US lawmakers file suit against Obama's illegal bombing of Libya

Yet another waste of time. Where is the lawsuit to get us out of Iraq?

Oh, Sweet Jesus, let this be the beginning of the Obama impeachment.

If they hop to it and get it done quickly, it would open the Democratic Party 2012 presidential candidacy field wide open. Maybe even Kucinich or Sanders would run.

I posted this yesterday.

This whole debate is one big piece of a shit stained mess. Theres about 50 sides of the argument and every side has its wrong and rights. Theres so many frickin laws that overlap eachother that its hard to say whos doing wrong or right. you could say the President isnt allowed to do this but then of course we made a law saying you can bomb threatening nations, also we made a TREATY and we are binded to that treaty.

Finance the contras and have a war...... Make the contras the terrorists make more wars..... Finance dictators like Kadhafi and have him brutally terrorise his people for generations... then switch side and make war with Kadhafi.... swish it all around and do it all again.... in the process millions of inocent people killed...dads, mothers, sons and daughters .... killed just so that the endless wars never ends.....

Endless wars is the goal of those with the power and that my friends will never end.... get used to it!

Are these the drones you are looking for? In a bizarre way I have been hoping that Obama would force this with the Congress.

The system will not work again until Congress takes its responsibility seriously again. Cheney bullied Congress into accepting the overreaching presidency, secret wars, massive surveillance programs etc etc, with the repeated challenge, "if you don't like it impeach us."

Don't expect Obama to give you peace and freedom on a silver platter, take it. The system cannot work if the people just wait and hope that someone else will free them. We have to do it ourselves.

If you want a democracy demand it from your Congress, demand it from your courts. The American system was not meant to have the decisions made by a King, but by the people, the president is an "executive" he is supposed to execute the will of the people, as voiced by the Congress, and within the confines of law.

Well that is what Congress gets for voting for the Iraq Resolution which basically allows any president to now bomb any country they deem a terrorist threat in this ongoing "war on terror." What I want to know is, who gets the water and the oil now? And just to add, I don't see much difference between this and the rationale for going into Iraq (and we know what that was really all about) and think some are definitely walking on eggshells about this because it is Obama. At least Dennis Kucinich isn't afraid to consistently speak truth to power.

1981: President Reagan deployed a number of U.S. military advisors to El Salvador but submitted no report to Congress. Members of Congress filed a federal lawsuit in an attempt to force compliance with the Resolution, but the U.S. District Court hearing the suit declined to become involved in what the judge saw as a political question, namely whether U.S. forces were indeed involved in hostilities.

1990-91: President George H.W. Bush sent several reports to Congress regarding the buildup of forces in Operation Desert Shield. President Bush took the position that he did not need "authority" from Congress to carry out the United Nations resolutions which authorized member states to use "all necessary means" to eject Iraq from Kuwait. (He eventually asked for "support" from Congress and got it. He never used the word "authorization".)

1993-99: President Clinton utilized United States armed forces in various operations, such as air strikes and the deployment of peacekeeping forces, in the former Yugoslavia, especially Bosnia and Kosovo. These operations were pursuant to United Nations Security Council resolutions and were conducted in conjunction with other member states of NATO. During this time the President made a number of reports to Congress "consistent with the War Powers Resolution" regarding the use of U.S. forces, but never cited Section 4(a)(1), and thus did not trigger the 60 day time limit. Opinion in Congress was divided and many legislative measures regarding the use of these forces were defeated without becoming law. Frustrated that Congress was unable to pass legislation challenging the President's actions, Representative Tom Campbell and other Members of the House filed suit in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia against the President, charging that he had violated the War Powers Resolution, especially since 60 days had elapsed since the start of military operations in Kosovo.

** The President noted that he considered the War Powers Resolution constitutionally defective. The court ruled in favor of the President, holding that the Members lacked legal standing to bring the suit; this decision was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. See Campbell v. Clinton, 203 F.3d 19 (D.C. Cir. 2000). The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from this decision, in effect letting it stand.**

What about all the other wars? No biggie???

Awesome! At least someone in DC is listening to 'we the people' -- we're sick and tired of being the fuzz of the world. Bring 'em home and get to work on helping THIS country get back on its feet; we've been on our knees long enough!

The US took no action to prevent the genocide in Rwanda, hundreds of thousands died that we might have saved.

The US started late in stepping in to the Yugoslavian disintegration, and tens of thousands died that we might have saved.

The US took timely action in Libya, and mass slaughter has been diverted.

The US doesn't have to be the world's police force. We could have chosen to do nothing. We can still choose to do nothing further. But we can't raise the dead.

There are innocent people that have been killed by our bombs in Libya. Of that I have no doubt. I also have no doubt that the number of deaths laid at our feet would be dwarfed beyond belief compared to the deaths we averted.

So, why doesn't the Congress step in and do it's job if they're so upset?

he is war criminal

Not illegal for the one billionth time. Our country is not at war with Libya, the UN is taking military action based on a rarely achieved consensus. Sorry if this is too nuanced for some people to understand. The UN charter that we signed allows it. This does not supersede our restrictions but allows for limited military resources to be made available to the UN. Treaties and Charters are binding. If you don't like then take it up with the past officials who signed it or have the US withdraw from the U.N.

If we sustain military action past 60 days then Congress can stop it. So why don't they? I guess it is easier to go after the President directly rather than have coward lawmakers go on the record. Redirect your outrage to Congress if you think participating in a UN action against Libya is wrong. Cut the bullshit about the President overreaching. This crap didn't fly in past administrations and it certainly won't now.

Tell the Libyan people they are on their own because we don't like getting involved in other countries (oh the irony) and lawmakers need another excuse to hate our president. Then we can criticize him for lack of action when Gaddafi remains in power and continues to slaughter his own.

The initial no-fly zone, set up to stop Gaddafi from air-striking people - who might as well have been considered unarmed in the face of such an onslaught - was justified (in my opinion, based on the ideas that have been presented to me). The continued strikes, including long-range bombing, are totally uncalled for.