Strange Definitions of War and Peace

"david white" <[email protected]> Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:22:10 -0500
Newsgroups gmane.music.dadl.ot
Message-ID <[email protected]>
http://paul.house.gov/index.php?
option=com_content&view=article&id=1878:strange-definitions-of-war-and-
peace&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69

Strange Definitions of War and Peace
      
Last week I joined six Republican and three Democrat colleagues to file a 
lawsuit against the Obama administration over its illegal war against Libya. 
Now that more than 90 days have passed since the president began bombing 
Libya, no one can seriously claim that the administration has complied with 
the clear requirements of the 1973 War Powers Resolution.

In a remarkable act of chutzpah, the administration sent to Congress its 
response to the growing concern over its abuse of war powers.  Its argument, 
in a nutshell, is that the War Powers Resolution is not relevant because US 
armed forces are not actually engaged in hostilities because Libya is so 
militarily weak it cannot fight back!  This explanation would be laughable if 
not so horrific.  The administration wants us to believe that there is no 
real violence because the victim cannot fight back?  Imagine if this standard 
was applied to criminal law in the United States!  I am sure Libyans on the 
receiving end of US and NATO bombs feel hostilities are quite definitely 
taking place.

We must recall the origins of these attacks on Libya. The Obama 
administration made no claim that Libyan leader Gaddafi was killing his 
civilian population.  Rather, the claim was that Libya might begin killing 
its civilians in the future.  One need not defend Gaddafi's regime -- and I 
most certainly do not -- to object to this flimsy and dangerous rationale for 
violating the sovereignty of another country.  Imagine a scenario where the 
UN approves military action against the United States as a preventative 
humanitarian measure over US enforcement of its immigration laws, for example!

Now in Libya we see the possible use of depleted uranium shells, we see 
infrastructure destroyed, we see universities bombed, we see all 
the "collateral damage."  Yet, this is a "humanitarian intervention”?

In our lawsuit against the administration, among other critical issues we are 
demanding that the courts provide relief and protection to the country from 
the administration's policy that a president may commit the United States to 
a war under the authority of the United Nations and NATO without 
authorization from Congress, and that previously appropriated funds by 
Congress may be used for an unconstitutional and unauthorized war in Libya or 
other countries. These are fundamental Constitutional issues and I expect the 
judicial branch to treat our challenge with the same level of gravity as we 
do in the legislative branch.

Remember, we were told that this attack would last "days, not weeks" and we 
are already three months and likely nearly a billion dollars into it.  As the 
bombings obviously target Gaddafi's houses, even killing some of his family 
members, we can see that the real goal is regime change rather than 
protection of civilians.  Do we know much about the rebels whose side we have 
taken in what is, in fact, a civil war?

Although it is a bit late, I am pleased to see that congressional leadership 
has started to listen to our constituents, who are solidly against this war 
on Libya.  I commend Speaker Boehner's expressions of dissatisfaction with 
the administration over this war and I sincerely hope he will use the full 
constitutional authority granted to the legislative branch to bring into 
check an administration clearly out of control.

Polls show that the American people increasingly favor a truly conservative 
foreign policy: one that rejects the leftist, utopian doctrines of nation 
building and preemptive war, and one that is NOT funded by debt.  Forcing the 
Obama administration to obey the clear letter of the law is one step towards 
restoring a traditional, patriotic foreign policy that serves American 
interests.

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