I Applaud this Statement by Obama

#1
n_huffhines

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
88,328
Likes
53,260
#1
"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. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent." Obama 12/20/2007
 
#2
#2
fyp

"The President (unless it's me or another democrat) 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. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent." Obama 12/20/2007
 
#4
#4
Obama walked right into this. I don't have a big problem with the Libya operation, but he has to lie in the bed he made when he was playing backseat driver.
 
#5
#5
this is exactly it. don't go around pulling the moral high card and then do the same crap bush did.
 
#6
#6
droski said:
this is exactly it. don't go around pulling the moral high card and then do the same crap bush did.
Click to expand...

In fairness, this isn't even close to the same crap Bush did. In the scheme of things, we have only launched some missles and enforced a no-fly zone. Bush fully invaded two countries. One of which, turned out not to be as big a threat as advertised.
 
#7
#7
rjd970 said:
In fairness, this isn't even close to the same crap Bush did. In the scheme of things, we have only launched some missles and enforced a no-fly zone. Bush fully invaded two countries. One of which, turned out not to be as big a threat as advertised.
Click to expand...

and why are we there?

we also have Marines on their way to Libya
 
#8
#8
rjd970 said:
In fairness, this isn't even close to the same crap Bush did. In the scheme of things, we have only launched some missles and enforced a no-fly zone. Bush fully invaded two countries. One of which, turned out not to be as big a threat as advertised.
Click to expand...

i'd argue during day 6 of the iraq war we'd be saying the same thing.
 
#10
#10
utvolpj said:
and why are we there?

we also have Marines on their way to Libya
Click to expand...

Right now our involvement is similar to Bosnia. Ground forces and an invasion are not on the table. Not saying they won't be, but right now comparing Bush and Obama (Libya and Afgh/Iraq) isn't even close.
 
#12
#12
BigPapaVol said:
have had SF guys on the ground in Libya for weeks.
Click to expand...

Some SF units compared against a 100,000 invasion force? Still not the same thing. If I had to bet, they aren't even actively engaging Ghaddafi forces, only painting targets for the fly boys.
 
#13
#13
rjd970 said:
In fairness, this isn't even close to the same crap Bush did. In the scheme of things, we have only launched some missles and enforced a no-fly zone. Bush fully invaded two countries. One of which, turned out not to be as big a threat as advertised.
Click to expand...

I agree that Bush did worse, but the point is Obama's shown many times to be a hypocrite.
 
#14
#14
rjd970 said:
Right now our involvement is similar to Bosnia. Ground forces and an invasion are not on the table. Not saying they won't be, but right now comparing Bush and Obama (Libya and Afgh/Iraq) isn't even close.
Click to expand...

but there are ground forces on the way. And the buildup took a little while for Iraq/Afgan too.

What's the solution we're going for here? Kill Q and let the Al-Qaeda backed rebels take over the country?
 
#15
#15
nbakerld said:
I agree that Bush did worse, but the point is Obama's shown many times to be a hypocrite.
Click to expand...

No argument from me on that point. I am just pointing out the use of military force comparison isn't even on the same playing field at the moment.
 
#16
#16
rjd970 said:
Some SF units compared against a 100,000 invasion force? Still not the same thing. If I had to bet, they aren't even actively engaging Ghaddafi forces, only painting targets for the fly boys.
Click to expand...

just saying that we have boots on the ground being FOs.
 
#17
#17
rjd970 said:
Some SF units compared against a 100,000 invasion force? Still not the same thing. If I had to bet, they aren't even actively engaging Ghaddafi forces, only painting targets for the fly boys.
Click to expand...

Stay tuned. You're witnessing what will be known as one of the greatest presidential ironies of modern US history. I think the hand-writing is on the wall, at this point.
 
#18
#18
IPorange said:
Stay tuned. You're witnessing what will be known as one of the greatest presidential ironies of modern US history. I think the hand-writing is on the wall, at this point.
Click to expand...

yup. this theory that the rebels can win without ground support is ridiculous. edit: and dont' tell me we wont be part of a peace keeping force.
 
#19
#19
droski said:
yup. this theory that the rebels can win without ground support is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Right. If the intervening nations want a "mission accomplished" moment that lasts, they're going to have to get in those shrubby hills and and sandy deserts and make it.
 
#20
#20
utvolpj said:
and why are we there?

we also have Marines on their way to Libya
Click to expand...

Are there any "critical infrastructures" as noted in that old Wikileaks list Libya?

Just curious and haven't had time to check. If so, a very round about "self defense" argument could be made.

Very round about, though...
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#21
#21
fl0at said:
Are there any "critical infrastructures" as noted in that old Wikileaks list Libya?

Just curious and haven't had time to check. If so, a very round about "self defense" argument could be made.

Very round about, though...
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

And a round about argument can be made for Iraq. I find these actions to be shaping up awfully similar.
 
#23
#23
Even if we go the full out invasion route (which I am skeptical of), the score is still 2 invasions to 1. Doesn't change the hypocrisy of it though.
 
#24
#24
rjd970 said:
Even if we go the full out invasion route (which I am skeptical of), the score is still 2 invasions to 1. Doesn't change the hypocrisy of it though.
Click to expand...
So you view Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya as equals?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top