USMB Poll: Are you for or agaainst the Libya assault?

[theHawk]

One thing I want to address is this idea of Constitutionality. Obama's NOT overstepping his constitutional powers with regards to Libya. The constitution says only congress has the right to DECLARE war. The last time we declared war was WW2. Legally speaking Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gulf War, etc. were all NOT declared wars by congress.

If you call Obama out for violating the constitution by conducting Libya-you have to call out Bush (both), Truman, etc. for doing the exact same thing.

BTW-I don't support what he's doing in Libya-I don't think it's any of our business. Just saying some people don't really understand what's in our constitution.

No, he is supposed to go through Congress to get authorization to use military force unless there is an imminent threat to the US.

 

[dilloduck]

Conservatives are all over the map concerning gow to react to the Lybian crisis!

Yesterday on FOXNEWS they were criticizing Obama for waiting to form a coalition and that now it may be "too little too late." They were also critical of allowing other nations to assume leadership roles in this kind of military operation and that if Ghadaffi isn't taken out immediately, it will reflect badly on US prestige.

Here we have another group who figures that because the Bush Administration "screwed" things up in Iraq and Afghanistan, nobody else, particulatily a Democratic president, could possibly do any better.

The problem is that the Bush Administration was so inept in Iraq/Afghanistan that American citizens have lost all confidence in their government's ability to conduct even limited military campaigns - even when a true humanitarian crisis arises!

Is this a humanitarian crisis or did we just save a failed rebellion attempt ?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Conservatives are all over the map concerning gow to react to the Lybian crisis!

Yesterday on FOXNEWS they were criticizing Obama for waiting to form a coalition and that now it may be "too little too late." They were also critical of allowing other nations to assume leadership roles in this kind of military operation and that if Ghadaffi isn't taken out immediately, it will reflect badly on US prestige.

Here we have another group who figures that because the Bush Administration "screwed" things up in Iraq and Afghanistan, nobody else, particulatily a Democratic president, could possibly do any better.

The problem is that the Bush Administration was so inept in Iraq/Afghanistan that American citizens have lost all confidence in their government's ability to conduct even limited military campaigns - even when a true humanitarian crisis arises!

Those people are Neocons. They're not real Conservatives. There is a difference. They support bombing the shit out of Libya. They just don't like how this President is doing it. Neocons & Socialists/Progressives both love us being the World's Policeman/Referee. And they're both wrong. This is a Libyan Civil War. Our Government should not be involved with it at all. It's not just all about DA BOOOOOOOOSH. Both the Democrats & Republicans have had a lot of Blood on their hands over the years. Aggressive Foreign Interventionism is just wrong. It's time for revolutionary changes in our Foreign Policy. Lets stop being the World's Policeman/Referee. Lets give that a shot for awhile. Who knows,it might just work? I'm willing to try it. How bout you?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

One thing I want to address is this idea of Constitutionality. Obama's NOT overstepping his constitutional powers with regards to Libya. The constitution says only congress has the right to DECLARE war. The last time we declared war was WW2. Legally speaking Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gulf War, etc. were all NOT declared wars by congress.

If you call Obama out for violating the constitution by conducting Libya-you have to call out Bush (both), Truman, etc. for doing the exact same thing.

BTW-I don't support what he's doing in Libya-I don't think it's any of our business. Just saying some people don't really understand what's in our constitution.

No, he is supposed to go through Congress to get authorization to use military force unless there is an imminent threat to the US.

He's got 60 days.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

What's so "Humanitarian" about bombing & killing people anyway? "Humanitarian" claims on this really are absurd.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

One thing I want to address is this idea of Constitutionality. Obama's NOT overstepping his constitutional powers with regards to Libya. The constitution says only congress has the right to DECLARE war. The last time we declared war was WW2. Legally speaking Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gulf War, etc. were all NOT declared wars by congress.

If you call Obama out for violating the constitution by conducting Libya-you have to call out Bush (both), Truman, etc. for doing the exact same thing.

BTW-I don't support what he's doing in Libya-I don't think it's any of our business. Just saying some people don't really understand what's in our constitution.

All the above GOT Congressional APPROVAL for their actions. THAT is all that is required by the Constitution. Obama hasn't even ask Congress about it.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

One thing I want to address is this idea of Constitutionality. Obama's NOT overstepping his constitutional powers with regards to Libya. The constitution says only congress has the right to DECLARE war. The last time we declared war was WW2. Legally speaking Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gulf War, etc. were all NOT declared wars by congress.

If you call Obama out for violating the constitution by conducting Libya-you have to call out Bush (both), Truman, etc. for doing the exact same thing.

BTW-I don't support what he's doing in Libya-I don't think it's any of our business. Just saying some people don't really understand what's in our constitution.

All the above GOT Congressional APPROVAL for their actions. THAT is all that is required by the Constitution. Obama hasn't even ask Congress about it.

Once again.

He's got 60 days.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

One thing I want to address is this idea of Constitutionality. Obama's NOT overstepping his constitutional powers with regards to Libya. The constitution says only congress has the right to DECLARE war. The last time we declared war was WW2. Legally speaking Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gulf War, etc. were all NOT declared wars by congress.

If you call Obama out for violating the constitution by conducting Libya-you have to call out Bush (both), Truman, etc. for doing the exact same thing.

BTW-I don't support what he's doing in Libya-I don't think it's any of our business. Just saying some people don't really understand what's in our constitution.

No, he is supposed to go through Congress to get authorization to use military force unless there is an imminent threat to the US.

He's got 60 days.

Technically he is REQUIRED to inform Congress BEFORE he uses military force or assets. He did not inform Congress. He has not asked for Congressional permission, he has not spoken at all to Congress about this.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

No, he is supposed to go through Congress to get authorization to use military force unless there is an imminent threat to the US.

He's got 60 days.

Technically he is REQUIRED to inform Congress BEFORE he uses military force or assets. He did not inform Congress. He has not asked for Congressional permission, he has not spoken at all to Congress about this.

How would you know if he's informed Congress or not? It's traditionally done in a letter, not an appearance.

Why do you assume that he didn't?

 

[liebuster]

Who gives a shit whether he informed congress! Thats the least important thing to worry about with this whole thing people!!!!!!!

We need to be discussing whether its the proper role of the U.S to be deciding who is in power and who is not of a sovereign nation.

 

[GWV5903]

At this point I am against...

Gaddafi needs to go, has needed to go for sometime, history tells us this action will not accomplish that...

He lost the opportunity to succeed by waiting for the UN's permission...

If it is such a moral obligation now, what was it a month ago?

Obama is a terrible leader we can't afford, it is disgusting how weak he has made us appear...

Now more than ever we need a leader...

 

[Cain]

I do not see why we should go to Libya. I just hope we change our stance from trying not to insult the people in the countries we are deployed too, and decide that winning is more important then not offending the enemy.

 

[kyzr]

The fact that Louis Farrakhan is whining to Obama says that the Libyan action is a very good thing.

 

[EriktheRed]

I'm always for bombing Muslims in the Middle East. They are all at war with us.

Jagoff.

 

[EriktheRed]

And no, I don't approve. It looks like it'll be another quagmire disguised as a humanitarian act.

 

[BrianH]

We are broke. We cannot afford to get involved in any more civil wars in foreign countries.

Apparently there's no such thing as a civil war these days. As soon as they start, another country gets involved....

 

[BrianH]

I can't believe this crap. I blame George Bush! Poor Obama having to deal with George Bush's mess.

 

[editec]

Not enough choices to vote.

I support the air war to keep Gaddaffi forces at bay.

Until I know what the END GAME is, I cannot support any boots on the ground.

 

[B. Kidd]

Against.
Bomb first, then clarify policy. What kind of putting-the-cart-before-the-horse crap is this?
Let them work through their own civil war. What if Britain or France had chosen sides in our civil war?
Screwed up strategy. Coalition unable to prevent close in fighting in urban areas through air power.

 

[tigerbob]

Support it in principle. I support pretty much any action against a totalitarian regime that is brutalizing its own people, assuming there is a UN mandate, and think the UN should do a far better job of doing the job it was created to do. Of course, I'm enough of a realist to know this is a path that is extremely difficult.