In 2001 and 2003, Pres Bush went to Congress and got resolutions to attack Afghanistan and Iraq.
Today, Pres BO has involved the US in a Libyan war without going to Congress.
Pres BO's position is that we are not really in a war. (Is that Clinton-speak or what? Remember "it depends what the definition of is is")
I guess that flying airplanes and dropping bombs is not a war! Or supporting NATO planes doing that? Or protecting NATO ships firing missiles off shore?
At the end of the day, this is another example of Pres BO's disregard for the constitution.
I guess that flying airplanes and dropping bombs is not a war! Or supporting NATO planes doing that? Or protecting NATO ships firing missiles off shore?
At the end of the day, this is another example of Pres BO's disregard for the constitution.
First, honest people can agree or disagree about the constitutionality of The War Powers Act. However, it has been understood since Vietnam that presidents should go to Congress to get bipartisan support, as Pres Bush did.
Second, Pres BO has not made the case that this is a matter of national security requiring an extended time frame beyond protecting civilians.
I supported the idea of protecting civilians but this is now gone beyond any of that. We are now engaged in regime change without knowing who the rebels are!
Third, it is wrong to start wars with a UN resolution rather than a congressional resolution.
As we saw today, Congress passed a resolution opposing the conflict but did not cut the funding in the middle of a conflict. (House Rejects U.S. Mission in Libya)
We need to stop presidents who fight wars without Congress.
We need to stop presidents who fight wars without Congress.
We spoke about this, and other issues, on Friday's show:
Listen to internet radio with Silvio Canto Jr on Blog Talk Radio
Tags: The War Powers Act and going to war, Pres BO and Libya To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
