B
bbarrick8383
Guest
Because we have a loan shark named China.
- Status
J
JaredM
Guest
I keep hearing that the mission of the UN is not to get rid of Muammar Gaddafi but to protect the citizens of Libya. Won’t it make more sense to get rid of the psychopathic lunatic who caused this mess in the first place?
D
Dale_M
Guest
Perhaps, but it may well be that such a blatant statement of purpose would never have passed the Security Council. Many nations are uneasy about the possibility that the UN could be used as a tool to organize a military invasion of them.I keep hearing that the mission of the UN is not to get rid of Muammar Gaddafi but to protect the citizens of Libya. Won’t it make more sense to get rid of the psychopathic lunatic who caused this mess in the first place?
I think that is why the UN resolution specifically ruled out “a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory.” As it was, the resolution passed with 10 votes (nine were needed) but five countries abstained as a gesture of disapproval. China specifically said that it did not veto the resolution out of deference to the Arab League (which, of course, is now saying the no-fly zone is too aggressive.)
un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10200.doc.htm#Resolution
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Congess doesn’t know what it wants to do. Last week we were moving to slow, This week we are moving to fast? The President made a choice and a tough one, I don’t blame him for that, and I don’t like him.
They think Gaddhaffis son was killed and a US Fighter was shot down. The troops are going their, because they know the tunnels exist just like the rest of the middle east. If he doesn’t exile, they will bring him out of there.
They think Gaddhaffis son was killed and a US Fighter was shot down. The troops are going their, because they know the tunnels exist just like the rest of the middle east. If he doesn’t exile, they will bring him out of there.
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
“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.” - Sen. Barack Obama December 20, 2007.
S
SamH
Guest
Maybe he should be impeached.“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.” - Sen. Barack Obama December 20, 2007.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
He’s on borrowed time now. I’m affraid he won’t want to go? 
Clinton can’t wait to leave and she should stay.
Clinton can’t wait to leave and she should stay.
D
Dale_M
Guest
Regarding the US warplane which went down:
nytimes.com/2011/03/23/world/africa/23libya.html?ref=global-home
M
Michael_C
Guest
Will we be launching a no fly zone over Bahrain to protect the protesters from the violent regime and the invading Saudi - UAE army?
Barrack Obama is a blood thirsty warmonger.
The constitution is an irrelevant document. The mob bosses met at the UN and agreed on a hit in Libya.
Barrack Obama is a blood thirsty warmonger.
The constitution is an irrelevant document. The mob bosses met at the UN and agreed on a hit in Libya.
S
Seamus_L
Guest
Just when I think the US government couldn’t get anymore insane, they go out and prove me wrong. What’s next ? sending US troops into Yemen and Bahrain to prop up pro American goverenments that are being threatened, or an invasion of Syria to support “Good rebels”. Whatever it is you can bet the de-facto government will play the patriotism card again. Support our boys and cheer for the stars and stripes that’s made in China.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Every Monday Morning Quarterback has a perfect record. All of them.
What shall “we” allow to happen next? Never forget this statement…
“History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.”
Martin Luther King, Jr.
What shall “we” allow to happen next? Never forget this statement…
“History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.”
Martin Luther King, Jr.
G
gamewell45
Guest
He’s no different then any other president since Reagan.
S
sidbrown
Guest
That is the truth.
All the codswallop about change and hope for the better turned out to be hype.
M
mary_bobo
Guest
As I recall, Libya killed a number of Americans in Libya. Reagan said no one would harm Americans while he was president and not pay (or words to that effect). What is the reason we are there now? What is the objective? What is the end game? This has not been explained to us. Perhaps you know something the rest of us don’t know.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
Try it. World Net Daily will even sell you posters from their bookshop urging it.
A
a_priori
Guest
Talk of impeachment is silly. We must get used to the fact that for the next two years, there will be no one in the wheelhouse. (Maybe for years after that.) He is more like a train engineer. Europeans, the UN and others laid the tracks and the train will merely follow the rails to another quagmire. Maybe he can play with the throttle a little to give the illusion of control. We’ve been sucked into another war we can’t afford anymore than the other two wars.
S
SamH
Guest
It’s the tracks laid by some of the others that concern me.
What change 30 years make. In 1986 Reagan bombed Libya and French president François Mitterrand denied the US overflight permission. In 2011 leader of the free world Nicolas Sarkozy bombs Libya while President Obama dithers over the subject…
S
SamH
Guest
I don’t need a poster. It’s on a massive billboard overlooking the highway as you leave Ft Riley, right beside the equally large billboard proclaiming “Say NO to Government Motors - Buy a Ford” provided by Dick Edwards Ford.Try it. World Net Daily will even sell you posters from their bookshop urging it.
G
gilliam
Guest
Barack Obama will cut short his trip to Latin America by two hours to fly home early to meet with his security team about the conflict in Libya, the White House says, according to AFP.
A
Alan55
Guest
President Obama isn’t violating the Constitution unless he declares war against Libya without congressional approval. Mind you, the U.S. hasn’t formally declared a war since Harry Truman sent troops to Korea, stating that the Korean War was simply a “police action.” No formal declaration of war, no constitutional crisis – that’s been true for the past six decades.“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.” - Sen. Barack Obama December 20, 2007.
In 1973, in response to the Vietnam War, the War Powers Act mandated that the President obtain congressional approval within 90 days of introducing troops into battle and that he explain the action to Congress within 48 hours. Even the War Powers Act has largely been ignored because it does not provide any recourse if the President violates it.
Obama may be hypocritical, since as a member of Congress in 2007 he stated that the President does not have authority to bomb Iran without congressional approval. However, he is not acting outside the law. Five decades of presidential warmaking without formal declarations of war proves that point. On Monday, Obama sent Congress a letter explaining that he was authorizing the Libyan action as authorized by the U.N. Security Council. Thus, he fulfilled the War Powers Act’s requirement that he explain to Congress within 48 hours. By my reckoning, he has close to three months to get congressional approval. Still in compliance with the War Powers Act.
Obama is acting within the powers granted him by law: no declared war, no violation of the War Powers Act.
And if that doesn’t satisfy the Republican critics, I cite higher authorities in approval of Obama’s action: Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich, both of whom criticized Obama for not acting in Libya.
- Status