PDA

View Full Version : Reason: Obama's Doctrine of Preemptive War - How Democrats set unConstitutional precedent




sailingaway
03-29-2011, 01:43 PM
http://reason.com/archives/2011/03/29/obamas-doctrine-of-pre-emptive

Zippyjuan
03-29-2011, 01:55 PM
Precident was set long ago- and been used literally dozens if not hundreds of times since. How many of these "US Military Actions" were declared wars? Even the long Korean War was not a declared war- it was a "police action". Then you have places like Grenada, Bosnia, Lebanon, etc. Seems almost every president has done it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations

This is not to say I agree with actions against Lybia.

sailingaway
03-29-2011, 02:07 PM
I know it was set long ago, but until now they at least followed the authorization by Congress of some sort. Now, Obama is saying that isn't necessary if he personally thinks going in is a good idea. THAT is a more blatant precedent, not because the physical action is worse than the Iraq war but because now the Dems have no grounds for objection in any future war....per reason.

Lucille
03-29-2011, 02:41 PM
I know it was set long ago, but until now they at least followed the authorization by Congress of some sort. Now, Obama is saying that isn't necessary if he personally thinks going in is a good idea. THAT is a more blatant precedent, not because the physical action is worse than the Iraq war but because now the Dems have no grounds for objection in any future war....per reason.

Yeah. Like Welch said, "the next Republican president now has an even lower bar than before when it comes to launching a preemptive war."

wizardwatson
03-29-2011, 02:57 PM
I know it was set long ago, but until now they at least followed the authorization by Congress of some sort. Now, Obama is saying that isn't necessary if he personally thinks going in is a good idea. THAT is a more blatant precedent, not because the physical action is worse than the Iraq war but because now the Dems have no grounds for objection in any future war....per reason.

We didn't even get the courtesy of an presidential address. At least Bush came on TV and said I'm going to attack. Obama I guess only feels the need to give a speech after the deed is done to tell us why he thinks it was a good idea.

It's all a farce anyway, read some Webster Tarpley today. Those "rebels of the people" are Al-CIA-da linked. Why were they armed? Who armed them? I like Tarpley's comparison to Kennedy's "Bay of Pigs" only Obama actually listened when the CIA said we want air-strikes. Maybe Obama learned that following orders is his real job, and that going against TPTB just ends up getting you shot.

The whole thing stinks and enough research will show that this is the same old shit.

http://tarpley.net/2011/03/19/obamas-bay-of-pigs-in-libya/

acptulsa
03-29-2011, 03:02 PM
Precident was set long ago- and been used literally dozens if not hundreds of times since. How many of these "US Military Actions" were declared wars? Even the long Korean War was not a declared war- it was a "police action". Then you have places like Grenada, Bosnia, Lebanon, etc. Seems almost every president has done it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations

That list puts the Civil War and Reconstruction on the same level. And it makes no distinction between what was and what wasn't done with Congress' complicit involvement.