Really?

[RoadToad]

Obama needed to get Congressional Approval........the UN does not Mandate when our TROOPS are used.

Even though the no fly zones in IRAQ were sanctioned by the UN, and lead to the War, Bush ASKED and got bipartisan approval for the actions in Afghanistan and IRAQ. Obama not only did not get approval, he didn't ASK.

"The President does not have the 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". Barack Obama, December 2007.

You're making an excellent point, but that's completely separate from the question I was asking. So let me just ask you point blank. If he HAD asked for approval, do you think it should have been given? My basic question is, if we intervened in Iraq, why shouldn't we intervene in Libya? What's the difference?

[GeoFisher]

You're making an excellent point, but that's completely separate from the question I was asking. So let me just ask you point blank. If he HAD asked for approval, do you think it should have been given? My basic question is, if we intervened in Iraq, why shouldn't we intervene in Libya? What's the difference?

YES......it should have been given. Maybe it would have maybe not.

I really see no difference with Libya or Iraq........except for the political climate we have today...............but I will say this..........for someone COMPLETELY against pulling the trigger on this crap, Obama sure rolled over to the world and did it.

Personally I would have had MORE respect for him had he told the WORLD to F off. THAT would have been sticking to your guns and not giving a **** about what others thought.

Instead he tried to do the right thing.

Later,

Geo

[kygorski]

Screw the UN, where were they in darfur??what are they doing about yemen?And where is that arab league support?

[RoadToad]

I think we did the right thing by helping the rebels here. I really think Ghadafi was going to go in and annihilate as many of them as he could find, and maybe he still will. And yeah, Obama's going to catch hell for how he handled it, but I think he was wrong when he said that in '07, and it's coming back to bite him now that he's President, and he's on the other side of the War Powers Resolution. In his letter to Congress notifying them of the mission, he said he was doing so "consistent with" the War Powers Resolution, rather than "pursuant to" it." This is important, because it shows he's taking the same position that all Presidents have taken since it was passed, namely that the War Powers Resolution of 1973 is unconstitutional. Well, if that's the case, then what he said as a candidate in 2007 is WRONG. So he's painted himself into a corner here.