Libya megathread: Gaddafi dead

[The Rich Port]

Hmm... I wonder how this will turn out.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

I agree. There was never any genocide happening in Libya and there was no danger of it happening.
Although, attacks on civilians, genocide or not, violates human rights. The problem is that France wanted oil and UK wanted Gadaffi gone.
And Obama rushed to war without the permission of his own country.

Yes thats why he waited 3 or so weeks until the rebels had been driven back to only a (few) cities. And do you honestly expect Gadaffi to not systematically kill any and all rebels or anyone he expects to have supported the rebels? In particular in light of his air striking of protesters.

If they have weapons are killing government troops,of course the govt is going to kill them. It's called civil war.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

Actually, President Obama has thirty days, under the War Powers Act to get the consent of Congress.

Of course, the War Powers Act is blatantly unconstitutional, so any stiff challenge in court should collapse it. God, it would be really cool if President Obama finally killed that fucker off.

Plus, add the fact that he's enforcing the UN resolution.

He needs Senate approval for that.

[Andaluciae]

Nope, Pres gets 30ish days(provided s/he/it makes sure to talk to congress within 48 hours) to muck about in military operations before needing congress approval for further funding/actions. link. Though considering Republicans and certain member of his own party attitudes as of late, I wouldn't be surprised if Obama doesn't get it.

This is day two of the attacks and he only has a few hours left to address Congress and get their permission. He has not done so, instead he's on vacation in Rio, ordering our forces into combat as if they were toys.

He has to inform Congress, that doesn't mean he has to give a speech in the Chambers.

It would be even better if he was getting ready to challenge the last vestige of Vietnam in court. Yeah...do it Barry!

Honest to god, if he takes down the War Powers Act, I feel like he should be allowed a couple rewrites on his NCAA bracket

[Caninope]

Nope, Pres gets 30ish days(provided s/he/it makes sure to talk to congress within 48 hours) to muck about in military operations before needing congress approval for further funding/actions. link. Though considering Republicans and certain member of his own party attitudes as of late, I wouldn't be surprised if Obama doesn't get it.

This is day two of the attacks and he only has a few hours left to address Congress and get their permission. He has not done so, instead he's on vacation in Rio, ordering our forces into combat as if they were toys.

No, he only has to inform Congress in 48 hours, not get their approval.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

This is day two of the attacks and he only has a few hours left to address Congress and get their permission. He has not done so, instead he's on vacation in Rio, ordering our forces into combat as if they were toys.

He has to inform Congress, that doesn't mean he has to give a speech in the Chambers.

It would be even better if he was getting ready to challenge the last vestige of Vietnam in court. Yeah...do it Barry!

Honest to god, if he takes down the War Powers Act, I feel like he should be allowed a couple rewrites on his NCAA bracket

Like the constitution, the War Powers Act, is there to reign in power hungry Presidents.

[Caninope]

Plus, add the fact that he's enforcing the UN resolution.

He needs Senate approval for that.

No, he doesn't. Enforcing an article from an already approved treaty doesn't need Senate approval. You're proving your ignorance.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

This is day two of the attacks and he only has a few hours left to address Congress and get their permission. He has not done so, instead he's on vacation in Rio, ordering our forces into combat as if they were toys.

No, he only has to inform Congress in 48 hours, not get their approval.

You miss my point of what I was saying. He didn't even inform them until after they heard about it from the media. He's apparently too busy living it up, to even let them know what he has taken America into a war that the American people simply will not support.

[Andaluciae]

Actually, President Obama has thirty days, under the War Powers Act to get the consent of Congress.

Of course, the War Powers Act is blatantly unconstitutional, so any stiff challenge in court should collapse it. God, it would be really cool if President Obama finally killed that fucker off.

Only Congress can declare war. It's not just the War Powers Act, its the constitution. Anything involving US military forces engaging in aggressive action against a nation not at war with the US, or which has not attacked the US, requires the approval of the United States Senate.

Libya has not attacked the US, nor are we currently at war with Libya.

That would be fine and dandy, if we didn't already have precedent on the matter: From the framers of the Constitution, no less! Whether it was the Northwest War, the Barbary Wars, the Seminole Wars, the Quasi War--the President acted with relative impunity. In fact, knowing that the Office was created with Washington as the prototype, shows us that the founders viewed it as an office that would allow its holder substantial flexibility over the tools of force--and that's how they used it.

[Caninope]

No, he only has to inform Congress in 48 hours, not get their approval.

You miss my point of what I was saying. He didn't even inform them until after they heard about it from the media. He's apparently too busy living it up, to even let them know what he has taken America into a war that the American people simply will not support.

Except that:

A) The media reported on it as soon as it happened, on a Saturday. When Congress was on a recess for the weekend. Come on, you can do better than this.

B) He's not taken America into a war, no more than Clinton waged war against Afghanistan.

[Andaluciae]

He has to inform Congress, that doesn't mean he has to give a speech in the Chambers.

It would be even better if he was getting ready to challenge the last vestige of Vietnam in court. Yeah...do it Barry!

Honest to god, if he takes down the War Powers Act, I feel like he should be allowed a couple rewrites on his NCAA bracket

Like the constitution, the War Powers Act, is there to reign in power hungry Presidents.

The Constitution is there to organize the government of the United States, it says so right at the beginning of the document. Part of that includes restrictions on all three branches of government, Congress included. Beyond that, it also delegates powers to the three branches--and one of the big powers delegated to the President is the power to make war. It gives Congress the power to declare war, but it doesn't give Congress control over the armed forces. That is explicitly delegated to the President.

The War Powers Act attempts to strip control of the military from the President, which is blatantly unconstitutional.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

Like the constitution, the War Powers Act, is there to reign in power hungry Presidents.

The Constitution is there to organize the government of the United States, it says so right at the beginning of the document. Part of that includes restrictions on all three branches of government, Congress included. Beyond that, it also delegates powers to the three branches--and one of the big powers delegated to the President is the power to make war. It gives Congress the power to declare war, but it doesn't give Congress control over the armed forces. That is explicitly delegated to the President.

The War Powers Act attempts to strip control of the military from the President, which is blatantly unconstitutional.

The President can't make war without Congressional consent. That was the intent of giving them sole power to declare war.

[OuroborosCobra]

No, he only has to inform Congress in 48 hours, not get their approval.

You miss my point of what I was saying. He didn't even inform them until after they heard about it from the media. He's apparently too busy living it up, to even let them know what he has taken America into a war that the American people simply will not support.

By your own claim, he is required to inform them within 48 hours, not "before they hear about it on the media."

He also is not required to inform them in a personal address, he can just as easily do so in a written statement.

He also has not gotten them "into a war." Only Congress can put us into an official state of war. They have not done so in any conflict since World War II.

[Clagen]

Actually, President Obama has thirty days, under the War Powers Act to get the consent of Congress.

Of course, the War Powers Act is blatantly unconstitutional, so any stiff challenge in court should collapse it. God, it would be really cool if President Obama finally killed that fucker off.

Only Congress can declare war. It's not just the War Powers Act, its the constitution. Anything involving US military forces engaging in aggressive action against a nation not at war with the US, or which has not attacked the US, requires the approval of the United States Senate.

Libya has not attacked the US, nor are we currently at war with Libya.

We are at war with Lybia, but it is an illegal and unconstitutional war, just like Iraq, Afghanistan... every war since WWII.

[OuroborosCobra]

He needs Senate approval for that.

No, he doesn't. Enforcing an article from an already approved treaty doesn't need Senate approval. You're proving your ignorance.

Actually...he does. Truman was the only president to get away with that, using that justification for not needing congressional approval for the Korean War. That and the unpopularity of Vietnam were the cause of the introduction of the War Powers Act. Prior treaties aren't an exception. That said, "UnitedStatesOfAmerica-" doesn't seem to understand how the War Powers Act works, and that Obama hasn't violated it.

[OuroborosCobra]

Actually, President Obama has thirty days, under the War Powers Act to get the consent of Congress.

Of course, the War Powers Act is blatantly unconstitutional, so any stiff challenge in court should collapse it. God, it would be really cool if President Obama finally killed that fucker off.

Only Congress can declare war. It's not just the War Powers Act, its the constitution. Anything involving US military forces engaging in aggressive action against a nation not at war with the US, or which has not attacked the US, requires the approval of the United States Senate.

Libya has not attacked the US, nor are we currently at war with Libya.

Where does the Constitution vest war declarations in the Senate, and Senate alone?

Why does the War Powers Act not allow the president, with congressional approval, to act beyond 60 days? Especially considering it specifically says he can should he secure that congressional approval, he does not need a declaration of war.

Again, there has not been a declaration of war in the US since World War II.

[Shofercia]

All minor points, morality, Shofercia is clearly ebil, blah, blah, blah rants and/or "posts", if they can be called that, the facts of the matter are quite simple.

1. UK/US/France are NATO countries, last time I checked.
2. UK/US/France are bombing Libya, a Muslim country.

Thus, we can establish that NATO countries are bombing a Muslim country.

We can also establish that the "human rights" are being selectively enforced. Saudi Arabia, Equatorial Guinea, Congo - all those are much worse violators of human rights than Libya. Additionally, there are protesters in Saudi Arabia, protesting and wanting to bring down their government, much like the Libyan protesters. Same with Equatorial Guinea. So what's the difference? It's not Russia's and China's veto. It's the fact that Saudis and Guineans are providing oil to the US. So Libya gets hit, while the other two do not. Pure and simple.

Why Libya? Well, I already mentioned two "hipster" reasons: distraction from economic woes for the populace, and lucrative rebuilding contracts. Provided of course that Dumbocracy is established.

Anda cut through the crap, and flat out stated that he supports selective enforcements, while craftier posters danced around it. And then we had the famous "Human Rights" argument again: "but if we don't intervene, tens of thousands of humans will die!"

And I care about human rights, so let's start helping out our fellow human beings. Let's end World Hunger. Two percent of Americans produce enough food to overfeed the other 98%. The numbers are similar in Europe. So instead of wasting money on warfare, let's add more farmers. http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Lea ... _the_world

There were 925 million hungry human beings in 2010. So 2% - let's see that's 18.5 million, or for simplicity's sake, 20 million farmers. I can assure you, that there are a lot of unemployed people in US and Europe right now, and those jobs openings could be fulfilled. The economy would be back on track. All you have to do is tax the corporations who made a windfall profit, without inventing anything. Of course these measures might not be enough, and won't be instant, but helping even ten percent of that number, even 92.5 million, sounds like a plan. And if one truly cares about human rights, 10,000 deaths from bullets, over millions of deaths from starvation - it really is a no brainer which one is preferable.

A counterargument is - well all those are hungry - but how many are starving! That number's in the millions: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/ju ... est-africa

Agencies launch emergency appeals for drought-stricken region as up to 10 million face conditions of 1984 Ethiopia famine

Of course NATO countries know this. They know that they can save a lot more by fighting starvation, than by fighting Khadaffi, with the same financial resources applied. This isn't about human rights, it's about selective enforcement, with human rights being used as a mere pretext; it's the old gangster days of "give us oil, or be invaded", with human rights as a mere pretext.

And that's why I'm against selective enforcement, which always just happens to be the country that has oil and pissed off NATO countries.

[Greed and Death]

Since the convo has gone that way.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/08/col ... warpowers/
An old article jsut before bush took us to war.

[Caninope]

Only Congress can declare war. It's not just the War Powers Act, its the constitution. Anything involving US military forces engaging in aggressive action against a nation not at war with the US, or which has not attacked the US, requires the approval of the United States Senate.

Libya has not attacked the US, nor are we currently at war with Libya.

We are at war with Lybia, but it is an illegal and unconstitutional war, just like Iraq, Afghanistan... every war since WWII.

Which explains the Quasi-War and the Barbary Wars, amirite?

[Caninope]

No, he doesn't. Enforcing an article from an already approved treaty doesn't need Senate approval. You're proving your ignorance.

Actually...he does. Truman was the only president to get away with that, using that justification for not needing congressional approval for the Korean War. That and the unpopularity of Vietnam were the cause of the introduction of the War Powers Act. Prior treaties aren't an exception. That said, "UnitedStatesOfAmerica-" doesn't seem to understand how the War Powers Act works, and that Obama hasn't violated it.

Enforcing an article doesn't need Senate approval. The Gulf War was started by a UNSC Resolution- it was however, funded by Congress.

Not that Congress will refuse to fund a few Tomahawk missiles though, to keep the Right from yelling "Why do you hate teh freedomz!" myself included.

[OuroborosCobra]

Actually...he does. Truman was the only president to get away with that, using that justification for not needing congressional approval for the Korean War. That and the unpopularity of Vietnam were the cause of the introduction of the War Powers Act. Prior treaties aren't an exception. That said, "UnitedStatesOfAmerica-" doesn't seem to understand how the War Powers Act works, and that Obama hasn't violated it.

Enforcing an article doesn't need Senate approval. The Gulf War was started by a UNSC Resolution- it was however, funded by Congress.

Not that Congress will refuse to fund a few Tomahawk missiles though, to keep the Right from yelling "Why do you hate teh freedomz!" myself included.

What was Public Law 102-1, then?

[Neu Leonstein]

It's the fact that Saudis and Guineans are providing oil to the US. So Libya gets hit, while the other two do not. Pure and simple.

Just can it already, ok? Ghaddafi did the one thing you don't do as a dictator: he upset the order of things in the middle east, he managed to get the Arab League against him as well as the Europeans. Together they proposed, and the UN approved, a mission authorising the use of military force to stop further attacks by his army and mercenaries against the civilian populace. The European countries involved in setting up this mission are now enforcing it, and the US is helping out with the capabilities that the European and Arab militaries do not have, in line with the text and spirit of the UN resolution, which calls on UN member states to do what they can. No more and no less. I cannot recall a time during my life or before where the US has been less of a driving force behind a situation as this.

[Risna]

My apologies for being unclear. I am trying to say that no one joined our side without us asking for their help. We asked the French for help but Libya did not ask for American aid. They want us out of their war.

[Mirkana]

My apologies for being unclear. I am trying to say that no one joined our side without us asking for their help. We asked the French for help but Libya did not ask for American aid. They want us out of their war.

On the contrary, the Libyans practically begged for a no-fly zone. Unless, of course, you believe that Gaddafi speaks for Libya.

[Laerod]

And that's why I'm against selective enforcement, which always just happens to be the country that has oil and pissed off NATO countries.

So when are you going to condemn the Russian actions in Georgia?