Obama's War: Grounds for Impeachment?

[sifreak21]

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?

didnt even read the op because i truely believe your out of touch with reality

 

[joepistole]

If Obama is looking for a new spin doctor, I think joepistole is an excellent candidate.

What is the mater Pinwheel, is the truth getting a little uncomfortable?

 

[sifreak21]

After the experience in Iraq of what happens if you have no post war plan, surely there is a Libya post war plan.
Surely a "We need change", sharp as a knife, basket ball playing President like Obama wouldn't make that dumb mistake.
There is a plan, isn't there?

Curious coincidence.
Cost of sending a Tornado on a single sortie, about £30,000, just for the fuel!
(Bombs are extra)
Number of Air Missions in Libya to date, 30,000
Estimated number of Civilian deaths, 30,000

Whoa. Good shot, Obama! Straight into the casket.

where exactly are you getting your information? and please remind me under what administration the war was started under

 

[sifreak21]

Got any examples of war crimes committed by someone like, say, Saif Qaddafi? After all, the International Criminal Court claimed that he's a war criminal. Then again, they also said they had him in custody...

There have been stories since nearly day one about massacres. If you are really interested... check the top of this page, I reckon. Not that it stops with that.

Of course, we are told to believe whatever the gov tells us about Qaddafi's crimes, but naturally the evidence will need to be massive to prove anything about the opposite side. that's the way it always goes. You oppose the U.S. or some NATO coalition, you are guilty by default.



Unless of course you are NATO. Then again, jail takes too long. Just bomb the F*** out of them usually does the trick.

here is an idea how about answering questions asked of you and quit dodging questions asked of you

 

[kx000]

Your next president.. who knows who it will be but im probably smarter than him. Maybe it will be a woman.. but she'll still be dumb.

 

[spidergoat]

Congress??? How about the shit-for-brains bloody-useless Supreme Court? It's their job to make sure everyone respects the Constitution. Since the beginning of this endless Rooseveltian Era, the Constitution has been nothing but toilet paper and the Supremes just sit on their butts and watch it happen.

I don't think they can make up their own cases.

 

[spidergoat]

After the experience in Iraq of what happens if you have no post war plan, surely there is a Libya post war plan.
Surely a "We need change", sharp as a knife, basket ball playing President like Obama wouldn't make that dumb mistake.
There is a plan, isn't there?

It's not our revolution, so we need no plan. That's what's so brilliant about it!

 

[Captain Kremmen]

where exactly are you getting your information? and please remind me under what administration the war was started under

What's your point?
If you are saying the figures are too low, you are probably right.

Here's some information on costs:

THE COST OF THE WAR​

TORNADO
There are usually four Tornados in each sortie. The total cost of flying time there and back per plane is up to £210,000. Each aircraft is equipped with Storm Shadow missiles. These cost around £500,000 each - so if each plane fires two missiles the cost is £4million. So the total cost of one four Tornado sortie is almost £5million.

OTHER COSTS
Other British assets in play include C17 and C130 Hercules transport planes at £42,000 and £12,000 per flying hour. E3D Sentry AWACS radar aircraft scan the skies for enemy planes, at £33,000 an hour. Frigates HMS Cumberland and HMS Westminster cost £90,000-a-day to run.

SUBMARINE
Trafalgar class sub HMS Triumph has been firing Tomahawk Cruise missiles from the Med. The sub costs £200,000 a day to run and each missile costs £500,000, with up to 10 fired so far.

TYPHOON
There are 10 £70 million Typhoon jets which are new and cost more to run than Tornados. They fly at 65,000ft, at twice the speed of sound and costs per mission are as high as £350,000 per jet.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/u...-the-sky-by-allied-airstrikes-86908-23011916/


Deaths. Estimated. Probably far more.
http://www.news24.com/Africa/News/US-Libya-death-toll-could-be-at-30-000-20110427


Not sure what you mean about the administration.
Could you simply say what you want to say?
So far you've just asked questions.

 

[spidergoat]

Cost is not much more than training missions, what's the big deal? Sure people got killed, but they were going to get killed anyway, we might have prevented even greater deaths had Ghaddafi been permitted to purge the country of rebels.

 

[Giambattista]

Who is the last US president who never authorized the US military to attack people in other nations without first getting a declaration of war signed by Congress?

Your statement is just a bit confusing. Are you meaning to say, who is the last president who waged a full scale attack on another country without Congressional approval, in fact, in defiance of Congress?
I wonder if Iran-Contra counts? I don't think it's ever been as upfront and straightforward as Libya.

The founders were correct that congress not the president should have this power but congress won't do it's job.

Preach that gospel!

That is not the issue. You are the one who wants to put people in jail. In order to do that, one ususally needs proof of a crime.

I am?
GB: Will they take responsibility as well for any war crimes committed by the peace loving freedom movement?

That statement is rather open, more alluding to the possibility rather than the hard reality of these supposed war crimes, although I feel confident that the hard reality is affirmative of them.

There have certianly been a lot of stories on both sides. But you should still have some evidence before you go around throwing people into jails or worse.

Sure. And that goes for the ICC, NATO, France, et al. Is it unreasonable to not launch undeclared, un-Constitutional wars over allegations of "atrocities" in a country before getting solid evidence to confirm those allegations?

Or does it work like this...

Originally Posted by Giambattista
Of course, we are told to believe whatever the gov tells us about Qaddafi's crimes, but naturally the evidence will need to be massive to prove anything about the opposite side. that's the way it always goes. You oppose the U.S. or some NATO coalition, you are guilty by default.

This sounds like a paranoid fantasy to me. One can speculate of many things, but evidence is necessary if you want to throw people in jail - assuming you are not a totalitarian and believe in human rights.

Again, it appears the burden of proof in Libya is only on this illegal war's detractors, and you seem to be confirming this with your exhortations to have evidence before arresting someone. Everytime the rebels make an accusation against the loyalists, it is regurgitated over and over unquestioningly by the usual media sources.

We can talk then, about probable cause and sufficiency of evidence in arresting someone for a crime. We can also talk about aerial bombardment in high population density areas. Is the burden of proof similar i.e. NATO's word is as good as a guilty verdict?

It is a well known fact that Libya (Gadhafi) supported terrorism. He admitted as much when he paid damages for Lockerbee.

Perhaps. And then again, perhaps the story we have been given about Lockerbie isn't the full truth. I have heard evidence that does not point to Gadhafi/Qaddafi/Kaddafi (how many spellings must we endure?!!?!? ).

Sometimes it seems that such people, while there are legitimate concerns about their characters, they are also easy targets for scapegoating.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Cost is not much more than training missions, what's the big deal? Sure people got killed, but they were going to get killed anyway, we might have prevented even greater deaths had Ghaddafi been permitted to purge the country of rebels.

Maybe the rebels wouldn't have rebelled at all if they had not been encouraged to do so. Were promises of unlimited support made? Who knows what was happening in the country before this intervention?

One explanation for Ghaddafi's sudden retreat was that he thought there was a ground invasion by US troops imminent.
Perhaps he was right.

 

[Giambattista]

If Obama is looking for a new spin doctor, I think joepistole is an excellent candidate.

He's nauseatingly good at it isn't he. I think joepistole may actually be Michelle Obama...

Sorry to see you ban yourself, you tyrant!

Number of Air Missions in Libya to date, 30,000
Estimated number of Civilian deaths, 30,000

Whoa. Good shot, Obama! Straight into the casket.

Casketball!
That's a lot of bombing missions. I wonder what the ratio of kills from Qawddawfhee (an original spelling, for once) forces versus Rebel/NATO forces is?

 

[joepistole]

I am?
GB: Will they take responsibility as well for any war crimes committed by the peace loving freedom movement?

That statement is rather open, more alluding to the possibility rather than the hard reality of these supposed war crimes, although I feel confident that the hard reality is affirmative of them.

Sure. And that goes for the ICC, NATO, France, et al. Is it unreasonable to not launch undeclared, un-Constitutional wars over allegations of "atrocities" in a country before getting solid evidence to confirm those allegations?

Or does it work like this...

Again, it appears the burden of proof in Libya is only on this illegal war's detractors, and you seem to be confirming this with your exhortations to have evidence before arresting someone. Everytime the rebels make an accusation against the loyalists, it is regurgitated over and over unquestioningly by the usual media sources.

We can talk then, about probable cause and sufficiency of evidence in arresting someone for a crime. We can also talk about aerial bombardment in high population density areas. Is the burden of proof similar i.e. NATO's word is as good as a guilty verdict?

Perhaps. And then again, perhaps the story we have been given about Lockerbie isn't the full truth. I have heard evidence that does not point to Gadhafi/Qaddafi/Kaddafi (how many spellings must we endure?!!?!? ).

Sometimes it seems that such people, while there are legitimate concerns about their characters, they are also easy targets for scapegoating.

It is pretty clear that you are immune to facts and reason. You avoid the facts; engage in ad hominmen; evasion and misrepresentation in order to push your point of view which is clearly not grounded in reasoned thinking.

The bottom line here is if you want to strart throwing people in jail, in a civil society, you need evidence. And the long and short of it is, you have nothing but inflamatory rhetoric - kinda of reminds me of the American right wing.

 

[Giambattista]

Since the beginning of this endless Rooseveltian Era, the Constitution has been nothing but toilet paper and the Supremes just sit on their butts and watch it happen.

You mean the Golden Toilet Bench?

I heard someone remark about a case they presented to the Supreme Court of the US. He said the Supremes (not to be confused with the music group who have probably caused far less damage) were self-absorbed and arrogant and acted like everyone in the court were recipients of some great favor by the justices to even allow them into their presence.
I think he mentioned Ginsberg looking very comical since her stature barely brings her up above the desk and they sit in huge chairs that are akin to thrones.

I never forget that description. :worship:

 

[Giambattista]

It is pretty clear that you are immune to facts and reason. You avoid the facts; engage in ad hominmen; evasion and misrepresentation in order to push your point of view which is clearly not grounded in reasoned thinking.

Evasion. I see you and sifreak both seem to have ignored when I referenced "at the top of this page"...

There have been stories since nearly day one about massacres. If you are really interested... check the top of this page, I reckon. Not that it stops with that.

Here. Get started on that.
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2736910&postcount=141

I will do my best to post more. I have followed this from early on, and I guess I take it for granted that others pay attention to other sources besides the psychophants in the establishment media.

The bottom line here is if you want to strart throwing people in jail, in a civil society, you need evidence.

And what is the level of evidence required before a foreign coalition can start bombing cities?

And the long and short of it is, you have nothing but inflamatory rhetoric - kinda of reminds me of the American right wing.

Duh...

 

[Giambattista]

didnt even read the op because i truely believe your out of touch with reality

Which version of reality? Specify, please. And you feel like criticizing me, without reading any other posts? Which is maybe why you said this:

here is an idea how about answering questions asked of you and quit dodging questions asked of you

How bout reading? Both my response to joe as well as the upper part of page 8..

where exactly are you getting your information? and please remind me under what administration the war was started under

The illegal Libyan war started under Obama, or at least the US part of it.
Thank you.

It's not our revolution, so we need no plan. That's what's so brilliant about it!

You and joepistole need to high tail it to Vegas for a wedding, pronto. There is no reason why your two minds shouldn't become one!

 

[spidergoat]

Maybe the rebels wouldn't have rebelled at all if they had not been encouraged to do so. Were promises of unlimited support made? Who knows what was happening in the country before this intervention?

One explanation for Ghaddafi's sudden retreat was that he thought there was a ground invasion by US troops imminent.
Perhaps he was right.

I think it was the Arab Spring that encouraged them to do so in the first place. We didn't want to make the same mistake George H.W. Bush made in Iraq, not to support the native rebellion. Isn't it better when the change comes from within? And we do want change from dictatorial rule, don't we?

 

[Giambattista]

Order: Kill non-mainstream reporters in Libya, What U.S. is hiding

The Examiner learned in communications from human rights defenders and independent journalists throughout Monday that they were shaken with news of 1300 Libyans killed and 5000 wounded Saturday, plus, the U.S. allegedly ordered Targeted Killings of Voltaire Network reporters, Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya and Thierry Meyssan, non-mainstream reporters in Libya covering the NATO war, while other independent reporters there are being fired upon and one, Mohammed Nabbous was killed Saturday according to ABC News. In an interview with journalist Don DeBar on KPFA radio, he reported most mainstream "news" about Libya has been untrue, as alternative news sites heavily report but are increasingly persecuted according to their recent reports.

...
...

"The conflict in Libya has claimed the life of another journalist. A sniper shot Mohammed Nabbous, 28-year old resident of Benghazi and founder of its first independent TV news channel Libya Alhurra, on Saturday night," reported ABC's Mark Colvin on Monday.
....
"He was also an important source for foreign networks like Al Jazeera, CNN and NPR who regularly interviewed him and rebroadcast his videos. We also relied on his video updates to confirm stories coming out of Benghazi," stated Colvin for ABC.
...
"What is needed right now is not despair on our part, but the dissemination of information, which NATO has decided is the most important battleground," stated independent journalist, WBAIX radio announcer Don DeBar, formerly with NPR's WBAI.

DeBar told Dupré in communications early Tuesday that Nabbous, unlike painted by ABC, was "clearly a U.S. agent."

"He founded Libya's version of al-Hurra," said DeBar.

According to Wikipedia "Alhurra (or al-Hurra) (Arabic: الحرّة‎, al-Ḥurrah [alˈħurra],[note] 'The free') is a United States-based satellite TV channel, sponsored by the U.S. government..."

"The station is forbidden from broadcasting itself within the U.S. under the 1948 Smith-Mundt Act concerning the broadcast of propaganda." (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Nabbous and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alhurra)

DeBar elaborated on U.S. media propaganda when interviewed by Press TV on Monday, showing documented photographic samples:

"Now the Russians, who conduct satellite surveillance of planet Earth, because they have been prepared for 50 years for a nuclear strike from the United States, said that, on the specific dates that [Gadaffi] charges were delineated that [he] had attacked his people from the air, here are the photographs: there are no planes in the air, there were no aeral activities conducted whatsoever. (Watch: 'US liable for civilian deaths in Libya', Press TV, August 22, 2011)​

"This has not made the media in the west at all - including on programs like Democracy Now! and Al Jazeera which is carried on progressive radio networks, if you can believe that, in the United States," he told Press TV.

...

The Réseau Voltaire, (Voltaire Network), an international non-profit organisation independent news group, based in Paris, released a brief statement late on Monday about its two journalists in Libya targeted for killings. (Also see: "Obama targeted killings lawsuit spotlights American civilians," Dupré, D. Examiner, September 2, 2010)

"From the Rixos [Hotel], the order was given by so-called "journalists" from the U.S. to bring down Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya and Thierry Meyssan."

The statement was released in an short newsletter by Voltaire news group saying that the individuals who gave the orders "have been identified and their names will be released in due course."

...

An interview conducted early Monday morning with Voltaire's Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya showed him in hiding, and trapped in Tripoli. (See embedded Youtube.)

"I'm confined in a place where I can't move," cleary unnerved and appearing to be in a very small space as he spoke, Nazemroaya said.

He described, partially in graphic details, some of the traumatizing events he has seen including massacres by NATO and the children.

"There have been massive, -- atrocious, -- criminal bombings" against the Libyan people he emphatically reported.

"I didn't sleep the other night because the bombings would not stop."

"Most reporting is being done from inside or near the journalists' hotels," DeBar stated.

"Outside the primary location, snipers have fired at - and in one case, shot - non-mainstream journalists."

According to DeBar, only reporters "embedded with the invaders" have been permitted to shoot footage outdoors.

Libya's media has had its power cut off, so is off the air he said.

There's a lot in that article.

I watched several of Nazemroaya's videos, particularly on Sunday night when the fighting escalated. I haven't heard much about him now. I heard the Red Cross escorted them to another hotel, but what happened since then is unknown. In the later videos, he was clearly scared and shaken, and not because of Gaddafi's troops.

 

[spidergoat]

A lot of accusation but no evidence. Why should we trust the non-democratic regime of Putin? They have been against invading Libya from the start!

 

[Giambattista]

NATO, Rebels Accused of War Crimes in Libya

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is being heavily criticized for civilian casualties and a series of bombings apparently targeting essential non-military infrastructure in Libya, with some observers calling the actions war crimes. The Libyan rebels being supported by coalition forces have also been accused of wanton savagery and even crimes against humanity.

Most recently, a NATO bombing campaign near the Libyan city of Zlitan earlier this month reportedly killed almost 100 civilians — more than half of them women and children. The attack sparked a new wave of outrage worldwide as journalists and activists called for investigations.

Representatives of the Gadhafi regime took a large group of foreign reporters to the site. They were reportedly shown bodies of women and children, including the remains of a baby. Multiple bombed out homes were also presented to international journalists.

“Today was yet another crime by NATO against civilians,” Libyan regime spokesman Moussa Ibrahim was quoted by Fox News as saying about the attack, noting that over 1,000 civilians had been killed by NATO so far. “They are killing women and children. This happens every day. Help us to stop this madness.”

The Western military alliance defended the strikes, saying they were against “legitimate” targets. According to NATO spokespeople, the coalition believed the town was being used as a staging ground for pro-Gadhafi forces and tribes aimed at repelling an upcoming rebel invasion of Tripoli.

But the victims cited in news reports said that was not the case. "NATO bombed us, for what reason? We did not do anything to them. We are civilian people," a man who lost his daughter and his home in the strike was quoted as saying in The Australian newspaper. “Why did they kill us? We had peace in my house with our family. What did we do to the other countries?"

International law expert Franklin Lamb, writing in the Foreign Policy Journal from Tripoli over the weekend, accused NATO of committing a “massacre” after visiting the bombing site. Citing international lawyers, U.S. congressional staffers and human rights activists visiting the war-torn nation, he charged that NATO had “committed war crimes and crimes against humanity.”

...
...​

The internationally backed rebels trying to seize power in Libya have also been accused of numerous war crimes and wide-scale barbarity — some of it too horrendous even to mention. Numerous gruesome videos have been posted online showing beheadings, lynchings and other crimes, proving that at least some of the allegations are true.

“The evidence provided by these videos makes clear that the rebels' conception of warfare has more in common with that of Al-Qaeda than that of the Geneva Conventions,” explained John Rosenthal in a piece for the U.S.-based Hudson Institute. “The abuses documented in the videos could serve as textbook examples of precisely the sort of savagery that the Geneva Conventions were supposed to prevent.”

As The New American and countless other sources have reported, the NATO-backed rebels are, in many cases, led by self-described leaders of al Qaeda and other extreme Islamic groups that have boasted of battling American forces everywhere from Iraq to Afghanistan. Some of the leaders are even former U.S. prisoners who were held in Guantanamo Bay.

...

Without congressional approval, which Obama himself acknowledged in 2007 is required by the U.S. Constitution prior to foreign militarism, critics have charged that American involvement is itself illegal. And while the administration has already informed Congress that it would ignore any attempt to rein in the war, critics worldwide are still hoping that there will eventually be some accountability and justice if crimes were indeed committed.

Rights group: Libyan rebels looted and beat civilians

The New York-based Human Rights Watch said that, in "four towns captured by rebels in the Nafusa Mountains over the past month, rebel fighters and supporters have damaged property, burned some homes, looted from hospitals, homes, and shops, and beaten some individuals alleged to have supported government forces."

The accusations came as rebel forces inside Libya managed to retake a village from Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi 's forces, and rebel leaders were in Europe meeting with NATO officials and the European Commission.

Mahmoud Jibril, chairman of the executive board of the opposition Transitional National Council, said the complaints represent only a "few incidents" that "took place in the very early days of the revolution, and we've been investigating those cases. We are against any human rights violation whomever is the source of those violations." Those responsible are "going to be brought to justice," he vowed.

Oh, Mr. Jibril assures us that it was limited in scope and that he'll get to the bottom of this!
Did I previously post anything related to the fact that some of the rebel factions are mercenaries of the loosely-organized and affiliated network sometimes referred to as Al Qaeda? I believe it was Jibril who admitted as much, but insisted that they were good Muslims... whatever that's supposed to mean.