Lawmakers Angry With Obama Over Libyan Strike, Warn Administration Lacks 'End-Game'

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
werepossum

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
He needs to inform Congress, and he needs to get Congressional approval if the mission is going to last more than sixty days, but the last thing in the world he needed to do is to have Congress debate it before committing. The delay was bad enough as it was without trying to walk it through Congress.
 
her209

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Last edited:
M

matt0611

Golden Member
Oct 22, 2010
1,879
0
0
Obama also did not get any authorization from congress like the constitution says he needs to go to war and like he said he would when he was a candidate:

"OBAMA: 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."

Lies.
 
ElFenix

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,405
8,582
126
so if we bomb and gaddafi doesn't go away, do we end up with another kosovo?
 
Fern

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
ericlp said:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...an-strike-warn-administration-lacks-end-game/

Haha, what are we suppose to do go discuss this with congress and have them muck around for a few weeks? I think congress can go fuck themselves. And you know every republican would be against it. So what's the point? Waste of tax payers money.
Click to expand...

You might wanna read the article you link. Says Boehner supports it. If the House leader, a Repub, supports it, it's highly unlikely every Repub would oppose it.

Congress has a Constitutional duty here. It's not up the UN to give our President the "OK" for acts of war, that's essentially Congress's role. But if he's got 60 days, then he has 60 days. But should be no outrage or shock that Congresspersons weigh in with their opinons, that's what they do. Obama did it too when he was a Senator.

Fern
 
G

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
ElFenix said:
so if we bomb and gaddafi doesn't go away, do we end up with another kosovo?
Click to expand...

I am curious to see what happens if he survives and the rebels cant do anything either. Wil the rebels accept the brokered peace France, Britain, and the United States make with his regime? If we dont get him in an airstrike the only other way is to land ground forces. I dont think even with the cover of air the rebels can do squat.
 
ericlp

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,139
236
106
Fern said:
You might wanna read the article you link. Says Boehner supports it. If the House leader, a Repub, supports it, it's highly unlikely every Repub would oppose it.

Congress has a Constitutional duty here. It's not up the UN to give our President the "OK" for acts of war, that's essentially Congress's role. But if he's got 60 days, then he has 60 days. But should be no outrage or shock that Congresspersons weigh in with their opinons, that's what they do. Obama did it too when he was a Senator.

Fern
Click to expand...


Boner is gonna go along with anything it's the rest of the retards you gotta worry about. I'm glad you have so much faith in them at least "SOMEONE" does.

Might be a shock to you, that I'm not for either side... *IF* you would have read the article even dems are against it as well. Sorry I don't have faith in the system. All you need is a bunch of lobbyist's to buy out votes ... so you tell me, who's opinions are they really? I'm certain they already are opposing it gain a little unknown cry agenda.

Altho I'm certain it will pass by majority I just thought it was funny.
 
Last edited:
A

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
The best possible outcome is probably now a partitioned Libya, Ghaddafi stays in power and proceeds to talk shit until he dies. We'll probably be footing the security bill for the free zone or whatever it'll be called and that's that.

He's surrounded himself with civilians and we're not going to wipe them out, nor will the Brits, so here we are. The rebels lost all of their momentum and obviously cannot win on the ground despite all of their recent boasting.

It's shocking that we're intervening on behalf of people we don't even know. I'm not suggesting they're extremists but we really don't have any idea who these people are or what the outcome would be if they were to come to power.

Yet we are putting Americans in danger to protect them.
 
ericlp

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,139
236
106
ayabe said:
The best possible outcome is probably now a partitioned Libya, Ghaddafi stays in power and proceeds to talk shit until he dies. We'll probably be footing the security bill for the free zone or whatever it'll be called and that's that.

He's surrounded himself with civilians and we're not going to wipe them out, nor will the Brits, so here we are. The rebels lost all of their momentum and obviously cannot win on the ground despite all of their recent boasting.

It's shocking that we're intervening on behalf of people we don't even know. I'm not suggesting they're extremists but we really don't have any idea who these people are or what the outcome would be if they were to come to power.

Yet we are putting Americans in danger to protect them.
Click to expand...

Good luck in your little dream world... Ghaddafi is gonna fold up like a popcorn fart.

Putting Americans in danger? Thats what the fucking signed up for. And what danger are they really in. Do tell...

I predict Ghaddafi doesn't last a month.
 
JSt0rm

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
matt0611 said:
Obama also did not get any authorization from congress like the constitution says he needs to go to war and like he said he would when he was a candidate:

"OBAMA: 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."

Lies.
Click to expand...

Your fucking stuck on stupid boy. This isnt a war.
 
M

matt0611

Golden Member
Oct 22, 2010
1,879
0
0
JSt0rm said:
Your fucking stuck on stupid boy. This isnt a war.
Click to expand...


OBAMA: 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."

This is not a military attack?
Really?

Attacking another countries military installations and tanks is not war?

Lol yeah ok, sure. What a hack you are.
 
Last edited:
her209

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
matt0611 said:
OBAMA: 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."
Click to expand...
He's technically right. Its in the War Powers Act.

:D
 
B

BladeVenom

Lifer
Jun 2, 2005
13,365
16
0
“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,"

Barak Hussein Obama, 2007
 
Fern

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
her209 said:
Sounds like an issue for the SCOTUS...

:D
Click to expand...

No, it is an issue for Congress.

I don't believe the subject could even get to the SCOTUS without Congress filing the suit.

But I don't believe Obama or the Dems want to see Congress involved, and that's why Obama hasn't asked for a resolution from them authorizing this etc.

It would put too many liberal Dems on the spot. Either vote gainst Obama or be the on 'hot seat' for authorizing another war. IMO, politics is driving this questionable process of by-passing Congress and getting involved anyway.

Fern
 
B

BladeVenom

Lifer
Jun 2, 2005
13,365
16
0
ericlp said:
Haha, what are we suppose to do go discuss this with congress and have them muck around for a few weeks?
Click to expand...

The uprising started a month ago. Obama goofed off for almost a month, even took time to get in plenty of golf. Congress could easily have acted quicker than Obama did.
 
J

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
matt0611 said:
You'd have a point if the Constitution wasn't the supreme law of the united states, but it is.

Even [candidate] Obama agrees with me.
Click to expand...

Of course it is, and Congress ceded their power for a period of 60 days with the War Powers Act of 1973, and had, in practice, ceded it may times before. Numerous US military interventions have occurred w/o formal declaration of war or Congressional approval of any kind. Grenada and Panama are 2 recent examples.
 
Throckmorton

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
BladeVenom said:
The uprising started a month ago. Obama goofed off for almost a month, even took time to get in plenty of golf. Congress could easily have acted quicker than Obama did.
Click to expand...

He was waiting for UN and Arab League approval. If we had gone in without international support, it would have been seen as another Iraq invasion style meddling by a lot of people, especially those in the Arab world. Without support from Arabs, we'd have ended up in another quagmire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom