How appropriate.
Posted on 03/22/2011 7:09:15 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Several days into a campaign of air and sea strikes against Libya, I agree with many of the arguments from critics of the intervention: President Obama acted imprudently in committing American forces to a conflict with an ill-defined national security justification. It is unclear how, on balance, a third war in a Muslim country helps our foreign policy goals. It is uncertain that the intervention will produce a regime more to our liking than Qaddafi's. It is hard to justify military action in Libya while the United States does not use military force in the face of brutal crackdowns by allies elsewhere in the Middle East. And it was especially unwise not to explain this action to the American people in advance or to better consult with and seek formal authorization, or at least political support, from Congress.
But that said, I depart from the critics of the Libya action, and from Sens. Obama and Hillary Clinton themselves circa 2007, and from the academic writings of Legal Adviser to the State Department Harold Koh on this one point: I do not believe that the military action in Libya is unconstitutional.
Legal scholars disagree about the original meaning of the Constitution's conferral on Congress of the power "to declare war." Many contend it required Congress to formally approve all uses of U.S. military force abroad, save, as James Madison said at the Convention, in situations needed to "repel sudden attack." Others maintain the "declare war" clause provides more leeway, allowing the president to use force abroad as long as the force does not rise to the level of "war," whatever that means. Yet others argue that the framers meant simply to give Congress the authority to signal under international law a state of war;
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
“The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgment Inside the Bush Administration” by Jack Goldsmith.
I haven’t read it. NYT, Huffington Post, Slate, and NPR liked it. Hmmmm.
How appropriate.
This went way past protecting civilians or establishing a no fly zone. The US (not the UN) is now spear-heading the rebel offensive, we are at war with the Libyan government.
The rebels have come out and said they can’t fight without the US leading the way.
“I’d love to see his argument for Bush going into Iraq. Somehow I expect he wouldn’t have the same opinion.”
Did you even READ the article???
Quote:
“Jack Goldsmith, a professor at Harvard Law School, worked in the Bush administration from 2002 to 2004”
I aint a lawyer and I aint a scholar and it’s all good because you dont need to be either to see his premise is pretty flimsy.
I did read the article, and I noted only passing references to Bush (though it was noted that he went to Congress for authorizations). And I get the overall point — Bush asked for authorizations; Obama hasn’t thus far. The article COULD HAVE used Bush’s example to explain how military actions become legally justified through Congress. He didn’t. And because that’s the most obvious counter-example, it does raise a red flag with me.
Look: I didn’t know the credentials of this guy, but I do have to be suspicious on the surface given his Harvard connection. Since he didn’t take the opportunity to take us through the proper channels of action that Bush used, I do have to wonder if that’s because he didn’t feel it was a justified war action.
Okay - I tried to assume that everybody’d figure out where I waa going on that from a too-simple one-liner answer above. Mea culpa.
And if all that failed, then you could have dusted off some academic who loves attention to reinterpret the precedents for you, and to exploit the letter of the law for you, so you could have the flimsy cover you wanted to do what you wanted anyway, putting men and women in harms way and overextending the nation to do it.
Obama goes down in flames over this. Mark my words.
Obama being Obama... Can you say "banana republic"?
I want Obama out!
The only thing I really know about this mess is Zer0 is pulling for the brotherhood.
Let’s put these arguments to rest once and for all. It’s legal for socialist, liberal presidents and illegal for conservative and Republican presidents.
That’s how Leftists always view the law; the ends justify the means at all times. Just look at the Madison Dane Co. Judge Sumi’s decision on the alleged violation of the state open meetings law and its application to WI Senate rules.
Heads I win, tails you lose.
What the hell do Haaaaavad law professors know about the Constitution?
If you’re going to shoot the messenger - let’s not shoot this one.
The problem is in the nature, structure,content and history of the War Powers Resolution itself, not necessarily its intent.
If you are a fan of the Congressional Research Service and its ability to produce unbiased analysis try
CRS Reports RL32267, RL31133 and RL33532. Available at http://opencrs.com/ .
His article is spot on as to the reality of this mess, he isn’t going to soil his reputation publishing fluff.
RE: What the hell do Haaaaavad law professors know about the Constitution?
Well, they’re too busy teaching it to read it. Just like Congressmen and Senators, they’re too busy defending it to read it.
South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
Are Americans getting dumber?
By Gary Stein, Sun Sentinel Editorial Board
5:32 AM EDT, March 22, 2011
Newsweek Magazine thinks we are dumb. And it’s hard to disagree.
The magazine gave 1,000 Americans the U.S. citizenship test, and 38 percent failed. In a way, I’m surprised the failure rate was so low.
People simply are not as curious as they should be about the world around them. Kids don’t take civics classes in high school. How many of your neighbors could find Libya on a map? Could you?
It’s understandable that most people wouldn’t comprehend all the complexities of Medicare or the national debt. But how many people actually know the name of their state representative? How many know the name of their mayor? Maybe most don’t care, if voting turnout is any indication.
So is Newsweek correct? Are we dumb?
POLL:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.