Page 20 of 22 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 216

Thread: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act

  1. #191
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    During the election campaign Barrack Obama denounced the Bush policies but he now is not only continuing with them, he is expanding on them.

    If it wasn't so serious, and the fact that it lasts four years, it might have been quite a funny joke that's been played on the American electorate.
    Reagan didn't nullify every executive order issued by Carter.

    Bush, Sr, didn't revise every law signed by Reagan.

    Clinton didn't undo every internal review conducted by Bush, Sr.

    Bush, Jr., didn't seak to repeal every law signed by Clinton.

    I don't see Pres. Obama needing to go out of his way to turnover every EO, internal review or law GWB signed just because he became our nation's 44th President.

    Every new administration builds upon the next. I'm sure that there are things the Obama Administration is doing or trying to do slightly differently than his predecessor. Problem is we're still in 2 wars and much of what GWB did he did via the Justice Department and much of that is now law (i.e., extending the Patriot Act which in many respects is still a very powerful tool in capturing terrorist here and abroad).

    I know presidential candidates come into an election thinking they're going to systematically "change the world," but I'm sure every new president will tell you (if he could) that "saying" and "doing" are two completely different things. For example, according to the book, "The Promise: President Obama, Year One," by Jonathan Alter President-elect Obama was briefed on the "Pakistan situation" long before he was inagurated. But could he deal with the Pakistani government exactly as he wished? No. Why? Because we still needed them to help root out terrorist. Yes, I know they haven't been of much help, but until you know the full details of the secret briefing the incoming President was given (and no, they weren't disclosed in the book), you really don't know why it is so difficult for our government to just cut them off completely. That said, now that OBL is dead we have far more negotiating power with Pakistan than we ever had before. Hence, the reason we're now sending Preditor Drones in the mountain region between Pakistan and Afghanistan where many of the insurgents tend to hide, and we're doing it relatively without a care what the Pakistan government thinks or threatens to do.

    Gitmo is another example of how things aren't as straigh-forward as they seem. The way the GW Bush administration used the legal system to surpress classified evidence on detainees from ever being shown to the public let alone in any court of law makes it extremely difficult to give these terrorist suspects a "fair trail under the law" even when using military tribunals. But until you understand how things came about and just how difficult it is to unwind them you really don't know how difficult it will be to close Gitmo until both wars are over.

    I understand what you guys are getting at, however..."say one thing, do another"...but I tend to put such things under the heading of "tried, but OBE...(Overcome By Events)," put it in its proper context and just let it go because the reality is there's nothing can be done about Pakistan or Gitmo until extermal circumstances change, i.e., both wars end.

    Now, getting back to the President, Libya and Congress...it's day 91 and no official resolution calling for a total withdrawal of our military nor his impeachment. Hmmmmm....
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 06-20-11 at 10:54 PM.

  2. #192
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act


  3. #193
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Reagan didn't nullify every executive order issued by Carter. Bush, Sr, didn't revise every law signed by Reagan. Clinton didn't undo every internal review conducted by Bush, Sr. Bush, Jr., didn't seak to repeal every law signed by Clinton. I don't see Pres. Obama needing to go out of his way to turnover every EO, internal review or law GWB signed just because he became our nation's 44th President.
    But of course, unlike those Presidents you mentioned, Barrack Obama made the distinct promises during his campaign that he would overturn almost all the Bush policies. This he has not done. Instead he has built on the Bush policies.

    Every new administration builds upon the next. I'm sure that there are things the Obama Administration is doing or trying to do slightly differently than his predecessor. Problem is we're still in 2 wars and much of what GWB did he did via the Justice Department and much of that is now law (i.e., extending the Patriot Act which in many respects is still a very powerful tool in capturing terrorist here and abroad).
    Actually BHO has , and illegally it seems, involved the US in a third war.
    I know presidential candidates come into an election thinking they're going to systematically "change the world," but I'm sure every new president will tell you (if he could) that "saying" and "doing" are two completely different things.
    And yet that never prevented BHO from saying he could make those changes. In ffact it was part of his campaign slogan.. He made promises either he knew he couldn't keep or didn't know he couldn't keep them. The choice appears to be him being a liar or ignorant.
    That said, now that OBL is dead we have far more negotiating power with Pakistan than we ever had before.
    There is no evidence of that at all. In fact the Pakistani government is quite upset and have even arrested Americans they believe were involved in the elimination of UBL..

    Hence, the reason we're now sending Preditor Drones in the mountain region between Pakistan and Afghanistan where many of the insurgents tend to hide, and we're doing it relatively without a care what the Pakistan government thinks or threatens to do.
    That doesn't seem to gibe with your earlier statement that there is more negotiating power. It suggests instead that there is no need for negotiations.

    Gitmo is another example of how things aren't as straigh-forward as they seem.
    I knew it wasn't so straightforward and so did many millions of others. How could Barrack Obama not know??

    The way the GW Bush administration used the legal system to surpress classified evidence on detainees from ever being shown to the public let alone in any court of law makes it extremely difficult to give these terrorist suspects a "fair trail under the law" even when using military tribunals. But until you understand how things came about and just how difficult it is to unwind them you really don't know how difficult it will be to close Gitmo until both wars are over.
    So Bush was right? Actually many people realized that the Bush administration was right on these issues and that BHO was blowing hot air, but it seems that the majority of the voters really wanted to believe him and the devil with facts.
    I understand what you guys are getting at, however..."say one thing, do another"...but I tend to put such things under the heading of "tried, but OBE...(Overcome By Events)," put it in its proper context and just let it go because the reality is there's nothing can be done about Pakistan or Gitmo until extermal circumstances change, i.e., both wars end.
    Ending both wars is what BHO promised, despite things going very well in Iraq. Many never believed Barrack Obama, and pointed out his errant beliefs, but not enough people listened. In fact many still aren't listening and continue to believe in him, despite all the evidence of his ineptitude.

    Now, getting back to the President, Libya and Congress...it's day 91 and no official resolution calling for a total withdrawal of our military nor his impeachment. Hmmmmm....
    And what does that mean to you? That it will not happen? That what he is doing in this third war is legal?

  4. #194
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:00 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,299

    Re: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    Nuance, don't ya' think? If we can kill off all the civilians, it will definitely prevent Qaddaffi from killing civilians and that is the stated NATO purpose and UN resolution. OIL don't come cheap. Yummy and look at all the unexplored Libyan OIL fields. No Qaddaffi, nobody threatening Nationalisation of the peoples OIL. That be our OIL under their sand. In a manner of speaking, of course, the OIL majors still want $95/barrel. Distribution is what? Could anyone take a look at the distribution. The network. The owners. The people enjoying the booty, as it might be said.

  5. #195
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act

    yesterday:

    Possible cracks emerged in NATO's Libya air campaign Wednesday as Italy expressed concern about the accidental killing of civilians and called for a suspension in hostilities to allow the delivery of humanitarian aid. However, Britain insisted the alliance was "holding strong."

    Skepticism over the military campaign is growing as weeks of airstrikes have failed to unseat Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi and outrage rises over allegations that airstrikes have caused civilian casualties.

    The air campaign continued Wednesday. At least two explosions shook Tripoli before noon as fighter jets soared overhead. It wasn't immediately clear what had been hit or if there were casualties.
    Possible Cracks Emerging in NATO's Libya Military Campaign - FoxNews.com

    hostilities, anyone?

  6. #196
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act

    today:

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will make the president’s case for the U.S. mission in Libya directly to Democrats Thursday afternoon as the Obama administration works to save itself from the political damage if it were to lose twin votes on the conflict on the House floor Friday.

    The White House requested an audience for Clinton, the nation’s top diplomat, with the full Democratic Caucus, which includes a large contingent of liberals upset about the Libya conflict.

    As Clinton was scheduled to begin her talk just after noon, the leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus issued a statement urging Democrats to vote to block funding for the mission.

    “The U.S. has been engaged in hostilities for over 90 days without congressional approval, which undermines not only the powers of the legislative branch but also the legal checks and balances put in place nearly 40 years ago to avoid abuse by any single branch of government,” wrote Reps. Raul Grijalva, Lynn Woolsey, Michael Honda and Barbara Lee. “We call on our colleagues in Congress to exercise their legitimate authority and oversight and immediately block any funding for this war.”

    Their caucus of liberals represents the largest subset of the Democratic Party in the House.

    House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has scheduled votes on whether to authorize the use of force in Libya — a resolution that is likely to fail — as well as a bill that would prohibit the use of government funds for hostilities.

    Many House Democrats are wary of engaging in a third front with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan continuing to drain American resources. Some are simply upset with Obama for failing to seek congressional approval for the mission and then announcing that he need not comply with the War Powers Act because American involvement in Libya doesn’t constitute “hostilities.”

    Republicans share many of the same sentiments about the Libya mission and Obama’s attitude toward Congress. Throw in the basic partisan clash between a House led by Republicans and a White House occupied by a Democrat and there’s little support for Obama’s policy in GOP circles.
    Hillary Clinton defends Libya to Democrats - Jonathan Allen - POLITICO.com

  7. #197
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act

    today:

    As the House prepares to vote on defunding American military actions in Libya, a new poll finds support for U.S. engagement there falling sharply, particularly among Republicans.

    Just 39 percent of people polled by Gallup Wednesday said they approve of U.S. participation in the NATO-led military action against dictator Muammar Qadhafi, a 12 percentage point drop from a March survey.

    The poll found support has dropped precipitously among Republicans. In March, 57 percent of Republicans Gallup surveyed supported Obama sending troops to Libya to try to oust Qadhafi. In the latest poll, 39 percent expressed support.
    of course, the commander in chief did not sell the libya mission as an effort "to oust qadhafi"

    no, it was all about protecting civilian lives and maintaining the credibility of nato

    what support would gallup find for the mission stated by the prez

    Among independents, support fell from 38 percent to 31 percent, while support has increased slightly among Democrats, from 51 percent to 54 percent.
    Poll: GOP support for Libya action drops sharply - Reid J. Epstein - POLITICO.com

    democrats, evidently, are less dismissive of a war represented to them as precluding "hostilities," which was sold as swift (lasting "days, not weeks"), which is sposed to be fought by nato (which the defense secretary called out correctly as a hollow alliance), which if successful necessarily entails nation building...

    more power to em, of course, and their principles...

    party on, progressives

  8. #198
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act

    alcee hastings, the florida rep who we learned this week is under ethics investigation for harrassment, who in 1989 was removed by the us senate from a florida judgeship for taking a 150 thousand dollar bribe, is sponsor of the bill authorizing whatever the heck it is barack the slasher is trying to accomplish in the skies above libya

    per cspan ten minutes ago, hastings was defeated, 123 to 295

    70 dems broke with the white house over libya, 115 stuck it out

    8 republicans broke ranks, i don't know who

    fyi

    the rooney bill is up next---DEFUND

  9. #199
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act


  10. #200
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Power outage: Libya war shows limits of War Powers Act

    Five days past the 90-day deadline and Congress is still deliberating...

    Just as an FYI, here are two opposing views on what the legal military definition of "hostilities" means and/or how former Presidents have defined it during previous armed conflicts.

    White House Clarifies Position on Libya and the WPR: US Forces Not Engaged in “Hostilities”

    Notre Dame Expert: U.S. is “most definitely” involved in hostilities in Libya

    Personally, I agree with the Notre Dame legal opinion. However, I think the best way around this political dilemma would be to turn over operational control of Preditor drones to NATO for a limited time and for the U.S. to continue in its support role, i.e., rescue, aerial refueling, operational planning, intelligence gathering and reconnaissance. The military could always place the unit in charge of operating Preditor drones under NATO command authority temporarily and still retain the military in a supporting role status.

Page 20 of 22 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •