Today is the day (60 day mark for Libya)

[Jaskalas]

Last bombing was today. So yes.

Try again.

British Maj. Gen. John Lorimer, a communications officer, said British warplanes hit two corvette warships in the Khoms harbor and "successfully targeted a facility in the dockyard constructing fast inflatable boats, which Libyan forces have used several times in their efforts to mine Misrata and attack vessels in the area."

 

[Sinsear]

according to senseamp if you are against this action in libya you are against the US

 

[werepossum]

Try again.

If we limit our future involvement to support such as AWACs and satellite intel, and maybe some crew rescue, SpecOps, and humanitarian missions, then he'd be within the letter of the law (in my untrained opinion.)

 

[CPA]

There's no indication he's breaking the law though so it's not particularly interesting. It seems like a bunch of partisan Senators trying to limit executive branch powers. They're certainly within their rights to do so, but nothing particularly illegal seems to be going on.

Good then I expect that the "Iraq War is unconstitutional, Bush is a war criminal" argument will cease.

 

[CPA]

Such as?

tic, toc, tic, toc, still waiting for an answer to this question.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Are we still bombing Libya? Serious question.

Good point. I need to add a third possible action for the president, which is suspension of any further U.S. military action against Libya.

 

[First]

Really? Because of genocide?

Yup.

Whats your explaination of the genocide thats been happening in Africa for decades that we do nothing about? That pales Libya in comparison. I know you cant answer that.

I can answer it pretty easily; we should have done something about it. Next.

 

[First]

Last bombing was today. So yes.

Seriously though, link?

 

[CallMeJoe]

Seriously though, link?

The only link I can find mentioning nationality of the attackers is a Fox News story which reads: "British Maj. Gen. John Lorimer, a communications officer, said British warplanes hit two corvette warships in the Khoms harbor and "successfully targeted a facility in the dockyard constructing fast inflatable boats, which Libyan forces have used several times in their efforts to mine Misrata and attack vessels in the area."

No word of any direct U.S. actions today.

 

[First]

^ I haven't followed the story closely enough, but I'm honestly curious if we're out of Libya, because I could have sworn we left weeks ago.

 

[blackangst1]

Seriously though, link?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/20/us-libya-idUSTRE7270JP20110520

But then, we arent NATO, right?

 

[Craig234]

^ I haven't followed the story closely enough, but I'm honestly curious if we're out of Libya, because I could have sworn we left weeks ago.

We transferred the leadership of the effort to NATO, but continued a strong 'support role' in the operation.

We could use a better mechanism than the current War Powers Act for fulfilling the constitutional requirement that only Congress can declare War.

Having the issue just be ignored because it's convenient isn't much of a solution to protect from later abuse when precedents are set.

 

[CallMeJoe]

But then, we arent NATO, right?

The United States is part of NATO, but the Fox News story on the bombing linked above quotes a British Major General stating that the operation was conducted by British aircraft.

 

[First]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/20/us-libya-idUSTRE7270JP20110520

But then, we arent NATO, right?

Well yes, how could a sovereign nation "be" NATO? We're a part of it. But AFAIK we're out of Libya militarily. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see any evidence that we're still there, certainly not in terms of combat operations.

 

[blackangst1]

Well yes, how could a sovereign nation "be" NATO? We're a part of it. But AFAIK we're out of Libya militarily. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see any evidence that we're still there, certainly not in terms of combat operations.

Well, we were still bombing confirmed by AP and the WH as of a month ago, even after the US supposedly turned over control to NATO. Im not sure why you would assume we're out.

http://www.wilx.com/home/headlines/US_Planes_Still_Bombing_Libya_119800844.html
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/04/ap-libya-limited-airstrikes-041311/

 

[chucky2]

Have all the civilians stopped dieing now that the UN decreed it? Just wondering...

 

[DucatiMonster696]

You see no difference between the 2?

Ummm....you're right there is a difference. Bush got congressional approval to use force and only launched combat operations after Congress gave him the okay after months of debate.

Obama and Libya...Nothing.

 

[Zebo]

Actually Obama was in violation of war powers act from DAY ONE. Section 1541(c) explicitly states that the temporary war-making rights conferred by the statute apply only to "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

But rule of law doesn't mean much at that level. That's for you.

 

[lupi]

what happened to the good ole days when you had things like declarations of war.

 

[Craig234]

Actually Obama was in violation of war powers act from DAY ONE. Section 1541(c) explicitly states that the temporary war-making rights conferred by the statute apply only to "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

You're right. One more reason for updating the law that did not meet the need here.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Yup.

I can answer it pretty easily; we should have done something about it. Next.

So, you support America intervening, with the blood of our soldiers and at the cost of our tax dollars, to stop genocide wherever it might be occurring in the world or overthrowing any oppressive government? Lets see... that would mean crushing The Taliban, Saddam fanboys, most of Africa, (Red) China, a few central Asian states, the Balkans, most of The Middle East, we cannot do that, nor should we.

how could a sovereign nation "be" NATO? We're a part of it

We are the public face of NATO, when you see protesters out in the streets, are they chanting "Death to NATO" or burning NATO flags? No, they are calling for the destruction of our republic and burning the American flag. We also finance more of NATO's military expenditures than the rest of the members combined.

 

[Throckmorton]

If it goes on beyond today without Congressional approval, there's every indication that he's breaking the law. Only Congress can declare war. The War Powers Act was a recognition that Congress often moves more slowly than the pace of modern warfare, and thus that the President needs to be able to move immediately to effectively do his job of leading our armed forces. If the President can wage war beyond the War Powers Act, Congress' Constitutional power is negated totally. If the War Powers Act is found to be unconstitutional, then the President has no authority to enter any conflict without prior Congressional approval. Either way, Obama needs Congressional approval, in a formal bill or motion.

Did we declare war on Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam?

 

[matt0611]

Did we declare war on Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam?

Not declared war, but military action authorized by congress.

 

[matt0611]

Actually Obama was in violation of war powers act from DAY ONE. Section 1541(c) explicitly states that the temporary war-making rights conferred by the statute apply only to "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

But rule of law doesn't mean much at that level. That's for you.

Yup, you are right. He has been in violation of the resolution from the outset.

 

[Zebo]

You're right. One more reason for updating the law that did not meet the need here.

Need for what? The need to use this 1 trillion dollar a year behemoth we have created I guess which does nothing to better peoples lives, indeed, it's about destruction of them, and creating blow-back to perpetuate itself. I am finally beginning to realize the intellectual atmosphere of this country when it comes to the question of war is so narrow and totally contradicts the dogma that democracies are inherently peaceful when it's the democracies of USA and the west constantly starting wars. Left and right, party doesn't matter just different a different squad of cheerleaders for war. Looking back all the way to Kosovo and lies told there all the way through Libya as it seems Kadafi has significant material support never reported it seems we just can't stop making excuses to go kill people and you want to loosen that framework further and make it easier? Easier for unilateral action? More unaccountable to the people? More imperial presidency? Not me.