Obama’s attack on Libya; unconstitutional, impeachable offense

[Nu Kua]

Obama the Great Hypocrite, the Liar, the Criminal.
Candidate Obama in 2007:

"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."

Kucinich calls Obama’s attack on Libya ‘an impeachable offense’

In an exclusive interview with Raw Story on Monday, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) tore into President Barack Obama's decision to order U.S. air strikes against Libya, opening the door for impeachment while emphatically declaring that Obama violated the Constitution.

"President Obama moved forward without Congress approving. He didn't have Congressional authorization, he has gone against the Constitution, and that's got to be said," Kucinich told Raw Story. "It's not even disputable, this isn't even a close question. Such an action -- that involves putting America's service men and women into harm's way, whether they're in the Air Force or the Navy -- is a grave decision that cannot be made by the president alone."

"And I'm raising the question as to whether or not it's an impeachable offense. It would appear on its face to be an impeachable offense," Kucinich said. "Now, it doesn't necessarily follow that simply because a president has committed an impeachable offense, that the process should start to impeach and remove him. That's a whole separate question. But we have to clearly understand what this Constitution is about."...

"So what the president did is, by his own words, outside the Constitution," Kucinich said. "This isn't a case of him not knowing. He knows clearly that he has not complied with the Constitution. And that's a very serious matter because he's using the ultimate authority of a president."...

Dennis goes on to comment on the aggressive reach of Obama, as well as his inherent hypocrisy.

Ron Paul: Libya no-fly zone unconstitutional

+ YouTube Video

He has said his opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan give him an edge over other Republicans and could help him defeat President Barack Obama in a national election. At CPAC, Paul drew thunderous applause for bashing the Patriot Act, US aid to foreign nations, and US military bases overseas during his speech...

UN Trumps Constitution, Congress, in President’s Undeclared War on Libya

“It is rather insulting to the American people that this authority [to wage undeclared war] comes from the United Nations and not the Congress. The hype is that a lot of people are being killed over there and we have to go in for humanitarian reasons.” Citing the oppression and killing waged by the Saudi government on Bahrain and the recent killing of civilians by the military in Yemen, the conservative congressman challenged the notion that it is the responsibility of the U.S. government to insert itself into another regional conflict merely on humanitarian grounds.

“Of course, we can hide behind the UN resolution and get support from other countries,” he said, “but we have the military might and nothing would happen without us. We bear the financial burden, and if it gets out of hand we will be blamed and also be forced to continue the process” — a process that could well include inserting ground troops, despite the President’s promise to the contrary.

Liberals and Democrats went beserk when it was a white Republican Bush committing the crimes- and on and on you went condemning Bushco. Oh how we collectively caught the vapors when learning of the torture and the war crimes.

We hear of the same policies being extended, increased in magnitude and scope- under Obama, and what are we hearing from the Liberal Dems now on the issue of the current President's condoning of human rights abuses, of Obama's lies?

<...crickets...>

Yes, it's true. Obama does it and all you can do is quickly don your rose colored glasses as you pointedly turn your gaze in another direction.

For those of you Liberal Lovelies, the Demure Dems, who ignore or excuse war crimes only when they are committed under the leadership of a President who happens to be of your same political party, and who happens to be the right skin color, know that you are also on the side of Boehner and McCain...

...which I think is hilarious, in a dark, macabre kinda way, that you, like they, are also more than willing to ignore the illegality of it all, in order that you maintain a no-fly zone on your personal comfort level.

...For example, ignoring that the United States had neither been attacked by nor was in danger from Libya and so had no constitutional reason for an assault, House Speaker John Boehner instead insisted that the U.S. had “a moral obligation to stand with those who seek freedom from oppression and self-government for their people.”...

...Likewise in the Senate, John McCain side-stepped constitutional issues at the core of the President’s actions, instead criticizing President Obama for not moving more quickly in his UN-permitted action against the Libyan dictator...

What strange bedfellows hypocrites will keep, in order they may be soundly screwed before falling back to a deep, deep sleep.

Your complicity is a danger to us all.

[pico]

Good points, NK. I hope our actions there do not bite us in the ass thru increased terrorist attacks and such.

[Nu Kua]

Good points, NK. I hope our actions there do not bite us in the ass thru increased terrorist attacks and such.

Well check this out...


The Los Angeles Times, March 18, 2003:

U.S. Raises Terrorism Alert Amid Concerns of Retaliation

Bracing for a backlash from impending war with Iraq, the Bush administration put the nation on high alert for a terrorist attack and announced that it was redoubling efforts to enhance security at home.

The decision to raise the terrorism threat level from yellow to orange, the third such move in the last six months, followed several months worth of intelligence reports indicating a strong likelihood of some type of terrorist attack or retaliation if the U.S. went to war with Iraq. Those strikes, officials said, could come from organized Al Qaeda cells or groups sent here by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, or from individuals or small groups who sympathize with them.

The New York Times, last week:

American Official Warns That Qaddafi May Lash Out With New Terrorist Attacks

The United States is bracing for possible Libyan-backed terrorist attacks, President Obama’s top counterterrorism official said on Friday.

The official, John O. Brennan, said that the military attacks on civilians ordered in recent days by Libya’s leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, coupled with his track record as a sponsor of terrorism, had heightened worries within the administration as an international coalition threatens military action against Libya.

Asked if American officials feared whether Colonel Qaddafi could open a new terrorism front, Mr. Brennan said: "Qaddafi has the penchant to do things of a very concerning nature. We have to anticipate and be prepared for things he might try to do to flout the will of the international community."

Among the threats the United States is focusing on is Libya’s stockpile of deadly mustard gas, he said...

I am certain there are People In High Places who, at least, would love for citizens to believe that, be it true or not. Since when has the truth ever mattered to our Esteemed Leaders?

[JenaS62]

I think I said in another thread that although I feel for the Libyan people, this is not our war and we cannot afford it. Add to that that Obama skirted the constitution and this is just a huge FUBAR. He is a joke. Nobel Peace Prize my ass.

[Ningishiddza]

I am certain there are People In High Places who, at least, would love for citizens to believe that, be it true or not. Since when has the truth ever mattered to our Esteemed Leaders?

That would be Susan Rice, one of the neo-cons on Obama's White House staff.

As I've said before, changing presidents without removing the neo-cons (or the 60-odd Olde Tyme Big Power Money Families and then Unions and the PACs and the Corporations) doesn't accomplish anything. It's just business as usual.

And no, the Truth doesn't matter:

Petraeus' Propaganda War on Congress: The Truth Behind His Testimony

Today, we will spend roughly $325 million fighting in Afghanistan. Twenty million dollars was spent just during Gen. David Petraeus's testimony to Congress this morning.

This month, we are on track to spend more than $10 billion in Afghanistan. This year, we expect to spend $120 billion fighting the war there.
And for what?

In the last year, we had the highest number of U.S. casualties, the biggest single-year spike in insurgent attacks, the most devastating of Afghan civilian deaths (an air strike on nine kids gathering wood), an Afghan majority that says their basic security and basic services have worsened substantially and majority populations in the United States and Afghanistan that want the troops to leave.

Ten years into this war, what do we have to show it? Every two or three years, the Pentagon comes up with a new strategy to justify another round of funding and forces.

Is it a surprise, then, to learn that psychological operations were used on U.S. senators during their visits to Afghanistan, as revealed by Rolling Stone magazine? Was the Pentagon's war strategy so ineffectual that a propaganda war was required?

We must come to realize, as the Rand Corporation has pointed out that policing, intelligence and negotiations -- all critically underfunded and underdeveloped in Afghanistan -- is what works best in undermining and dismantling threats of this nature. But this is just the sort of move discouraged by the defense industry -- which prefers big-ticket military equipment, like the Joint Strike Fighter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-mi..._b_836762.html

So who's running the war, the Defense Industry (Corporations) or the RAND Corporation (PACs)?

[Bob]

Sorry to be the fly in the syrup here, but the war powers act of 1974 says the president can do whatever the hell he wants to with the military as long as he reports to congress within 90 days. This country has not had a declared war since the end of world war 2.

[Zer0th]

Good points, NK. I hope our actions there do not bite us in the ass thru increased terrorist attacks and such.

You should consider that Daffy initially blamed his difficulties in the east on Al Qaeda having spiked the population's tea with hallucinogens. He has been fighting against a home-grown AQ franchise affiliate, the LIFJ. However, my enemy's enemy logic possibly doesn't factor here.

[Nu Kua]

That would be Susan Rice, one of the neo-cons on Obama's White House staff.

As I've said before, changing presidents without removing the neo-cons (or the 60-odd Olde Tyme Big Power Money Families and then Unions and the PACs and the Corporations) doesn't accomplish anything. It's just business as usual.

I agree completely. It's apparent to me that the whole "elections" thing is just a farce to make us think we actually have a say-so in affairs, some sort of power. Yet the majority of our own elected Congress cannot muster up enough courage to even question the the illegality of President Obama's actions. Why would Obama think he needed approval from Congress, when he thinks he can get it from the UN?

What happened to Candidate Obama who in 2007 who said

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.

Did he never believe it to begin with, did he decide the Constitution doesn't apply to him, or does he know it's illegal but doesn't care because he knows Congress is too meek to stop him?

To remove the Families and the PACS and the Corporations- is this seriously possible, and if so, how?

And no, the Truth doesn't matter:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-mi..._b_836762.html

So who's running the war, the Defense Industry (Corporations) or the RAND Corporation (PACs)?

Might as well link to the original article from Rolling Stone.

You should consider that Daffy initially blamed his difficulties in the east on Al Qaeda having spiked the population's tea with hallucinogens. He has been fighting against a home-grown AQ franchise affiliate, the LIFJ. However, my enemy's enemy logic possibly doesn't factor here.

Who exactly are the rebels, anyway? Who is their leader, what group or organization, where did they come from?

[Zer0th]

Who exactly are the rebels, anyway? Who is their leader, what group or organization, where did they come from?

Libya roughly divides down into three provinces: Tripolitania (north west), Fezzan (south west) and Cyrenaica (east, from north to south). Resistance to Gaddafi rule in the east has some history, a military rebellion at Tobruk in 1980, for example. I believe they preferred King Idris, whom Gaddafi succeeded by coup d'état in '69.

So basically, most of the peoples that live in the east.

Leaders? I doubt that have any meaningful structure as yet. Nominally the National Libyan Council (NLC)

[lycanox]

Then what should Obama have done then.
Ignore Ghadaffis war crimes and just let another genocide happen?

I rather have a president that deceives politics in favor of human rights. Than one that deceives human rights in favor of politics.

[Nu Kua]

Libya roughly divides down into three provinces: Tripolitania (north west), Fezzan (south west) and Cyrenaica (east, from north to south). Resistance to Gaddafi rule in the east has some history, a military rebellion at Tobruk in 1980, for example. I believe they preferred King Idris, whom Gaddafi succeeded by coup d'état in '69.

So basically, most of the peoples that live in the east.

Thanks- you know what, I wasn't even looking for it, but I just found this write up from "The World Bulletin"- a Turkish-based paper

Who is who in Libya: The Opposition and Islamic movements

The strongest opposition movements in Libya, which is prominent for its tribal make-up, are the Libyan Islamic Brotherhood and the Libyan National Salvation Front.

Goes on to elaborate on:
The Libyan Islamic Brotherhood
Libyan National Salvation Front
A. The goal before Qaddafi
B. The goal after Qaddafi
Jihad Movements
Nationalists, Socialists, Liberals...

Then what should Obama have done then.
Ignore Ghadaffis war crimes and just let another genocide happen?

Oh, you mean like he's ignoring Yemen and Bahrain?
Come talk to me about the U.S. noble role in saving people from genocide when we get a President who either authorizes that we whisk in and save troubled peoples from ALL nations, as opposed to saving just the ones we have an important, strategic stake-for-oil in.

Yemen's president warns of civil war

Ali Abdullah Saleh, Yemen's president, has offered to step down from his post by the end of the year as protests against his rule continue in defiance of a deadly crackdown by security forces.

Saleh pledged a "constitutional" transfer of power, and added that he would not hand over power to the military. Addressing military leaders, he warned against "coups" said the country faced a civil war if he was forced from office. Several senior officers have backed protesters in recent days.

The offer comes with Saleh under renewed scrutiny following the declaration on Friday of a nationwide state of emergency after a violent crackdown on anti-government protests killed at least 41 people, and left scores more wounded, in the capital Sanaa...

Crackdown in Bahrain: Notes from the field

...He assured me that it would be perfectly safe and that I would find whole families – including women and children – peacefully camped out there.

They were there because the ruling Al Khalifa family so far had failed to persuade them that they are sincere about political reform.

While the crown prince had offered to meet the opposition (the Shia Wifaq party and other groups) had refused, insisting that the rulers first make a good will gesture such as accepting a constitutional reform committee of their choosing.

Instead the king took the highly provocative step of calling in outside military forces (the mostly Saudi "Peninsula Shield" of the Gulf Cooperation Council). So the protests continued.

My driver seemed optimistic that "people power" would bring democracy to Bahrain as it had in Tunisia and Egypt.

How wrong he was.

Suppression

The next morning, just after 6 am, I looked out of my hotel window across largely vacant land in the direction of the Pearl roundabout.

The crackdown was beginning. I could see a steady line of armoured personnel carriers inching down a road toward the roundabout.

I counted around thirty of them. Four helicopters hovered over the area with a fifth surveying at a higher altitude. Then I could see plumes of white and black smoke rising from behind and between the buildings near the roundabout, apparently from the burning tents of the protesters.

An hour later I saw another huge column of black smoke billowing up. What I couldn't see were the Bahraini and Saudi forces attacking the protesters (killing two and injuring many more) and burning their tents...

Syria?

EU condemns 'unacceptable' repression in Syria

The European Union on Tuesday strongly condemned an "unacceptable" crackdown against peaceful protests in Syria that has resulted in deaths, injuries and arbitrary detentions.

The EU's foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said in a statement that the 27-nation bloc "strongly condemns the violent repression, including through the use of live ammunition, of peaceful protests in various locations across Syria"...

[pico]

Then what should Obama have done then.
Ignore Ghadaffis war crimes and just let another genocide happen?

What war crimes? He is defending his regime. He is no more guilty of war crimes than Obama.

[Zer0th]

Who is who in Libya: The Opposition and Islamic movements

It reads like a good plan...

B. The goal after Qaddafi

1. After ending the Qaddafi administration, to form an assembly of ministers and a temporary government with the condition that their term will not exceed one year.
2. After establishing an assembly of ministers and a temporary government, to hold a general election within the first six months.
3. To elect a new head of state in accordance with the new constitution, which will be accepted as a result of a referendum.
4. In order to prevent authority from being gathered together in one hand, it will be distributed among different state institutions according to the principle of separation of powers.
5. Protecting the country's sacredness and spirituality.
6. Presenting the country's resources to the service of the people, neighboring countries, brother countries and all of mankind.
7. To change the bad image of Libya that was formed in the international arena during the Qaddafi reign. To develop good relationships within a framework of mutual respect with neighboring and world countries.

[krakatoa]

Then what should Obama have done then.
Ignore Ghadaffis war crimes and just let another genocide happen?

I rather have a president that deceives politics in favor of human rights. Than one that deceives human rights in favor of politics.

Exactly!

I want Libyans people to be free from Ghadafi, but...

I wish it wont be another Irak or Afghanistan...

I admit that it cost a lot of money also, so I anderstand the point of view of americans that say it is to expensive, it is perfectly anderstandable.

Lest just hope it wont take long before Ghadafi is out...

Krakatoa.

[lycanox]

What war crimes? He is defending his regime. He is no more guilty of war crimes than Obama.

And when exactly has Obama given the order to blow up an jetliner.
Or to shoot and bomb his own people just because they were of an other political party.

And if every dictator has the right to defend his own regime. Then why are we complaining so much about the axis and terrorist and such. Afteral, all they did was defend their own regime.

Oh, you mean like he's ignoring Yemen and Bahrain?
Come talk to me about the U.S. noble role in saving people from genocide when we get a President who either authorizes that we whisk in and save troubled peoples from ALL nations, as opposed to saving just the ones we have an important, strategic stake-for-oil in.

As long people keep kicking them even when they are doing something right. It wont happen.

Now you are basically saying that we should not safe anyone at all.

[pico]

Actually, I have not seen proof the Libyan strongman ordered that bombing.. so far as I've seen, he is being accused by another trying to save his own skin.

The axis of evil should not be an axis at all... just one country... Iran. Iraq was a lie, and North Korea is a farce that has not attacked the US in nearly 60 years.

[ruiner4u]

Im with Ning..

debating this is like not seeing the forest for the trees. Yeah THIS guy ordered action, THAT guy ordered action...

Its all about who tell the president whatever information they want him to know.

We are Rome 2.0

[Anarch]

Then what should Obama have done then.
Ignore Ghadaffis war crimes and just let another genocide happen?

I rather have a president that deceives politics in favor of human rights. Than one that deceives human rights in favor of politics.

Your not a US citizen Lycanox.

Clearly you are not referring to the western world but to the US president directly.

He is not in charge of the world, He is only the executive of the USA. and that is OUR usa not YOUR usa.


And if he favors human rights so much why does he allow dafur, Taiwanese slave trade, Mexican slave trade, North Korean famine , African genocide , shit man everyone has problems but thank the lordy lordy obama declared war on yet another arab nation..

WIth out the consent of congress.

And again that is the US congress of which you have no say and no part of.

[lycanox]

Actually, I have not seen proof the Libyan strongman ordered that bombing.. so far as I've seen, he is being accused by another trying to save his own skin.

The axis of evil should not be an axis at all... just one country... Iran. Iraq was a lie, and North Korea is a farce that has not attacked the US in nearly 60 years.

He openly announced the attacks on civilians.
And the orders have been backed up with independent eyewitness and defectors.

Your not a US citizen Lycanox.

Clearly you are not referring to the western world but to the US president directly.

He is not in charge of the world, He is only the executive of the USA. and that is OUR usa not YOUR usa.

And if he favors human rights so much why does he allow dafur, Taiwanese slave trade, Mexican slave trade, North Korean famine , African genocide , shit man everyone has problems but thank the lordy lordy obama declared war on yet another arab nation..

WIth out the consent of congress.

And again that is the US congress of which you have no say and no part of.

Sod off. I have freedom of speech. Thus also the right to voice my opinion on the US president.

And pacifist are just as evil as Nazis when their actions lead to the death of innocent.

The west by refusing to intervene in Rwanda is thus guilty of supporting genocide. And would be guilty of genocide if they didn't intervene in Libya.

You are thinking along the lines of. If I killed so many people, its ok to kill even more people.

[Anarch]

.

We are Rome 2.0

I would only change this to say we are 1933 Germany

[Anarch]

Sod off. I have freedom of speech. Thus also the right to voice my opinion on the US president.

And pacifist are just as evil as Nazis when their actions lead to the death of innocent.

The west by refusing to intervene in Rwanda is thus guilty of supporting genocide. And would be guilty of genocide if they didn't intervene in Libya.

You are thinking along the lines of. If I killed so many people, its ok to kill even more people.

You sod off, Your the one that IS a pacifist.

And your opinion about waton killing with DU tipped tomahawks is deplorable,.


Maybe you support an out of control US military killing anything it wants in the name of whatever. But us REAL US citizens are very opposed to this and beside ourselves in bewilderment.


AND ANOTHER THING!!!

You have said several times that we do not have freespeech here, especially when moderating. We have the rules here we choose to abide by so PHHHHHHBTTTTTT

[Traveler]

The real problem is what other nations see all this as.
This kind of thing could well lead to coalitions of large states that see the US as a real threat and see a need to break its power.

[Anarch]

This kind of thing could well lead to coalitions of large states that see the US as a real threat and see a need to break its power.

IT is.

AS was Germany.

They did not see it as a problem.

untill it was too late

By then if you opposed them they threw you in a camp...like Gitmo

like manning.

If we find that shit tolerable then we should not bat an eyelash when a loud mouth pig head fool like myself goes.

[JenaS62]

Sod off. I have freedom of speech. Thus also the right to voice my opinion on the US president.

Of couse you have freedom of speech and you can voice your opinion about the US president but what is really annoying is when you say "us" "we" and "our" because you truly have no stake in it. You are not an American. You do not pay taxes in the US. You do not vote in the US. You do not have to fight for the US and you do not need to abide by the US Constitution or have rights afforded to you under the Bill of Rights.

[Cartesiantheater]

I personally, like many in this thread, like the idea of Libyan civilians being exterminated by their government.


EDIT- Death count in Libya possibly > 1000. Is this the same in Yeman (~45) and Bahrain (~10) ? No, no it isn't.