Our View: Was it legal making war on ...

Our View: Was it legal making war on Libya?

There are 7 comments on the Las Cruces Sun-News story from Mar 25, 2011, titled Our View: Was it legal making war on Libya?. In it, Las Cruces Sun-News reports that:

The following editorial appeared in The Washington Post. President Obama went to some lengths to get United Nations authorization and Arab League support for the current U.S. mission in Libya.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Las Cruces Sun-News.

MadMax

Williamsburg, NM

#1 Mar 25, 2011
60-day time limit for the use of force is plenty of time, who needs that old constitution thing or congress? We'll do just what ever we please (insert snoot here).
After all we are Americans, the only people that have the right to do anything to anyone with impunity.
Shouldve be done long ago

Las Cruces, NM

#2 Mar 25, 2011
Qaddafi murdered hundreds of Americans over Lockerbie and he still owns illegal chemical weapons, weapons that he was allowed to keep when Bush and Cheney embraced Qaddafi in return for oil (Qaddafi NEVER had any nuclear weapons).

Since: Sep 08

Albuquerque, NM

#3 Mar 25, 2011
I damn sure didn't like the decision, but it damn sure is constitutional. President Obama collected the facts, gathered support, acted decisively and rationally.

The House had plenty of time to have brought it to the forefront, but they were to busy doing that "emergency" session to listen to attacks on NPR. And then they had to take a week off -

As John Steward said, "At least bush respected us enough to LIE us into Iraq!"

Since: Jun 08

Saint Paul, MN

#4 Mar 25, 2011
"Let me make this perfectly clear" Obama's normal line when he hasn't a clue of what to do.

"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.... It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action."

I repeat "let me make this perfectly clear". It is clear that he is one dumb dude.
grecianformula2

Albuquerque, NM

#5 Mar 25, 2011
Thomas F Schraad wrote:
"Let me make this perfectly clear" Obama's normal line when he hasn't a clue of what to do.
"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.... It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action."
I repeat "let me make this perfectly clear". It is clear that he is one dumb dude.
Obama took notes on Reagan's attack on Libya in the 80's. I suppose you thought The Gipper was dumb too, huh Herkimer? Of course, we have been in Irtaq for darned near 10 years in an undeclared war. No prob there, huh Thomas?

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#6 Mar 25, 2011
PlacitasRoy wrote:
I damn sure didn't like the decision, but it damn sure is constitutional. President Obama collected the facts, gathered support, acted decisively and rationally.
The House had plenty of time to have brought it to the forefront, but they were to busy doing that "emergency" session to listen to attacks on NPR. And then they had to take a week off -
As John Steward said, "At least bush respected us enough to LIE us into Iraq!"
It's not Constitutional. Only the Congress has the authority to declare war. President Obama and the Administrations have been acting outside the Constitution since 1941. The Congress has sweeping legislative authority, but it hasn't got the authority to hand over that role, as it has under the war powers resolution.

Since: Jun 08

Saint Paul, MN

#7 Mar 26, 2011
grecianformula2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama took notes on Reagan's attack on Libya in the 80's. I suppose you thought The Gipper was dumb too, huh Herkimer? Of course, we have been in Irtaq for darned near 10 years in an undeclared war. No prob there, huh Thomas?
Congress voted including the Democrats.

Bush got permission, Obama did not. Bush had a plan, Obama does not.

Reagan, want to talk about Vietnam? Hmmmmmmm. and the Democrats again.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Las Cruces Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Convicted stalker running for Pearce's seat as ... Nov 15 Demo Rats 7
Stomach virus Nov 13 Marty 1
LCPS School Superintendent is a DOLT Nov 10 LCPSGOOFBALS 1
Looking for my ex or his son Nov 4 Nita Rusak 2
NO Butters (Sep '13) Nov 2 TomCat 4
Are you're teens drinking lean?? Oct 27 three blocks 1
News Deputies: Man drove golf cart while drunk, flip... Oct 24 Larry Craig s WC ... 1

Las Cruces Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Las Cruces Mortgages