reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Mar 21, 2011 15:58:53 GMT -5
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 21, 2011 21:05:44 GMT -5
I said I didn't know the legalities, with all respect I am not accepting any one heres explanation either. I wasn't making a judgment on whether this is legal or not...simply quoting the law. It's not my explanation you're dissing, the first part of my response was from Obama himself when questioned about Bush getting us involved in Iraq. The second is law, not my opinion. I'm just relaying what I've found so far. So let me see if I have your argument straight.... you don't know what the law or the constitution say on this subject and you have no clue whether Obama's actions are legal or not, but you're sure we're all wrong because POTUS Obama surely must have covered his backside. After all, no POTUS has ever been wrong about anything....ever. How about instead of simply whining that we're all "bashing Obama", you do a little research and consider the information you've been given....instead of hanging your hat on what you "feel" was done. Florida if there is one thing I do is research and as far as the legalities , with out the training, just read the act I put up, and you will see paragraph after paragraph of statements of how many questions there are on the right of a Potus to order military action and how there seems to be no clear cut decisive ruling that covers all and every such occurrence. This even didn't just happen its been a few long weeks of event leading up to this and with all the bashing of the POTUS by those who agenda and life seems to revolve around that happening here, a idiot he is not, a lawyer with good legal credentials he is, he even taught law at a prestigious law school, and if you had read Woodwards book, the attorneys were in on many of the decisions that led to his decisions on Afghanistan, dealings with congress and his rights as Commander in Chief. Trust me on this, the legals were covered a far as ordering the actions he took. Disagree with his decision, fine , but I will not change my thoughts that because you or any one says it is so, from a legal standpoint her on this zone , it is so. No one here is qualified to so judge and make such a claim.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,519
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 21, 2011 21:55:13 GMT -5
I was thinking about the issue of going to Congress to see if they think we should send a few missiles and remembered this: Published: March 19, 2011 3:00 a.m. Senators urge Obama to lead on debt, taxes
Heidi Przybyla | Bloomberg News WASHINGTON – A bipartisan majority of the Senate called on President Obama on Friday to lead a broad effort to slash U.S. debt through spending cuts and tax increases as part of negotiations on this year’s budget.
A letter to Obama on Friday signed by 60 senators said “comprehensive deficit reduction measures are imperative” and the president’s leadership is vital. Maybe if Congress would get the budget done, President Obama would think they are up to the war issue.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 21, 2011 22:02:49 GMT -5
I was thinking about the issue of going to Congress to see if they think we should send a few missiles and remembered this: Published: March 19, 2011 3:00 a.m. Senators urge Obama to lead on debt, taxes
Heidi Przybyla | Bloomberg News WASHINGTON – A bipartisan majority of the Senate called on President Obama on Friday to lead a broad effort to slash U.S. debt through spending cuts and tax increases as part of negotiations on this year’s budget.
A letter to Obama on Friday signed by 60 senators said “comprehensive deficit reduction measures are imperative” and the president’s leadership is vital. Maybe if Congress would get the budget done, President Obama would think they are up to the war issue. Nice I like it.. ;D
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 21, 2011 23:27:29 GMT -5
Oh well. They're going to be disappointed! But it's ok, the smart people already knew Obama was a major f-up...
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Mar 22, 2011 9:05:25 GMT -5
No one here is qualified to so judge and make such a claim. Are you qualified to read? According to the The War Powers Act of 1973, Section 2(c) clearly states that "The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces. Let's look at these three circumstances one at a time, shall we? (1) Declaration of War - There has been no formal declaration of war. Strike One. (2) Statutory Authorization - Would have gone before congress which (some) congressmen are saying he did not. Strike Two. (3) National emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces - Unless Libya is now a US territory / possession or the rebels have been recruited into our military, there has been no attack on the US. That sounds like strike three. Now, there may be another workaround that I have not seen, I do not know. Clearly, Obama cannot legally commit our military under the War Powers Act.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Mar 22, 2011 9:13:20 GMT -5
I was thinking about the issue of going to Congress to see if they think we should send a few missiles and remembered this: <snip> Maybe if Congress would get the budget done, President Obama would think they are up to the war issue. Since congress can't come up with a budget, it justifies the possible illegal commitment of our troops? C'mon bills....awfully weak attempt to justify his actions, don't you think?
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 22, 2011 9:18:17 GMT -5
Mr Obama has acted in the "national security and foreign policy interest of the United States" and don't forget Mr Obama used to teach Constitutional Law so you have to go with his decision and why are the Dems so upset?? Don't they trust our President to do the right thing for our Country? However a legal scholar said and I am paraphrasing somewhat .. The President can use force only if we have (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, (3) national emergency created by attack upon the USA it territories or possesions or its armed forces...so have any of those 3 things happened? I have no idea..way above my pay grade and I have no clue but will defer to our legal constitutional scholars here ..
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Mar 22, 2011 9:33:03 GMT -5
However a legal scholar said and I am paraphrasing somewhat .. The President can use force only if we have (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, (3) national emergency created by attack upon the USA it territories or possesions or its armed forces...so have any of those 3 things happened? I have no idea..way above my pay grade and I have no clue but will defer to our legal constitutional scholars here .. I fully acknowledge that we do not have all the information so I have no clue either. But, on the surface and from what info is available, he is clearly in violation of the war powers act. Apparently some in congress agree. Of course, some of the lib truthers still claim "Bush's war" was illegal even though he had congressional approval. I guess only time will tell.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,519
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 22, 2011 9:34:51 GMT -5
I was thinking about the issue of going to Congress to see if they think we should send a few missiles and remembered this: <snip> Maybe if Congress would get the budget done, President Obama would think they are up to the war issue. Since congress can't come up with a budget, it justifies the possible illegal commitment of our troops? C'mon bills....awfully weak attempt to justify his actions, don't you think?Not meant to justify. Just offiering the idea that Congress is calling for the President to bail them out on one hand and complaining that he isn't consulting them on the other. Meant solely as a rip on Congress.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Mar 22, 2011 9:43:49 GMT -5
However a legal scholar said and I am paraphrasing somewhat .. I fully acknowledge that we do not have all the information so I have no clue either. But, on the surface and from what info is available, he is clearly in violation of the war powers act. Apparently some in congress agree. I guess only time will tell. A very profound conclusion voiced here, floridayankee. While you and I might often find ourselves on opposite sides of issues, I do admire your ability, and willingness, to see both sides and think them through. Karma to you for that! We DON'T have all the information. We don't really know anymore than what we can ferret out through investigation, and what we're told by talking heads. Anything "on the surface" is always subject to doubt, IMO. It could hide things we'd need to make a reasonable decision. When we don't have those, all we can do is wait, and hope.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 22, 2011 9:45:18 GMT -5
I guess only time will tell.
Ok but don't forget the Dems in congress are looking for Ms Pelosi to give them direction on the War Powers Act...she said Friday "that she commends Mr Obama for his leadership and prudence on how our nation will proceed in Libya and work to with our European allies [to address this crisis"....then she got sick from fatigue or bad pasta
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 22, 2011 9:50:02 GMT -5
We DON'T have all the information. We don't really know anymore than what we can ferret out through investigation, and what we're told by talking heads. Anything "on the surface" is always subject to doubt, IMO. It could hide things we'd need to make a reasonable decision. When we don't have those, all we can do is wait, and hope.
Far be it for me to disagree with you Ma'am but our Liberal/Progressive members of congress who are also anti-war claim they have enough facts to state emphatically that Obama screwed up big time when he violated the War Powers Resolution and they referred to the 1973 Law as their source...so you might want to check it out...IMHO
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Mar 22, 2011 9:55:24 GMT -5
A very profound conclusion voiced here, floridayankee. While you and I might often find ourselves on opposite sides of issues, I do admire your ability, and willingness, to see both sides and think them through. Karma to you for that! Thank you mmhmm...I appreciate that. Back at ya for the acknowledgment. A closed mind is like a closed book; just a block of wood. Agreed, but if we waited until we knew everything, the board would be awfully quiet.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Mar 22, 2011 9:58:50 GMT -5
Far be it for me to disagree with you Ma'am but our Liberal/Progressive members of congress who are also anti-war claim they have enough facts to state emphatically that Obama screwed up big time when he violated the War Powers Resolution and they referred to the 1973 Law as their source...so you might want to check it out...IMHO Keep in mind, we're talking about a congress that cannot come to an agreement on the legality / constitutionality (or lack thereof, whichever it may be) of Obamacare.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 22, 2011 10:00:16 GMT -5
Libya no fly zone, what if Bush had done it? . House Republican Leader Eric Cantor spoke to the Hoover Institution this afternoon. After his talk, I asked Cantor what he thought the reaction would be if George W. Bush had done what Barack Obama did on the Libya no-fly zone. "There'd be total outrage. So I am wondering what perhaps a local congresswoman from here, the Minority leader (Nancy Pelosi), is thinking right now. Because I know that in '06 her big cry was "Out of Iraq." And the fact that she's now supporting this president in this move is fairly surprising to me." Eric Cantor on lack of congressional input on Libya: Where's Nancy? The former speaker, I am happy to report, is out of a Rome hospital and has resumed her schedule. Now there is grumbling in Congress about Obama not seeking its approval before authorizing "Operation Odyssey Dawn" in Libya, just not from Pelosi. And, I should note, the president did wait for the approval of the United Nations Security Council. Read more: www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/djsaunders/detail?entry_id=85476#ixzz1HLBiUof7
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Mar 22, 2011 10:00:32 GMT -5
I guess some pundits were right after all. We elected "Bush Light". I have to admit, I did not think Senator Obama would become a warmonger upon entering the White House. He must have read the Presidential book of Secrets that the Presidents edit for the next President, and realized things are worse than what they are telling the public. ;D
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 22, 2011 10:01:23 GMT -5
Eric Cantor on lack of congressional input on Libya: Where's Nancy?
Ms Pelosi issued a statement on Friday but since then has been silent and confering with her Liberal Caucus....she also is not feeling too good today BTW
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 22, 2011 10:04:51 GMT -5
I believe that the president only has to notify congress, after which the president has 60 days with an extra 30 day withdrawal period. During those 60 days, congress does not need to approve. After that time has elapsed, congressional approval is required. Shirana , that is why I am not trying to give a definite answer, I put up the War powers act, there are many however and not quite clears in there if you read it, here you, who are a careful and honest poster here, and even you are using "I believe "...it's not for us here to give "absolute the way it is " statements. Oh, OK why not, and your right but hope you understand why I am not taking anyone who posts here as the way it is as gospel. No one here really knows, and I am going with, till hear differently, the PONTUS has excellent legal advice and will be smart enough, being a lawyer himself, to cover his back side to do things legal. I know a few legislatures , including some from his own party, are calling into question his legal authority but so many of them, especially house members just yada, yadda for their moment in the SUN, figuring when its done and over, no one will remember their blathering.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 22, 2011 10:13:57 GMT -5
The essence of the Obama foreign policy is its lack of essence; its doctrine, the absence of doctrine. To allies, it seems unpredictable. To reformers, unreliable. Contrast this to Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., speaking recently at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. While recognizing the risks of rapid change, Kerry asserted: "Just as the Berlin Wall could not be rebuilt, so we know that the old order in the Middle East cannot be restored." He is proposing, along with Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, a package of proposals to reinforce political and economic reform in the Middle East, similar to American efforts in Eastern Europe two decades ago. According to Kerry, Americans believe "that democracy enables the fullest expression of the human spirit and that economic freedom is the engine of human innovation. We believe that when people can trust their government and rely on its justice, the society that flourishes is a stable one. And we believe that stability and prosperity are powerful antidotes to the violent urges of nihilism and extremism." At this moment, we hope for the success of allied arms, the protection of Libyan civilians and the fall of a dictator. But it is Kerry's vision that should guide the president forward Read more: www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/03/21/ED761IG3KP.DTL#ixzz1HLFTX6Zswww.sfgate.com/columns/gerson/
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Mar 22, 2011 10:52:34 GMT -5
Didn't we see the same or similar situation during the Korean Conflict?? The United Nations Security Council voted to send UN Troops into South Korea to stop the attacks by North Korea?? China and Russia abstained or voted NO...Korea was never called a war but a Police Action....so in this case we had UN Resolution 1973 that basically called for UN Troops to stop Khadafy's attacks on his own people but this time without boots on the ground from the UN ..unless we have Spec Ops guys doing their thing without any fanfare about it.. And this little war is being called the Libyan Conflct and not the Libyan War... I think it is fundamentally different, the korean conflict was one country attacking another, with Libya who is a member of the UN, it appears to be an internal issue, which I thought the UN rules forbid them interfering with internal affairs of member states.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 22, 2011 10:57:46 GMT -5
The essence of the Obama foreign policy is its lack of essence; its doctrine, the absence of doctrine. To allies, it seems unpredictable. To reformers, unreliable. Contrast this to Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., speaking recently at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. While recognizing the risks of rapid change, Kerry asserted: "Just as the Berlin Wall could not be rebuilt, so we know that the old order in the Middle East cannot be restored." He is proposing, along with Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, a package of proposals to reinforce political and economic reform in the Middle East, similar to American efforts in Eastern Europe two decades ago. According to Kerry, Americans believe "that democracy enables the fullest expression of the human spirit and that economic freedom is the engine of human innovation. We believe that when people can trust their government and rely on its justice, the society that flourishes is a stable one. And we believe that stability and prosperity are powerful antidotes to the violent urges of nihilism and extremism." At this moment, we hope for the success of allied arms, the protection of Libyan civilians and the fall of a dictator. But it is Kerry's vision that should guide the president forward Read more: www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/03/21/ED761IG3KP.DTL#ixzz1HLFTX6Zswww.sfgate.com/columns/gerson/If they are talking about a Marshall plan, LOL, with all the $ available in the region , The Saudis proposed $30 Billion plus for benefits for his populace and thn another $96 Billion on top of that, all to try to keep populace happy, thus $ to spend they have , just where it goes, these Senators had better get a life.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 22, 2011 10:58:38 GMT -5
Didn't we see the same or similar situation during the Korean Conflict?? The United Nations Security Council voted to send UN Troops into South Korea to stop the attacks by North Korea?? China and Russia abstained or voted NO...Korea was never called a war but a Police Action....so in this case we had UN Resolution 1973 that basically called for UN Troops to stop Khadafy's attacks on his own people but this time without boots on the ground from the UN ..unless we have Spec Ops guys doing their thing without any fanfare about it.. And this little war is being called the Libyan Conflct and not the Libyan War... I think it is fundamentally different, the korean conflict was one country attacking another, with Libya who is a member of the UN, it appears to be an internal issue, which I thought the UN rules forbid them interfering with internal affairs of member states. Good point but I saw the similarities since both conflicts required the UN Security Councils to act and then those who approved the resolutions for Korea and Libya sent in the troops..both were classified as conflicts and not wars and congress was out of the loop since Harry Truman went along with the UN and ordered our Army in Japan to land in Korea in June 1950 and Obama ordered our Army and Navy to launch air assaults in Libya.. And some in congress are claiming they were out of the loop for the Libyan conflict.. But Libya will not be another Korean Confilct which was horrendus as you know.
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Mar 22, 2011 11:09:42 GMT -5
we've already lost one jet to "mechanical failure".
one pilot rescued by us, the other, held by rebels till his freedom was "negotiated".
you know the rebels we are "protecting".
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 22, 2011 11:17:39 GMT -5
we've already lost one jet to "mechanical failure". one pilot rescued by us, the other, held by rebels till his freedom was "negotiated". you know the rebels we are "protecting". "negotiated"." Is that true, hadn't seen that, just that he fell in with insurgents and then ended up back with US forces, read nothing about having to be freed by "negotiations ". Possible had to be proven that he was a US pilot?
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Mar 22, 2011 11:19:27 GMT -5
i would think his uniform would clear that up. also the only planes flying are ours and the coalitions.
let's face it folks. We are running the operation, not the UN.
des,
try to get the stories when they break, not after a few hours of MSM massage. ;D
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 22, 2011 11:30:56 GMT -5
i would think his uniform would clear that up. also the only planes flying are ours and the coalitions. let's face it folks. We are running the operation, not the UN. -------------------------------------------------------- We are not talking about the most sophisticated here, in the insurgents, actually a ploy to be used by a member of the Gaddafi forces for good treatment if caught by insurgents is possible, and it is always SOP in even sophisticated situations to identfy suspects who might be found in custody. --------------------------------------------------- US jet crashes in Libya, both crew are safe By DAVID RISING, Associated Press David Rising, Associated Press – 2 hrs 15 mins ago "BERLIN – A U.S. fighter jet crashed in Libya after an apparent equipment malfunction but both crewmembers were able to eject and were back in American hands with only minor injuries, U.S. officials said Tuesday. The F-15E Strike Eagle jet was conducting a mission Monday night against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's air defenses when it crashed at 2130 GMT (5:30 p.m. EDT), said Lt. Cmdr. Karin Burzynski, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Africa Command. A spokesman for the Libyan opposition, Mohammed Ali, said the U.S. plane went down about 25 miles (40 kilometers) outside of the eastern rebel stronghold of Benghazi, Libya's second-largest city. Britain's Telegraph newspaper published a series of photographs it said was the wreckage of the plane, showing people milling around the burned-out aircraft in a Libyan field. One of the jet's airmen landed in a field of sheep after ejecting from the plane, then raised his hands and called out "OK, OK" to a crowd who had gathered, the Telegraph cited witness Younis Amruni, 27, as saying. "I hugged him and said: 'Don't be scared, we are your friends,'" Amruni told the newspaper, adding that people then lined up to shake the airman's hand. "We are so grateful to these men who are protecting the skies," he said. "We gave him juice and then the revolutionary military people took him away." A Marine Corps Osprey search and rescue aircraft retrieved the main pilot, while the second crew member, a weapon systems officer who is also a pilot, was recovered by rebel forces and is now in American hands, a U.S. official said in Washington. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record. Amruni said the Osprey fired shots to keep locals away, then swooped in and rescued the second crew member." -------------------------------------------------- All I am suggesting , to post inaccurate facts to push a agenda some might have , purposly, takes away from the zone. Not fair to fellow posters , one can get their ideas across with out all the purposly planted mis information. My feelings, if others like the misinformation , think it's proper, so be it. This article was front and center on one of my sites, easily found, took seconds, so why put up something that is false? It wasn't done by mistake, it was posted exactly the way it was to just get a diss in. Why?
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Mar 22, 2011 11:33:41 GMT -5
who says your article is "true"?
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 22, 2011 11:40:12 GMT -5
who says your article is "true"? Ok, here, plus I trust AP and there are by lines of the two reporters, want to put up a link to the post about "negotiations?"mmmm news.yahoo.com/s/ap/af_libya
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Mar 22, 2011 11:42:15 GMT -5
|
|