[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse"

"Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD"

"Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy"

Woodworking and Construction Hacks

"CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination"

"NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law"

"Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing"

Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine

Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn.

After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning

Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate

Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending.

Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar”

"Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny"

"Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is"

Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner.

Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him

South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien

GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis

Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash

New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms

Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania

Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally

"It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala

Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump

Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive'

(Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

U.S. Constitution
See other U.S. Constitution Articles

Title: President Obama Goes to War - Without Congress
Source: American Thinker
URL Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog ... dent_obama_goes_to_war_wi.html
Published: Mar 20, 2011
Author: Wesley Clark, MD
Post Date: 2011-03-20 16:49:31 by We The People
Keywords: None
Views: 117601
Comments: 105

Regardless of one's inclination toward the "freedom fighters" and the "monster" in Libya, or the wisdom of United States military intervention, there are certain formalities that are required, and that President Obama and his administration, including Secretary of State Clinton, appear determined to ignore, in violation of both the Constitution and United States Law.

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution specifies that it is the Congress that has the power to declare war. United States Code (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548), the War Powers Act, specifically states that the president may undertake the use of military force only in the case of "... a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces." It further states that the President must consult with Congress, "...in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities ..."

Membership in the United Nations does not grant the Security Council the authority to order U.S. forces into action, and being the President does not permit Obama to violate the Constitution and the Law, to commit an act of war without the authorization of the People, through their Congress.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 75.

#1. To: We The People (#0)

.

and not a FUCKING word from so the called CONSTITUTIONAL and TRADITIONAL "CONSERVATIVES" meme here.

Ah yes.

Affectation as opposed to natural honesty.

Bullshit is the language.

Self is the true cause.

"Send lawyers guns and money, the sh!t has hit the fan!"

Mad Dog  posted on  2011-03-22   18:02:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Mad Dog (#1)

I'm absolutely amazed that the Republicans, ANY Republicans, are not saying a word about this. The only outrage I've heard has come from Democrats, unless I've just missed it.

We The People  posted on  2011-03-23   19:11:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: We The People (#2)

I'm absolutely amazed that the Republicans, ANY Republicans, are not saying a word about this. The only outrage I've heard has come from Democrats, unless I've just missed it.

The War Powers Act gives the President 60 days before he needs Congressional approval.

lucysmom  posted on  2011-03-24   0:19:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: lucysmom (#6) (Edited)

The War Powers Act gives the President 60 days before he needs Congressional approval.

That is not true.

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548) was a United States Congress joint resolution providing that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or if the United States is already under attack or serious threat.[citation needed] The War Powers Resolution requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war.

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

We The People  posted on  2011-03-26   17:28:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: We The People (#25)

That is not true.

Not so fast.

What does that little "[citation needed]" following the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or if the United States is already under attack or serious threat. mean?

lucysmom  posted on  2011-03-26   21:20:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: lucysmom (#26)

Further...

www.law.cornell.edu/uscod..._50_00001543----000-.html

(a) Written report; time of submission; circumstances necessitating submission; information reported

In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced—

(1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;

(2) into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or

(3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation;

the President shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth—

(A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces;

(B) the constitutional and legislative authority under which such introduction took place; and

(C) the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.

(b) Other information reported

The President shall provide such other information as the Congress may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United States Armed Forces abroad.

(c) Periodic reports; semiannual requirement

Whenever United States Armed Forces are introduced into hostilities or into any situation described in subsection (a) of this section, the President shall, so long as such armed forces continue to be engaged in such hostilities or situation, report to the Congress periodically on the status of such hostilities or situation as well as on the scope and duration of such hostilities or situation, but in no event shall he report to the Congress less often than once every six months.

We The People  posted on  2011-03-27   10:28:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: We The People (#28)

the President shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth—

Obama's written report:

www.whitehouse.gov/the-pr...encement-operations-libya

lucysmom  posted on  2011-03-27   11:58:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: lucysmom (#32)

Obama's written report:

www.whitehouse.gov/the-pr...encement-operations-libya

TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE

March 21, 2011

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

At approximately 3:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time, on March 19, 2011, at my direction, U.S. military forces commenced operations to assist an international effort authorized by the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council and undertaken with the support of European allies and Arab partners, to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe and address the threat posed to international peace and security by the crisis in Libya. As part of the multilateral response authorized under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973, U.S. military forces, under the command of Commander, U.S. Africa Command, began a series of strikes against air defense systems and military airfields for the purposes of preparing a no-fly zone. These strikes will be limited in their nature, duration, and scope. Their purpose is to support an international coalition as it takes all necessary measures to enforce the terms of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973. These limited U.S. actions will set the stage for further action by other coalition partners.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 authorized Member States, under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in Libya, including the establishment and enforcement of a "no-fly zone" in the airspace of Libya. United States military efforts are discrete and focused on employing unique U.S. military capabilities to set the conditions for our European allies and Arab partners to carry out the measures authorized by the U.N. Security Council Resolution.

Muammar Qadhafi was provided a very clear message that a cease-fire must be implemented immediately. The international community made clear that all attacks against civilians had to stop; Qadhafi had to stop his forces from advancing on Benghazi; pull them back from Ajdabiya, Misrata, and Zawiya; and establish water, electricity, and gas supplies to all areas. Finally, humanitarian assistance had to be allowed to reach the people of Libya.

Although Qadhafi's Foreign Minister announced an immediate cease-fire, Qadhafi and his forces made no attempt to implement such a cease-fire, and instead continued attacks on Misrata and advanced on Benghazi. Qadhafi's continued attacks and threats against civilians and civilian populated areas are of grave concern to neighboring Arab nations and, as expressly stated in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973, constitute a threat to the region and to international peace and security. His illegitimate use of force (irony?) not only is causing the deaths of substantial numbers of civilians among his own people, but also is forcing many others to flee to neighboring countries, thereby destabilizing the peace and security of the region. Left unaddressed, the growing instability in Libya could ignite wider instability in the Middle East, with dangerous consequences to the national security interests of the United States. Qadhafi's defiance of the Arab League, as well as the broader international community moreover, represents a lawless challenge to the authority of the Security Council and its efforts to preserve stability in the region. Qadhafi has forfeited his responsibility to protect his own citizens and created a serious need for immediate humanitarian assistance and protection, with any delay only putting more civilians at risk.

The United States has not deployed ground forces into Libya. United States forces are conducting a limited and well-defined mission in support of international efforts to protect civilians and prevent a humanitarian disaster. Accordingly, U.S. forces have targeted the Qadhafi regime's air defense systems, command and control structures, and other capabilities of Qadhafi's armed forces used to attack civilians and civilian populated areas. We will seek a rapid, but responsible, transition of operations to coalition, regional, or international organizations that are postured to continue activities as may be necessary to realize the objectives of U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1970 and 1973.

For these purposes, I have directed these actions, which are in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States, pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct U.S. foreign relations and as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive.

I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution. I appreciate the support of the Congress in this action.

BARACK OBAMA

We The People  posted on  2011-03-27   13:10:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: We The People (#49)

Okay.

Again, what is your point? Obama explained his reason for acting as he did. That explanation fulfills his War Powers Act requirements.

lucysmom  posted on  2011-03-27   13:17:48 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: lucysmom (#53) (Edited)

Obama explained his reason for acting as he did. That explanation fulfills his War Powers Act requirements.

Come now. You're an intelligent person. You can't possibly believe that statement.

If that's the case, then ANY president can take this nation into hostilities or war and his only requirement is to explain his actions?

We The People  posted on  2011-03-27   13:21:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: We The People (#54)

Come now. You're an intelligent person. You can't possibly believe that statement.

For the moment, yes.

It ain't done yet.

lucysmom  posted on  2011-03-27   13:26:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: lucysmom (#58)

For the moment, yes.

It ain't done yet.

My hunch about your intelligence was correct.

And, that was meant as a compliment, not an insult.

We The People  posted on  2011-03-27   13:29:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: We The People (#60) (Edited)

My hunch about your intelligence was correct.

And, that was meant as a compliment, not an insult.

Makes me think of the song; I'm Living Up To Her Low Expectations

lucysmom  posted on  2011-03-27   13:37:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#75. To: lucysmom (#64)

Makes me think of the song; I'm Living Up To Her Low Expectations

Sorry, I don't know the song.

I plugged the title into youtube but just got political stuff.

We The People  posted on  2011-03-27   13:57:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 75.

#84. To: We The People (#75)

video.ca.msn.com/watch/vi...aryle-singletary/hahivqw9

lucysmom  posted on  2011-03-27 14:26:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 75.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com