Redwingtom
Freaking Lunatic
Posts: 60,888
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 1547
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Soros' Basement |
RE: Rand Paul is tearing Markwayne Mullin apart in Mullin's confirmation hearing
(03-18-2026 11:45 AM)CardinalJim Wrote: (03-18-2026 11:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote: (03-18-2026 10:27 AM)TripleA Wrote: Speaking of Democrats and hearings, there also is a Senate Intel hearing going on now with Gabbard, Ratcliffe and Patel.
Most of the Democrats are literal morons. They say some of the dumbest things. And one word out of their mouths in every question is "Trump!"
Right. It's almost as if trump was the president who started a war with no congressional oversight or approval, no global coordination with all our allies, and no credible case made to the American public. Go figure that he would be a topic of discussion! 
There hasn’t been a declared war since 1941….
Please post evidence of your complaints about Obama using military force without prior specific congressional approval on several occasions, most notably in the 2011 Libya bombing campaign, operations against the Islamic State (ISIS) starting in 2014, and increased drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia.
This war in Iran is in no way comparable to what happened in Libya. It's been over 15 years ago...so I don't really even recall my feelings on it at that time all that much.
I did find this with a quick search...I didn't go drudging through a bunch of long threads however.
(04-01-2011 05:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: (04-01-2011 02:43 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote: So the liberals who post here are fine and dandy with escalating the war in Afghanistan, keeping Gitmo open and having secret trials,
bombing Lybia?
Obama campaigned on escalating things in Afghanistan. I would rather we either go all in or go home though.
I still want Gitmo to be closed but understand that the whole thing was so mucked up that it is just not that easy.
Libya bombing I could do without but I understand it's purpose.
Secret trials don't bother me, the US has lots of secrets. The use of waterboarding bothered me more.
And if you look into the Libya stuff even a little bit, you'll find the following...perhaps you can spot a few differences between then and now. 
Quote:As Secretary Clinton testified in March, the United States' engagement in Libya followed the Administration's strategy of “using the combined assets of diplomacy, development, and defense to protect our interests and advance our values.” Faced with brutal attacks and explicit threats of further imminent attacks by Muammar Qadhafi against his own people, the United States and its international partners acted with unprecedented speed to secure a mandate, under Resolution 1973, to mobilize a broad coalition to protect civilians against attack by an advancing army and to establish a no-fly zone. In so doing, President Obama helped prevent an imminent massacre in Benghazi, protected critical U.S. interests in the region, and sent a strong message to the people not just of Libya—but of the entire Middle East and North Africa—that America stands with them at this historic moment of transition.
From the start, the Administration made clear its commitment to acting consistently with both the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution. The President submitted a report to Congress, consistent with the War Powers Resolution, within 48 hours of the commencement of operations in Libya. He framed our military mission narrowly, directing, among other things, that no ground troops would be deployed (except for necessary personnel recovery missions), and that U.S. armed forces would transition responsibility for leading and conducting the mission to an integrated NATO command. On April 4, 2011, U.S. forces did just that, shifting to a constrained and supporting role in a multinational civilian protection mission—in an action involving no U.S. ground presence or, to this point, U.S. casualties—authorized by a carefully tailored U.N. Security Council Resolution. As the War Powers Resolution contemplates, the Administration has consulted extensively with Congress about these operations, participating in more than ten hearings, thirty briefings, and dozens of additional exchanges since March 1—an interbranch dialogue that my testimony today continues.
This background underscores the limits to our legal claims. Throughout the Libya episode, the President has never claimed the authority to take the nation to war without Congressional authorization, to violate the War Powers Resolution or any other statute, to violate international law, to use force abroad when doing so would not serve important national interests, or to refuse to consult with Congress on important war powers issues. The Administration recognizes that Congress has powers to regulate and terminate uses of force, and that the War Powers Resolution plays an important role in promoting interbranch dialogue and deliberation on these critical matters. The President has expressed his strong desire for Congressional support, and we have been working actively with Congress to ensure enactment of appropriate legislation.
Together with our NATO and Arab partners, we have made great progress in protecting Libya's civilian population, and we have isolated Qadhafi and set the stage for his departure. Although since early April we have confined our military involvement in Libya to a supporting role, the limited military assistance that we provide has been critical to the success of the mission, as has our political and diplomatic leadership. If the United States were to drop out of, or curtail its contributions to, this mission, it could not only compromise our international relationships and alliances and threaten regional instability, but also permit an emboldened and vengeful Qadhafi to return to attacking the very civilians whom our intervention has protected.
https://2009-2017.state.gov/s/l/releases...167250.htm
|
|
/
Rand Paul is tearing Markwayne Mullin apart in Mullin's confirmation hearing
