Obama's War: Grounds for Impeachment?

[Giambattista]

Obama attacked Libya by authorizing, without Congressional assent, 100+ cruise missiles launched (according to official media) onto sovereign Libyan territory.

What is Obama doing?


President Obama Sidesteps Congress: Ron Paul Addresses Obama's Attack on Libya

Dennis Kucinich: Obama's Action Outside the Constitution





Is this a violation of the United States Constitution?

My opinion, yes.

He declared war by circumventing Congress and using whatever feeble authority the United Nations has by launching 110 or more Tomahawk missiles at various targets in Libya.

If launching a 100+ missiles at a country isn't an act of war, what is???

Where does he derive his authority from?

Is this an impeachable offense?

 

[joepistole]

Obama attacked Libya by authorizing, without Congressional assent, 100+ cruise missiles launched (according to official media) onto sovereign Libyan territory.

What is Obama doing?

President Obama Sidesteps Congress: Ron Paul Addresses Obama's Attack on Libya

Dennis Kucinich: Obama's Action Outside the Constitution


Is this a violation of the United States Constitution?

My opinion, yes.

He declared war by circumventing Congress and using whatever feeble authority the United Nations has by launching 110 or more Tomahawk missiles at various targets in Libya.

If launching a 100+ missiles at a country isn't an act of war, what is???

Where does he derive his authority from?

Is this an impeachable offense?

President Obama has not done anything other presidents have done. Did Ronald Reagan violate the Constitution when he invaded several countries without a declaration of war from Congress?

Why is it the president always carries with him/her something called the football that allows him/her to launch nuclear war at a moments notice?

The fact is the POTUS is also commander in chief of all US military forces per the Constitution and the president does not need to get authorization from congress to utilize the nation's military. This is so in the text of the law as well as history.

 

[Giambattista]

IMPEACH OBAMA!!!!


Obama has gone even farther than his predecessor George did, in that at least he got some kind of authorization from Congress.

That The Stately Hedge would be outdone in this department by the guy who promised Hope, Change, and to turn America around from the dangerous path it was on, is utterly ridiculous.

Obama has shown his true colors.

Obama's "Change" truly means going from bad to worse.



So what is it? The UNITED NATIONS now has complete authority over the elected officials of this country regardless of our Constitution?

This is a dangerous precedent that has been set. And our Hope and Change Master, was the one who set it in place.

 

[Giambattista]

President Obama has not done anything other presidents have done. Did Ronald Reagan violate the Constitution when he invaded several countries without a declaration of war from Congress?

What did Ronald Reagan do? Does that excuse Obama from attacking a country, and starting a war?
I don't exculpate any previous president from any violation of Congressional powers.
Our current president is no exception.

Why is it the president always carries with him/her something called the football that allows him/her to launch nuclear war at a moments notice?

Football? We're not talking about sports, please. Nuclear war?

The fact is the POTUS is also commander in chief of all US military forces per the Constitution and the president does not need to get authorization from congress to utilize the nation's military.

So what is the authority of Congress to declare war? What does that actually mean?

You're saying that the President of the United States has authority to do whatever he wants, anytime, anywhere?

 

[Giambattista]

What has Obama done for world peace?

BLAH BLAH BLAH


It's a Peacekeeping Mission. These are Peacekeeping Missiles.

 

[joepistole]

What did Ronald Reagan do? Does that excuse Obama from attacking a country, and starting a war?
I don't exculpate any previous president from any violation of Congressional powers.
Our current president is no exception.

Well that is the problem with your arguement, President Obama nor his predecessors have declared war on anyone. They have however used their powers as Commander in Chief to use military action to effect foriegn policy goals of the United States.

Your saying President Obama has declared war does not make it so. Using military forces against another country is not a declaration of war either as you have claimed. It is certianly a hostile act.

One more thing you might want to concern yourself with my friend, Obama was enforcing an act of the United Nations Security Counsel. It was not a rogue action. It was an action grounded in international law.

Football? We're not talking about sports, please. Nuclear war?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_football

So what is the authority of Congress to declare war? What does that actually mean?

I suggest a trip to the dictionary. What is the meaning of declare?

You're saying that the President of the United States has authority to do whatever he wants, anytime, anywhere?

Now when did I say that? The fact is I never said such a silly thing. The powers of the POTUS are constained by law. But the simple fact here is that there is nothing in the law that prohibits the president from using in powers as Commander in Chief to effect the foriegn policy objectives of the United States. If you don't like it then you need to change the Constitution.

 

[joepistole]

What has Obama done for world peace?

It's a Peacekeeping Mission. These are Peacekeeping Missiles.

It's a mission to keep Gaddafi from further slaughtering his people. Gaddafi has a long history of terrorism and attacks against the United States. His attacking US soldiers and blowing up a United States airliner was not a peaceful action either.

I think the world will be better off without Gaddafi. He is not a trustworthy individual. But at the same time I am not happy about the prospect of having to rebuild the Arab nations across the globe.

 

[cosmictraveler]

It's a mission to keep Gaddafi from further slaughtering his people.

Well then why didn't Obama send in troops to Iran, Syria and Yemen then, after all the government there was killing its own citizens as well. It just seems very unconstitutional as to how he is going about using the military for only countries he deems as killing their citizens but never has anything to do about stopping other dictators that do the same America helps, like Saudi Arabia as just one example. Now over 200 million just for weapons used has been thrown away as well as a few more million for aircraft downed then fuel should be considered as well to travel to Libys to handle this mess. Without any talks with Congress and no set goals as to what will happen in Libya if Qaddafi doesn't capitulate then he has exceeded his power and should be carefully examined as to how he can get by doing this sort of thing.

 

[joepistole]

Well then why didn't Obama send in troops to Iran, Syria and Yemen then, after all the government there was killing its own citizens as well. It just seems very unconstitutional as to how he is going about using the military for only countries he deems as killing their citizens but never has anything to do about stopping other dictators that do the same America helps, like Saudi Arabia as just one example. Now over 200 million just for weapons used has been thrown away as well as a few more million for aircraft downed then fuel should be considered as well to travel to Libys to handle this mess. Without any talks with Congress and no set goals as to what will happen in Libya if Qaddafi doesn't capitulate then he has exceeded his power and should be carefully examined as to how he can get by doing this sort of thing.

You may not like how President Obama uses his powers as president. But that does not mean President Obama does not have them or that he has exceeded his powers as president.

Nor is there any requirement in the Constitution that the United States be consistent in its policy and treat all nations equally. The US has a long history in inconsistent foriegn policy. President Obama is probably more consistent in foriegn policy than any of his predecessors.

 

[Giambattista]

Well that is the problem with your arguement, President Obama nor his predecessors have declared war on anyone.

Indeed they haven't.

They have however used their powers as Commander in Chief to use military action to effect foriegn policy goals of the United States.

To obvious effect. Provide some evidence in the Constitution where the President is authorized to attack and lay the groundwork to occupy another country.

Your saying President Obama has declared war does not make it so. Using military forces against another country is not a declaration of war either as you have claimed. It is certianly a hostile act.

You keep misspelling key words. I think you're engaging in disgusting un-American semantical acts.

Obama attacked another country, plain. Simple. What don't you understand about that?
Congress hasn't been consulted on this action. There hasn't been a vote.
What about that don't you understand?

One more thing you might want to concern yourself with my friend, Obama was enforcing an act of the United Nations Security Counsel. It was not a rogue action. It was an action grounded in international law.

Rogue Action? Where is that in the Constitution?

Someone post her boobies, please. Palin's boobies as footballs. Cuz that's extremely sexy.

It's a mission to keep Gaddafi from further slaughtering his people. Gaddafi has a long history of terrorism and attacks against the United States. His attacking US soldiers and blowing up a United States airliner was not a peaceful action either.

And the United States doesn't have a history of attacking other countries, or innocent civilians?

I think the world will be better off without Gaddafi. He is not a trustworthy individual. But at the same time I am not happy about the prospect of having to rebuild the Arab nations across the globe.

Dear William Kristol,
That's okay. You committed someone to do it. And sucked his dick all the way to the top.

Dems Rip Obama on Libya, Bring Up 'Impeachable Offense'

Nine liberal Democrats have found something they agree with Republicans on: President Barack Obama’s authorization of military strikes on Libya without congressional consent is unconstitutional.

Those Democrats join GOP critics, including Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and tea party favorite Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky. And Democratic Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio even suggested that Obama’s action could be an “impeachable offense.”

Sen. Paul points out that Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution says “Congress shall have power to declare war.”

“It is alarming how casually the administration talks about initiating acts of war, as though Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution does not exist,” the freshman senator says in a statement on his congressional website.
“Frankly, it is not up to the president whether or not we intervene in Libya, or set up ‘no-fly’ zones, or send troops. At least, it is not if we follow the Constitution.”

Obama has no authority to launch military attacks under the War Powers Resolution, Paul argues, because the United States has not been attacked.

“This is not our fight,” he adds. “If the administration wants to make it our fight, let them make their case before Congress and put it to a vote. I would strongly oppose such a measure, but that is the proper way to proceed.”

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland, a senior Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, echoes Paul’s view. “The United States does not have a King's army," he said in a statement Monday. "President Obama's unilateral choice to use U.S. military force in Libya is an affront to our Constitution."

 

[cosmictraveler]

You may not like how President Obama uses his powers as president. But that does not mean President Obama does not have them or that he has exceeded his powers as president.

Nor is there any requirement in the Constitution that the United States be consistent in its policy and treat all nations equally. The US has a long history in inconsistent foriegn policy. President Obama is probably more consistent in foriegn policy than any of his predecessors.

But when a Republican does it, the MEDIA bashed him even with Congresses help. It is just odd that the MEDIA doesn't seem to care about how Democrats handle things without Congresses approval. I do belive that Obama isn't making the right decisions because he would have attacked Iran after they were killing the protestors there but didn't but now he is after Libya for doing the exact same thing.

 

[Giambattista]

What has Obama done for world peace?

Not much.

 

[Pinwheel]

He should be impeached for being Kenyan.

 

[Giambattista]

But when a Republican does it, the MEDIA bashed him even with Congresses help. It is just odd that the MEDIA doesn't seem to care about how Democrats handle things without Congresses approval. I do belive that Obama isn't making the right decisions because he would have attacked Iran after they were killing the protestors there but didn't but now he is after Libya for doing the exact same thing.

Actually, it seems that certain people ARE asking about Obama's actions. But the likes of Hannity et al asking pertinent questions are nil. WHY?

And don't ask joepistole to ever ask anything along those lines of Obama either, because he won't.

Obama is a sick puppy.

Where's the birth certificate, Obama?

 

[Giambattista]

He should be impeached for being Kenyan.

Well, whether or not he's actually Kenyan born, is slightly debatable.
But not much.

He REFUSES to offer his real birth certificate.

What is it, Obama-Soetoro? Queens Medical Center, or Kapi'olani Hospital as your birth place?

Out with it.

 

[Giambattista]

Where are all the anti-Bush, anti-War people?

You've all suddenly found out that Obama is righteous?

Fakes.

You're all fakes.

 

[joepistole]

To obvious effect. Provide some evidence in the Constitution where the President is authorized to attack and lay the groundwork to occupy another country.

You are the one saying that attacking another nation is unconstitutional without a declared act of war by Congress? Please show the Constitutional basis for your claim. The unpleasant reality for you as previously pointed out is that there is no Constitutional basis for your claim.

The Constitution, as previously pointed out, gives sole command and control authority over the nations military to the president. He can order them to do whatever he wants providing those orders do not violate the constitution or the laws of the land.

You have not proven that the president has violated any statutory law or violated any legal precedents.

You keep misspelling key words. I think you're engaging in disgusting un-American semantical acts.

lol YOU are reduced to picking out typos? Transposing an a and an i is not a felony nor does it present any problem for the intelligent reader. My you would go crazy if you read something written by a Canadian or an Englishman as we share the same language we do spell words differently.

Obama attacked another country, plain. Simple. What don't you understand about that?

I understand that perfectly. But what you don't seem to understand is that the president has not violated ANY law in doing so - statutory or otherwise. And you have not proven your claim.

Congress hasn't been consulted on this action. There hasn't been a vote.
What about that don't you understand?

Show me where Congress is required to be consulted? And how do you know that Congress was not consulted. Ron Paul certianly was not consulted, nor should he have been. Congress is not required to vote on military action. President Obama has done nothing different in this regard than any of his predecessors.

Rogue Action? Where is that in the Constitution?

What don't you understand about the roll of the Commander in Chief? Apparently you have much to learn in this regard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articl...3B_Opinions_of_cabinet_secretaries.3B_Pardons

And the United States doesn't have a history of attacking other countries, or innocent civilians?

Apparently history is not your strong suit either. Ronald Reagan authorized an attack against Libya without a declaration of war or a vote in Congress and killed Gaddafi's daughter. I believe she was an innocent bystander.

Reagan authorized many other miltary actions around the globe without a vote by congress as well. George I did the same thing as well. The thing with impeachment, it requires that the president has violated some law. And you have not demonstrated same.

Dear William Kristol,
That's okay. You committed someone to do it. And sucked his dick all the way to the top.

Dems Rip Obama on Libya, Bring Up 'Impeachable Offense'

Oh, now we escalate the argumentum ad hominem. When on can confuse honesty and rational thought with a sexual act, then it is a pretty sad day indeed. Ad hominem is not a subsitute for evidence and reason. And is it suprising to find that extremists from both ends of the political spectrum find issuses upon which they can gain a little attention? No it is not. Extremists are so desperate for attention they even make stuff up. They use every opportunity to gain a little attention. Because no rational sane person would pay the Ron Pauls and the Dennis Kucinichs much heed were it not for their insane antics.

 

[cosmictraveler]

joepistole

Why didn't he start a war with Iran when they did the same thing to their people? :shrug:

 

[fedr808]

Obama attacked Libya by authorizing, without Congressional assent, 100+ cruise missiles launched (according to official media) onto sovereign Libyan territory.

What is Obama doing?


President Obama Sidesteps Congress: Ron Paul Addresses Obama's Attack on Libya

Dennis Kucinich: Obama's Action Outside the Constitution





Is this a violation of the United States Constitution?

My opinion, yes.

He declared war by circumventing Congress and using whatever feeble authority the United Nations has by launching 110 or more Tomahawk missiles at various targets in Libya.

If launching a 100+ missiles at a country isn't an act of war, what is???

Where does he derive his authority from?

Is this an impeachable offense?

How is it a violation of the constitution?

He did not declare war. Learn to read. He is doing the US's part in an international coalition to enforce a no fly zone over Libya.

And I hate to break it to you, but Ron Paul is a moron. Just like Mcpalin and the "hopeless" tea party.

 

[fedr808]

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but people DIE in war. Its not some sort of joke you know. When you blow sh*t up, people die.

Gadafi has done far more damage then the US has.

What, do you actually delude yourself into thinking things were better off as they were?