[Peace-discuss] Congress Must Debate the Libya War
C. G. Estabrook
galliher at illinois.edu
Mon Mar 21 18:42:22 CDT 2011
Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world
Like a Colossus, and we petty men
Walk under his huge legs and peep about
To find ourselves dishonorable graves.
Men at some time are masters of their fates:
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings.
On 3/21/11 6:28 PM, E. Wayne Johnson wrote:
> Obama lied.
>
> That's what he does.
>
> We can't seem to blame him for it any more
> than one can blame Limburger cheese for its odor
> or blame narcissi for being yellow. Those things
> are intrinsic to the program.
>
> At this point, it is much worse than useless to /politely beseech the
> Congress/ to
> do anything at all. The problem is not with the Congress, the cheese,
> the bulbs, or even Mr Obama.
>
>
>
>
> On 3/22/2011 2:53 AM, Robert Naiman wrote:
>>
>> I don't know if you are being sarcastic. The point here is to reach out to
>> people who are undecided about or supportive of the Libya intervention and
>> point out to them that a dangerous precedent is being set if there is no
>> Congressional debate. According to a recent CNN poll, a clear majority
>> support the intervention right now (last week, it was the other way; this is
>> typical - typically there is a significant swing to support once it is a fait
>> accompli.)
>>
>> Incidentally, here is Obama on Presidential authority to bomb other
>> countries, 2007:
>>
>> Q. In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional
>> authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from
>> Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected
>> nuclear sites -- a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)
>>
>> A.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.
>>
>> http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/CandidateQA/ObamaQA/
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:25 PM, E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag
>> <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>> wrote:
>>
>> I understand the threat much more clearly and it really does make so more
>> sense to worry about war when it is framed in the spectral context of
>> "President Palin".
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>> And this one woman, she was 23 or 24 And she was laying on the bed And
>> you knew she was going to die... And, erh, we gave her a bottle of
>> shampoo...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/22/2011 1:33 AM, Robert Naiman wrote:
>>>
>>> http://my.firedoglake.com/robertnaiman/2011/03/21/congress-must-debate-the-libya-war/
>>>
>>>
>>> Congress Must Debate the Libya War
>>> <http://my.firedoglake.com/robertnaiman/2011/03/21/congress-must-debate-the-libya-war/>
>>>
>>> By: Robert Naiman
>>> <http://my.firedoglake.com/members/robertnaiman/> Monday March 21, 2011
>>> 1:12 pm
>>>
>>> TweetTweet
>>> <http://my.firedoglake.com/robertnaiman/2011/03/21/congress-must-debate-the-libya-war/#>
>>>
>>> digg
>>> <http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmy.firedoglake.com%2Frobertnaiman%2F2011%2F03%2F21%2Fcongress-must-debate-the-libya-war%2F&title=Congress+Must+Debate+the+Libya+War>
>>> stumbleupon
>>> <http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmy.firedoglake.com%2Frobertnaiman%2F2011%2F03%2F21%2Fcongress-must-debate-the-libya-war%2F&title=Congress+Must+Debate+the+Libya+War>
>>>
>>> The U.S. is now at war in a third Muslim country, according to the
>>> “official tally” (that is, counting Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya but not
>>> Pakistan or Yemen, for example.) But Congress has never authorized or
>>> debated the U.S. military intervention in Libya. (A sharply disputed
>>> claim holds that the Pakistan and Yemen actions are covered by the 2001
>>> authorization of military force, but no-one has dared to argue that the
>>> 2001 AUMF covers Libya.)
>>>
>>> Some will no doubt claim that the President is acting in Libya within
>>> his authority as Commander-in-Chief. But this is an extremely dangerous
>>> claim.
>>>
>>> To put it crudely: as a matter of logic, if President Obama can bomb
>>> Libya without Congressional authorization, then President Palin can bomb
>>> Iran without Congressional authorization. If, God forbid, we ever get to
>>> that fork in the road, you can bet your bottom dollar that the advocates
>>> of bombing Iran will invoke Congressional silence now as justification
>>> for their claims of unilateral Presidential authority to bomb anywhere,
>>> anytime.
>>>
>>> Some Members of Congress have strongly objected to President Obama’s
>>> bombing of Libya without Congressional approval.
>>>
>>> On the Democratic side, John Larson, chair of the Democratic Caucus in
>>> the House, called for President Obama to seek congressional approval.
>>> Reps. Jerrold Nadler, Donna Edwards, Mike Capuano, Dennis Kucinich,
>>> Maxine Waters, Rob Andrews, Sheila Jackson Lee, Barbara Lee and Eleanor
>>> Holmes Norton “all strongly raised objections to the constitutionality
>>> of the president’s actions” during a Saturday call organized by Larson,
>>> the /Politico /reports
>>> <http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51595.html>.
>>>
>>> “They consulted the Arab League. They consulted the United Nations.
>>> They did not consult the United States Congress,” one Democrat[ic]
>>> lawmaker said of the White House. “They’re creating wreckage, and
>>> they can’t obviate that by saying there are no boots on the ground.
>>> … There aren’t boots on the ground; there are Tomahawks in the air.”
>>>
>>> “Almost everybody who spoke was opposed to any unilateral actions or
>>> decisions being made by the president, and most of us expressed our
>>> constitutional concerns. There should be a resolution and there
>>> should be a debate so members of Congress can decide whether or not
>>> we enter in whatever this action is being called,” added another
>>> House Democrat opposed to the Libyan operation.
>>>
>>> “Whose side are we on? This appears to be more of a civil war than
>>> some kind of a revolution. Who are protecting? Are we with the
>>> people that are supposedly opposed to [Qadhafi]? You think they have
>>> a lot of people with him? If he is deposed, who will we be dealing
>>> with? There are a lot of questions here from members.”
>>>
>>> On the Republican side, Senator Richard Lugar, ranking Member on Senate
>>> Foreign Relations, told /CBS/‘ Face the Nation yesterday that if we’re
>>> going to war with Libya, we ought to have a declaration of war by the
>>> Congress:
>>>
>>> A memo distributed to Republican aides in the Senate Armed Services and
>>> Foreign Relations Committee made the case that Congressional
>>> authorization is necessary and used Barack Obama’s own words to make the
>>> case, /ABC/ reported
>>> <http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/congress-vote-libya-fly-zone/story?id=13167045>.
>>>
>>> The memo quotes Obama when he was in the Senate and there were
>>> concerns that then-President George W. Bush would take strike Iran.
>>>
>>> “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,”
>>> the memo quotes then-Senator Obama saying on Dec. 20, 2007.
>>>
>>> In times like this, you can be sure some journalist will marvel at the
>>> “strange bedfellows
>>> <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/20/obama-libya_n_838219.html>”
>>> coalition of Democrats and Republicans standing up to the President. But
>>> there’s nothing strange about this bed. Everyone who wants to live in a
>>> constitutional republic belongs in this bed. Everyone who wants to hold
>>> the Administration to its promise of a “limited intervention” aimed at
>>> “protecting civilians,” rather than overthrowing the Libyan government,
>>> and to avoid “mission creep” from the former to the latter, belongs in
>>> this bed.
>>>
>>> Congressional debate is a key means of compelling the Administration to
>>> clearly state its case and its objectives, to be honest and transparent
>>> about the potential cost of its proposed policies, and to limit its
>>> actions to its stated objectives; and to force Members of Congress to go
>>> on the record, in opposition or in support, and to state clearly, if
>>> they support, what it is that they support. On cost, for example: each
>>> Tomahawk missile is reported to cost on the order of a million dollars.
>>> So, firing 110 of them over the weekend cost about $100 million, far
>>> more than House Republicans cut from National Public Radio with great
>>> fanfare. Shouldn’t Congress consider this expenditure?
>>>
>>> Two days into the military intervention, there was already sharp dispute
>>> over whether the military intervention that has unfolded has already
>>> gone beyond what the UN Security Council authorized and what the Arab
>>> League endorsed.
>>>
>>> Yesterday, the /New York Times/ reported
>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/world/africa/21libya.html>:
>>>
>>> A day after a summit meeting in Paris set the military operation in
>>> motion, some Arab participants in the agreement expressed
>>> unhappiness with the way the strikes were unfolding. The former
>>> chairman of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, told Egyptian state media
>>> that he was calling for an emergency Arab League meeting to discuss
>>> the situation in the Arab world and particularly Libya.
>>>
>>> “What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a
>>> no-fly zone, and what we want is the protection of civilians and not
>>> the bombardment of more civilians,” he said, referring to Libyan
>>> government claims that allied bombardment had killed dozens of
>>> civilians in and near Tripoli.
>>>
>>> Today, Moussa appeared to walk back
>>> <http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110321/wl_nm/us_libya_arabs_moussa_1> these remarks.
>>>
>>> But with Benghazi apparently no longer under Libyan government threat,
>>> and with Western bombs falling in Tripoli, this dispute over the scope
>>> of Western bombing is virtually certain to intensify.
>>>
>>> You can debate the constitutional issue of war powers until the cows
>>> come home; but as a practical matter, if Congress doesn’t formally
>>> address the issue, such debate isn’t very relevant. If a majority of the
>>> House and the Senate support the present US military intervention in
>>> Libya, let them say so on the record, at least, by voting for a
>>> resolution to authorize military force. If the majority of the House or
>>> Senate are opposed, let them say so on the record. A minimum standard
>>> for transparency in government is that the House and the Senate go on
>>> the record for or against a new war.
>>>
>>> *UPDATE:* Former MoveOn and Democracy for America staffer Ilya Sheyman,
>>> who is exploring a run for Congress in Illinois’ 10th Congressional
>>> District, has a petition <http://www.ilyasheyman.com/on-libya/> calling
>>> for Congress to debate the war in Libya.
>>>
>>> /Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign Policy
>>> <http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/>./
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Robert Naiman
>>> Policy Director
>>> Just Foreign Policy
>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org <http://www.justforeignpolicy.org>
>>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org <mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Robert Naiman
>> Policy Director
>> Just Foreign Policy
>> www.justforeignpolicy.org <http://www.justforeignpolicy.org>
>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org <mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20110321/423760d9/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list