Friday, March 18, 2011

Libya.... No No No No No

Londo Mollari once said: "Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts." Sure, he's fictional and we aren't up to twelve (yet) but honestly, Libya? Does anybody not see all the ways that could go bad? And do we really have the resources to fight in Libya and Iraq and Afghanistan? Why not throw in Bahrain - oops, wait, we like their despot, how about Iran - too?

And while we're at it, didn't Candidate Obama once say:
"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."
Trick question! Apparently that only meant Republican presidents... I mean, he also said
"It is illegal and unwise for the President to disregard international human rights treaties that have been ratified by the United States Senate, including and especially the Geneva Conventions"
"The President is not above the law,"
right? Hahahahaha.... Damn.

Look, if the US needs to be in Libya (if, which is a separate argument), then let Congress send us there. The Founders knew that one man can't be trusted to make those decisions, no matter who he is (and let me repeat myself: If it was illegal under Bush it's illegal under Obama). John Jay explained it neatly in the Federalist Papers, #4 in fact (my emphasis):

It is too true, however disgraceful it may be to human nature, that nations in general will make war whenever they have a prospect of getting anything by it; nay, absolute monarchs will often make war when their nations are to get nothing by it, but for the purposes and objects merely personal, such as thirst for military glory, revenge for personal affronts, ambition, or private compacts to aggrandize or support their particular families or partisans. These and a variety of other motives, which affect only the mind of the sovereign, often lead him to engage in wars not sanctified by justice or the voice and interests of his people.

A president unchecked by Congress is a monarch. The Imperial Presidency is a godawful, horrible idea regardless of who the president happens to be.

Labels: ,


At 10:58 PM, March 20, 2011 Anonymous Atlanta Roofing had this to say...

For a lot of different reasons voters saw what they wanted to see in Obama. In some very real respects he’s no different than Bush on foreign policy. That said ultimately the fault lies with the American people. Something is wrong with the system if no matter who you vote for, you get war. Wonder if Obama feels that he has to overcompensate to show that he’s not “Palin’ around with terrorists”. This action against Libya is truly hypocritical and disgusting, especially when you consider what the ruler of Yemen just did.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post

Links to this post:

Create a Link

     <-- Older Post                     ^ Home                    Newer Post -->