

Yeah. Some pissant around here used the Arab League support a few days ago in a thread. That didn't last long. You lefties are so damn stupid.

The Arab League is a joke, what did they think establishin a no fly zone meant? sending George Clooney and Sean Penn to Libya with a couple of loud speakers and asking Ghaddafis people to please vacate the area?:doubt:
 
I thought the Democrats supported the Iraq war, isn't that what you clowns have tried to sell for the last 8 years?

Yes, it is...

They voted for it, unlike the current one in Libya.

Just saying.

No, they didn't. Most Democrats voted against the Iraq war authorization.

Why in the HELL don't people know this?
 
How on earth can you conclude that Saddam was unjustified and Khadafi is?

I can state very clearly why I supported one and why I don't support this one. Much of it has to do with the speed by which we are moving in, the lack of information being provided by the public, the lack of any sort of interest on our part, and the lack of authorization from Congress.

Gulf War 1 -totally justified
Gulf War 2 was a "he tried to kill my daddy' action, that was full of spite payback

You do realise that the UN, with regard to Libya, are only doing what Bush said he would do with regard to the Marsh Arabs etc just after Gulf War I. And we know what happened to those poor people due to Bush Snrs' lack of action. What Obama is doing is showing balls and leadership, which must really stick the craw of neocons (not that you are one btw)

With all due respect, what leadership is Obama showing? He's following the lead of others. That really doesn't take leadership in my book. Im surprised he was able to take time off his vacation to acknowledge we are at war.

He's not on vacation.
 
The Libyan rebels are not that organized and experienced, do you guys really think air support will be enough? or will they be calling for special ops help next and than full out foreign intervention?
 
The Libyan rebels are not that organized and experienced, do you guys really think air support will be enough? or will they be calling for special ops help next and than full out foreign intervention?

A large part of the effort appears aimed at leveling the playing field enough to convince Libyan military to drop their forced loyalty to Qaddafi and fight with the rebels, which was happening in large numbers towards the beginning of the fight. The non-Qaddafi aligned tribes will be encouraged to change allegiances if they think the rebels have a chance, and therefore the rebels will gain organization and experience.
 
"In marked contrast to the continuing Republican investigations of President Clinton, the Democrats eight years ago cooperated with Republicans in shutting down substantive inquiries that implicated President George H.W. Bush in a variety of geopolitical scandals


What a steaming pile of shit. Goddamn but you progressives are some ******* liars.

The leftists spent $65 million on a witch-hunt with the Iran/Contra bullshit.

"Cooperated" my ass.

I guess you're going for the "big lie" technique there.

Walsh Iran / Contra Report
 
I thought the Democrats supported the Iraq war, isn't that what you clowns have tried to sell for the last 8 years?

Yes, it is...

You leftist supported GOING INTO the Iraq war. Once we were there, you started with the attacks and bullshit.

Kind of the opposite of me. I loudly opposed going in, but once we did, I shut up and supported our troops.
 
15th post
The Libyan rebels are not that organized and experienced, do you guys really think air support will be enough? or will they be calling for special ops help next and than full out foreign intervention?

They have the numbers.

The vast majority of the countries people want democracy.

They will take Gadfi out if they are not blown away by their own military.
 
"In marked contrast to the continuing Republican investigations of President Clinton, the Democrats eight years ago cooperated with Republicans in shutting down substantive inquiries that implicated President George H.W. Bush in a variety of geopolitical scandals

What a steaming pile of shit. Goddamn but you progressives are some ******* liars.

The leftists spent $65 million on a witch-hunt with the Iran/Contra bullshit.

"Cooperated" my ass.

I guess you're going for the "big lie" technique there.

Walsh Iran / Contra Report


Witch hunt? You are either misinformed as to what that hase means or very misinformed about the the Iran Contra affair.

FYI..witch hunts do not lead to indictments or convictions or prison sentences.




Elliott Abrams -- Pleaded guilty October 7, 1991, to two misdemeanor charges of withholding information from Congress about secret government efforts to support the Nicaraguan contra rebels during a ban on such aid. U.S. District Chief Judge Aubrey E. Robinson, Jr., sentenced Abrams November 15, 1991, to two years probation and 100 hours community service. Abrams was pardoned December 24, 1992.

Carl R. Channell -- Pleaded guilty April 29, 1987, to one felony count of conspiracy to defraud the United States. U.S. District Judge Stanley S. Harris sentenced Channell on July 7, 1989, to two years probation.

Thomas G. Clines -- Indicted February 22, 1990, on four felony counts of underreporting his earnings to the IRS in the 1985 and 1986 tax years; and falsely stating on his 1985 and 1986 tax returns that he had no foreign financial accounts. On September 18, 1990, Clines was found guilty of all charges. U.S. District Judge Norman P. Ramsey in Baltimore, Md., on December 13, 1990, sentenced Clines to 16 months in prison and $40,000 in fines. He was ordered to pay the cost of the prosecution. The Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., on February 27, 1992, upheld the convictions. Clines served his prison sentence.

Alan D. Fiers, Jr. -- Pleaded guilty July 9, 1991, to two misdemeanor counts of withholding information from Congress about secret efforts to aid the Nicaraguan contras. U.S. District Chief Judge Aubrey E. Robinson, Jr., sentenced Fiers January 31, 1992, to one year probation and 100 hours community service. Fiers was pardoned December 24, 1992.

Clair E. George -- Indicted September 6, 1991, on 10 counts of perjury, false statements and obstruction in connection with congressional and Grand Jury investigations. George's trial on nine counts ended in a mistrial on August 26, 1992. Following a second trial on seven counts, George was found guilty December 9, 1992, of two felony charges of false statements and perjury before Congress. The maximum penalty for each count was five years in prison and $250,000 in fines. U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth set sentencing for February 18, 1993. George was pardoned on December 24, 1992, before sentencing occurred.

Albert Hakim -- Pleaded guilty November 21, 1989, to a misdemeanor of supplementing the salary of Oliver L. North. Lake Resources Inc., in which Hakim was the principal shareholder, pleaded guilty to a corporate felony of theft of government property in diverting Iran arms sales proceeds to the Nicaraguan contras and other activities. Hakim was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on February 1, 1990, to two years probation and a $5,000 fine; Lake Resources was ordered dissolved.

Robert C. McFarlane -- Pleaded guilty March 11, 1988, to four misdemeanor counts of withholding information from Congress. U.S. District Chief Judge Aubrey E. Robinson, Jr., sentenced McFarlane on March 3, 1989, to two years probation, $20,000 in fines and 200 hours community service. McFarlane was pardoned December 24, 1992.

Richard R. Miller -- Pleaded guilty May 6, 1987, to one felony count of conspiracy to defraud the United States. U.S. District Judge Stanley S. Harris sentenced Miller on July 6, 1989, to two years probation and 120 hours of community service.

Oliver L. North -- Indicted March 16, 1988, on 16 felony counts. After standing trial on 12, North was convicted May 4, 1989 of three charges: accepting an illegal gratuity, aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents. He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on July 5, 1989, to a three-year suspended prison term, two years probation, $150,000 in fines and 1,200 hours community service. A three-judge appeals panel on July 20, 1990, vacated North's conviction for further proceedings to determine whether his immunized testimony influenced witnesses in the trial. The Supreme Court declined to review the case. Judge Gesell dismissed the case September 16, 1991, after hearings on the immunity issue, on the motion of Independent Counsel.

John M. Poindexter -- Indicted March 16, 1988, on seven felony charges. After standing trial on five charges, Poindexter was found guilty April 7, 1990, on all counts: conspiracy (obstruction of inquiries and proceedings, false statements, falsification, destruction and removal of documents); two counts of obstruction of Congress and two counts of false statements. U.S. District Judge Harold H. Greene sentenced Poindexter June 11, 1990, to six months in prison on each count, to be served concurrently. A three-judge appeals panel on November 15, 1991, reversed the convictions on the ground that Poindexter's immunized testimony may have influenced the trial testimony of witnesses. The Supreme Court on December 7, 1992, declined to review the case. In 1993, the indictment was dismissed on the motion of Independent Counsel.

Richard V. Secord -- Indicted March 16, 1988 on six felony charges. On May 11, 1989, a second indictment was issued charging nine counts of impeding and obstructing the Select Iran/contra Committees. Secord was scheduled to stand trial on 12 charges. He pleaded guilty November 8, 1989, to one felony count of false statements to Congress. Secord was sentenced by U.S. District Chief Judge Aubrey E. Robinson, Jr., on January 24, 1990, to two years probation.

Pre-trial Pardons


Duane R. Clarridge -- Indicted November 26, 1991, on seven counts of perjury and false statements about a secret shipment of U.S. HAWK missiles to Iran. The maximum penalty for each count was five years in prison and $250,000 in fines. U.S. District Judge Harold H. Greene set a March 15, 1993, trial date. Clarridge was pardoned December 24, 1992.

Caspar W. Weinberger -- Indicted June 16, 1992, on five counts of obstruction, perjury and false statements in connection with congressional and Independent Counsel investigations of Iran/ contra. On September 29, the obstruction count was dismissed. On October 30, a second indictment was issued, charging one false statement count. The second indictment was dismissed December 11, leaving four counts remaining. The maximum penalty for each count was five years in prison and $250,000 in fines. U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan set a January 5, 1993, trial date. Weinberger was pardoned December 24, 1992.

Dismissal

Joseph F. Fernandez -- Indicted June 20, 1988 on five counts of conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstructing the inquiry of the Tower Commission and making false statements to government agencies. The case was dismissed in the District of Columbia for venue reasons on the motion of Independent Counsel. A four-count indictment was issued in the Eastern District of Virginia on April 24, 1989. U.S. District Judge Claude M. Hilton dismissed the four-count case November 24, 1989, after Attorney General Richard Thornburgh blocked the disclosure of classified information ruled relevant to the defense. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Va., on September 6, 1990, upheld Judge Hilton's rulings under the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA). On October 12, 1990, the Attorney General filed a final declaration that he would not disclose the classified information.


The only BIG LIE happening here is the one you just tried to pass off to us about the history of the criminal conspiracy that was known as Iran Contra Affair, Lad.
 
Last edited:
The Libyan rebels are not that organized and experienced, do you guys really think air support will be enough? or will they be calling for special ops help next and than full out foreign intervention?

They have the numbers.

The vast majority of the countries people want democracy.

They will take Gadfi out if they are not blown away by their own military.

They have the numbers? really? last time I checked the rebels were getting over run by Ghaddafis thugs before we started pounding the **** out of them with cruise missiles and fighter jets. If they really had the numbers like you say this conflict would be over by now. It sounds to me like Ghaddafi has numbers as well.
 
Back
Top Bottom