Constitutional Problems with the Libyan War

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?
option=com_content&view=article&id=1840:constitutional-problems-with-the-
libyan-war-&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69

Constitutional Problems with the Libyan War 
       
Last week the Obama Administration took the United States to war against 
Libya without bothering to notify Congress, much less obtain a 
Constitutionally-mandated declaration of war. In the midst of our severe 
economic downturn, this misadventure has already cost us hundreds of millions 
of dollars and we can be sure the final price tag will be several times 
higher.

Why did the US intervene in a civil war in a country that has neither 
attacked us nor poses a threat?  We are told this was another humanitarian 
intervention, like Clinton’s 1999 war against Serbia. But as civilian victims 
of the US-led coalition bombing continue to add up, it is getting difficult 
to determine whether the problem we are creating on the ground is worse than 
the one we were trying to solve.

Though the administration seems to be playing with semantics, calling this 
a “kinetic military action,” let’s be clear: this is a US act of war on 
Libya.  Imposing a no-fly zone over the air space of a sovereign nation is an 
act of war, as Secretary of Defense Robert Gates pointed out before the 
bombing began.  That the administration hesitates to call this war, possibly 
due to the troubling Constitutional implications, does not mean that it is 
not one. Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution could not be clearer: the 
power and obligation to declare war resides solely in the US Congress. 

There was ample time and opportunity for the administration to consult the 
UN, NATO and the Arab League before going to war, but not the US Congress.

Aside from the manner in which the administration took us to war, it is also 
troubling that our government has taken a decisive stand for one side of an 
internal conflict in another sovereign country.  The administration speaks 
out of both sides of its mouth on this, claiming that the US is not 
attempting to overthrow the Gaddafi regime while clearly benefitting the 
rebels and stating that Gaddafi must leave. Does this make any sense? Gaddafi 
may well be every bit the “bad guy” we are told he is, but who are the rebels 
we are assisting?  Do we have any clue?  Will they bring freedom and 
prosperity to Libya if they are victorious?  We might like to hope so, but 
the fact is, we don’t know.  Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA’s Bin 
Laden unit, explained in a recent article that there is plausible reason to 
believe the rebels are current or former Islamist mujahedin, eager to engage 
in jihad.  Indeed, Gaddafi has fought against Libyan Islamists for years and 
is seen by them as a bitter enemy.  Astoundingly, it may well be that we are 
assisting al Qaeda in this new war!

The costs of this terrible mistake cannot be ignored.  Congress has been 
locked in battles over budget cuts and agonizing over ways to save money.  
Recent proposed spending cuts have by now been completely wiped out with this 
new war!  Will we be rebuilding Libya ten years from now?  Will Congress 
simply roll over and rubber stamp more emergency spending bills for this new 
war as they have done in the past?  We must end our participation in any 
attack on Libya immediately and I have signed on to legislation that would do 
exactly that. Congress must assert its Constitutional authority and rein in 
an administration clearly out of control.

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot