The law is complicated. It is not clear to what extent prior presidents have complied with this law. I'm going to sit this one out, as the issues are not clear to me.
With reference to the question of getting involved in Libya generally, I think it is dumb. It is not a vital US security interest. It ought to be left to the EU community to address -- let them pay for it with their own money. We shouldn't be the world's policeman.
I am not so clear on it either. However when the president orders our military into harms way, he ought to explain what the mission is. Does anybody know what we are doing in Libya? The last I heard it was to avert a humanitarian crisis. I guess those F15s are dropping boxes of food.
__________________ www.Kaydoo.com
Your Visual Marketplace
Crafters, Artists, Fundraisers,
Kaydoo is your place to be seen.
Location: On an Island in the west coast of New England
Posts: 13,132
Is that what they call it now? Lunchbox bombs???? We don't belong there and I resent having the government use my money to pay for it. This bozo ran on getting the troops home and after 2 1/2 years we have now gone even further into the quagmire. About the only thing he seems good at is going on vacation.
__________________
Too busy with fishing to spend much time here.
In a partial quote from the above linked article, these guys are making a Clintonian argument about the meaning of "is."
Quote:
“We are acting lawfully,” said Harold H. Koh, the State Department legal adviser, who expanded on the administration’s reasoning in a joint interview with the White House counsel, Robert Bauer.
The two senior administration lawyers contended that American forces had not been in “hostilities” at least since early April, when NATO took over the responsibility for the no-fly zone and the United States shifted to primarily a supporting role — providing refueling and surveillance to allied warplanes, although remotely piloted drones operated by the United States periodically fire missiles, too.
They argued that United States forces are at little risk because there are no troops on the ground and Libyan forces are unable to exchange fire with them meaningfully. And they said the military mission was constrained by a United Nations Security Council resolution, which authorized air power for the purpose of defending civilians.
“We are not saying the president can take the country into war on his own,” said Mr. Koh, a former Yale Law School dean and outspoken critic of the Bush administration’s expansive theories of executive power. “We are not saying the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional or should be scrapped or that we can refuse to consult Congress. We are saying the limited nature of this particular mission is not the kind of ‘hostilities’ envisioned by the War Powers Resolution.”
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
Obama is not going to win any friends with this position. The left wing that is anti-military, anti-war is going to be very offended by this. The right wing and the center are going to resent what appears to be a disregard for law. Who is going to applaud this position? Our involvement in Libya does not constitute engaging in hostilities? That doesn't pass the smell test!
I don't know why Obama is taking this path. It isn't going to go away. It is likely to blow up and be a big attention getter, and it isn't the kind of attention he should want (it isn't going to place him in a more favorable light than the miserable shape of the economy, so it can't be seen as some clever Machiavelian manipulation to lead us to take our eye off the ball). Does he think ANYONE buys this argument? If he wanted to challenge the constitutionality of the War Powers Act, certainly there is a better way to do that. But why spend his ever diminishing political capital fighting a loser issue like this? If he really wants to maintain the military in Libya, go through the regular channels of getting Congress to approve this via a vote.
Does anyone understand why Obama is doing this seemingly self-defeating act? It just doesn't seem very smart -- and I'm talking first order level here not second level or third level. It is dumb on its face.
Agreed. THe president is basing his challenge to congress on the fact that U.S. troops are not in harm's way (whether that's true or not...or whether it's realistic or not). He loses on the funding part, however. He's not asked congress for the money to fund his war...and that's money we sorely need here, and not spent being 'depiddy dawg' for all the world's spats. Libya will not adopt a democracy, or a representative republic which is the hope of or fledgling ersatz leader...they will choose a theocracy, one that is hostile to our country. Bad decision....bad politics....bad finances....Il pesce fetidi dalla testa
Obama and these 2 nincompoops are making a ridiculous argument. U.S. military actions are helping deliberately kill people in a foreign country. Most intelligent people would consider that an act of war. What if the situation were reversed and Libyans were doing this to U.S. citizens on U.S. soil? Does anybody think we wouldn't consider that an act of war? Of course not.
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
I've long since stopped looking for the rule of law from this administration. I will put my hopes on the reinstatement of same upon the swearing in of the next administration. Hopefully, they will be of a bent to bring criminals to justice....
I've long since stopped looking for the rule of law from this administration. I will put my hopes on the reinstatement of same upon the swearing in of the next administration. Hopefully, they will be of a bent to bring criminals to justice....
Has anyone ever read the Constitution of the Soviet Union, you know, the old Soviet Union. It's remarkably like ours, with all kinds of rights and all.
Of course the reality of life in the old Soviet Union was nothing like that. It illustrates what happens when the people allow the government to claim that the laws, as written, don't apply to them. but are subject to interpretation.
__________________
Proud parents of our own "Daddy's Little Girls"
I heard Jesus He drank wine and I bet we'd get along just fine.
War Powers Act Does Not Apply to Libya, Obama Argues (Obama claims he's above the law
