It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Paul: Why I'm Suing the Obama Administration Over Libya

page: 1
26
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   
dailycaller.com...


There is no issue more serious than war. Wars result in the loss of life and property. Wars are also expensive and an enormous economic burden.

Our Founders understood that waging war is not something that should be taken lightly, which is why Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution gives Congress — not the president — the authority to declare war. This was meant to be an important check on presidential power. The last thing the Founders wanted was an out-of-control executive branch engaging in unnecessary and unpopular wars without so much as a Congressional debate.

Unfortunately, that’s exactly the situation we have today in Libya.

That’s why I’ve joined several other members of Congress in a lawsuit against President Obama for engaging in military action in Libya without seeking the approval of Congress.


Awesome article written by Ron Paul that highlights all that is wrong about the Libyan War.

He highlights some important points I have never even thought of- such as the fact that the Obama Administration's reasoning behind going to war in Libya gives him the sole power to launch a nuclear holocaust.

Or the fact that the Federal Reserve's Bank Bailouts benefited Gaddafi's Regime.




posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   
usliberals.about.com...




I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war.






Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.... The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors...and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.



obama the HYPOCRITE

GO PAUL FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Just curious, did Paul sue the Bush Administration?

If not, I guess he's a hypocrite too?

I agree with what Paul is saying in regards to war (100%).



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Haha wow that is 100% MAXIMUM hypocrite-ness right there.

Sometimes though, I wonder if Obama is even the one making the decisions to go to war.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Paul is an idiot and he shows it with that statement. He is such a strict constitutionalist that he doesn't realize that as Commander and Chief the President has the power to send troops to war if the need is immediate and there isn't time to go to Congress for approval.

This is why they passed the war powers act because Presidents were overstepping their bounds and Congress called them on it. Now you may certainly debate whether Libya was an immediate threat but the problem with Ron Paul is that he doesn't believe the President has this power.

If he was President and China invaded the east coast he would have to convene Congress, have a debate, then a vote on whether to go to war with China or not.

He is stupid.


+5 more 
posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Paul is an idiot and he shows it with that statement. He is such a strict constitutionalist that he doesn't realize that as Commander and Chief the President has the power to send troops to war if the need is immediate and there isn't time to go to Congress for approval.

This is why they passed the war powers act because Presidents were overstepping their bounds and Congress called them on it. Now you may certainly debate whether Libya was an immediate threat but the problem with Ron Paul is that he doesn't believe the President has this power.

If he was President and China invaded the east coast he would have to convene Congress, have a debate, then a vote on whether to go to war with China or not.

He is stupid.


Did you even read the article?


If a president does go to war unilaterally, the War Powers Act requires him to seek Congressional approval within 60 days. The president can get an extension of up to 90 days if he asks for more time — but President Obama did not do this.


Of course presidents can make quick decisions to go to war- some of them have to be made. However, they MUST eventually gain congressional approval within a 60-90 day max time-frame. Obama did not do that.

Obama claims he didn't have to get approval because the Libyan war is not "technically" a war.

Now THAT is stupid, and THAT is why Paul is suing him.


+4 more 
posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Paul is an idiot and he shows it with that statement. He is such a strict constitutionalist that he doesn't realize that as Commander and Chief the President has the power to send troops to war if the need is immediate and there isn't time to go to Congress for approval.

This is why they passed the war powers act because Presidents were overstepping their bounds and Congress called them on it. Now you may certainly debate whether Libya was an immediate threat but the problem with Ron Paul is that he doesn't believe the President has this power.

If he was President and China invaded the east coast he would have to convene Congress, have a debate, then a vote on whether to go to war with China or not.

He is stupid.


Wow, calling Ron Paul stupid and implying he doesn't understand the constitution or the law regarding war is so idiotic I'm lost for words.

You obviously haven't got a clue about what you're talking about.

Thank goodness Ron Paul does, and thank goodness he is courageous enough to speak out..

.




edit on 17-6-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Of course Obama violated the war powers act and he should be held accountable for that. Absolutely agree.

Apparantly I went a bit off topic with the rest of my comment so disregard that as i'll save it for another post.

Every President since Ford has pushed their limits regarding this issue with Bush even blatantly saying he doesn't recognize the war powers act so it's great to see Congress finally backing a very crucial check and balance instead of just blindly following a President as has been the case lately.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   
They don't need to sue him. They need to exert their power and authority as The Congress of The United States and say no, if they have such a moral opposistion to the actions in Libya. So many of you are acting like these 10 congressmen are hero's and standing up for what is right...wrong. They have the existing power to say no, they can say no right now or could have after the 60 day mark, Why didn't they do it? Why are they going to the judicial branch to do what is already in their power to do? I can tell you why, to get the exact reaction many of you are giving.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 08:43 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


Thank you for making a perfect example of the intelligence that Ron Paul haters exhibit.

Your hypothetical situation is just ridiculous to say the least. If America was attacked, be it on our land or somewhere else, Ron Paul, or any president for that matter would respond immediately against the country responsible, and they would be withing their legal right to do so. Congress can act quickly if it wants, which is evident by the expedited passing of the "Patriot" Act. I have absolutely no doubt if there was a serious threat to the US, Congress could easily grant war powers to the president withing 90 days.

Also, Ron Paul is not a hypocrite because he is rallying against Obama's illegal war. Congress authorized use of force against Iraq and Afghanistan, making those "wars" technically legal. Stupid? Yes, but still legal.

Congress doesn't have to formerly declare war on a nation in order for Military action to be legal, but after 90 days Congress DOES have to authorize the use of force, which they DID with regards to the conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan.

On the other hand, Congress did not authorize military action in Libya, Obama was trying to be sneaky, and maybe he thought that we would be finished with Libya within the 90 day period he doesn't need Congress for. That has not happened, and now Obama is again being sneaky by trying to make it seem as if we aren't involved in Military action with Libya, which is a flat out lie. Because of this, the involvement with Libya IS ILLEGAL, and Ron Paul is calling out Obama, and is NOT a hypocrite because Congress authorized and funded the Iraq and Afghanistan war.

Please people, stop with this Ron Paul hate based on nothing but your own dislike for the man. You can't even come up with a reasonable and honest attack against him, you have to resort to lies.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
They have the existing power to say no, they can say no right now or could have after the 60 day mark,


The President still has the ability to engage in military action PAST 60 days. He has up to 90 days. The 60 day mark is when the President has to TELL Congress that the military action is taking place, he has 90 days to get Congress's approval. He has not done so.

What is dangerous about this whole thing, is the UN involvement. The US's military, and the US's President is TAKING ORDERS FROM THE UN WHICH VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION AND PUT AMERICAN LIVES IN DANGER. Sorry for the caps, but that part really, really, needs to be understood.

Ron Paul is not doing anything hypocritical or against The Constitution, PERIOD



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by James1982
Please people, stop with this Ron Paul hate based on nothing but your own dislike for the man. You can't even come up with a reasonable and honest attack against him, you have to resort to lies.


Personally I don't hate or even really dislike the man. I think he's probably sincere in his beliefs. I just think his economic policies would be disastrous for our country and thus there is no way I'd ever vote for him.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Can anyone define war for me? I seem to not understand what a war is I guess. Either its one thing and Paul is a hypocrite or its another and Paul is a hypocrite. Don't worry so are the other 9 involved in the suit. This was pointed out on MSNBC today when Dennis Kuncinich was on.
edit on 17-6-2011 by LexiconRiot because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Paul is an idiot and he shows it with that statement. He is such a strict constitutionalist that he doesn't realize that as Commander and Chief the President has the power to send troops to war if the need is immediate and there isn't time to go to Congress for approval.

This is why they passed the war powers act because Presidents were overstepping their bounds and Congress called them on it. Now you may certainly debate whether Libya was an immediate threat but the problem with Ron Paul is that he doesn't believe the President has this power.

If he was President and China invaded the east coast he would have to convene Congress, have a debate, then a vote on whether to go to war with China or not.

He is stupid.


Ya Paul is such a idiot for being a constitutionalist, let this unitary president keep doing his thing. As the last time a unitary presidency that had run of the mil over their congress and senate was Nazi Germany


People like you truly amaze me with your thought process,never mind the main reason the United States is in the economical shape that it is in,Wars


Go Paul, thanks for being one of the few with a spine in trying to salvage this countries constitution



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 


Agreeing to support their mission is far different than taking orders, we signed an agreement with the UN long ago in order to gain entrance to it. They have been supporting us in all our military actions/wars ever since and we have been supporting theirs. Hypocrite is not the word I would use to describe Ron Pauls actions, opportunist is, him and his 9 buddies. Tell me one good reason why they are going to the judicial branch when the legislative branch has the full power to do what he is claiming to try to be doing with the judicial? What kind of sense does that make? Why are they acting like private citizens when they are in fact law makers? Why aren't they on the House floor demanding the purse strings be cut? Because the words SUING THE POTUS has a much better affect on the minds of the people than going about it the right way.

Not to mention they are suing him for something that has not even happened, the President is not in violation of the Constitution.
edit on 17-6-2011 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


But really to some degree Paul and the other 9 at still hypocrites one way or the other. If someone would please define war to me I will tell you how he is.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Paul is an idiot and he shows it with that statement. He is such a strict constitutionalist that he doesn't realize that as Commander and Chief the President has the power to send troops to war if the need is immediate and there isn't time to go to Congress for approval.

This is why they passed the war powers act because Presidents were overstepping their bounds and Congress called them on it. Now you may certainly debate whether Libya was an immediate threat but the problem with Ron Paul is that he doesn't believe the President has this power.

If he was President and China invaded the east coast he would have to convene Congress, have a debate, then a vote on whether to go to war with China or not.

He is stupid.


WOW, talking about "Idiots" and "stupid"


The choice of the words "idiot" and "stupid" best describes that reply there.




edit on 17-6-2011 by pplrnuts because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 10:27 PM
link   
The thing that everyone is forgetting is that this is a NATO action, by that treaty we are required to participate. So for once President Obama may be right. All of you that are asking for war, try serving in the military for a few years, it might give you a whole different perspective. I served, signed my name on that line, I have lost friends, and fellow patriots along the way, you sorry assed scum that call your selves patriots now, make me wanna puke. Piss off.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by BubbaJoe
 


Wow, you are way out of line sir. I don't assume you are talking to me as I wouldn't call for war but be careful who you call "sorry assed scum." I along with many many other ATS'ers also served, even those I disagree with should never be attacked in this manner whether or not they did serve themselves. It is all about civil discourse sir.
edit on 17-6-2011 by LexiconRiot because: error




top topics



 
26
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join