Boehner to introduce resolution tomorrow demanding that Obama seek congressional approval on Libya

Exit question: What if Boehner’s resolution passes and Obama simply ignores it, or sends back a letter reminding him that the House is free to vote on authorization or deauthorization without a formal presidential request? What’s the GOP’s move then?

….why not demand that we pull out since Obama continuously is stating that we have taken a back seat.

Obama has misled the country about why we are in Libya…
………he has not stated exactly what the mission is for…how it is beneficial to the US…. what the end game is….or how much it is costing.

We should get answers to all of these questions before continuing Obama’s Libyan adventure.

….For one thing…Obama has shifted the mission as time has gone by.

Let’s start with this:

Obama:

Let me be clear…again…about our policy…which is determined by me….the President of the United States………….

Obama March 11, 2011

…okay…..let’s take a look at the only little bit of policy that Obama has even talked about:

When Obama was against war and running for President…he insisted that humanitarian reasons were not enough of a reason to use military force and that any force that was used…needed Congressional approval.

” the AP reported on July 20, 2007 (my italics). withdrawal would unleash a massive Iraqi bloodbath. “Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn’t a good enough reason to keep US forces there,” the AP reported on July 20, 2007 (my italics).

…and of course this gem………..

Obama:

The President does not have 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.

…now that has gone the way of the anti-war movement….it’s okay as long as a democrat is doing it.

Then after more than a week…Obama’s rational for not getting Congressional approval falls flat:

…White House on why Obama did not get Congressional Authorization:

Carney said that if Obama had waited for lawmakers to return from a recess next week, events could have overtaken plans for a no-fly zone and many civilians could have been killed.
“There was an urgency to act here,” he said.
“Had (Obama) waited for Congress to come back, had he taken more time to debate and consult on this issue, I think there is very little doubt that Benghazi would have fallen and many people (would have) died.”

…now remember…Obama was filling NCAA brackets…Golfing….and campaigning before he launched this war from the beaches in Rio…..
………… what pathetic spin to claim “he did not have time to consult Congress”

…Then Obama tells us that we have taken a back seat and that NATO is in charge so Congressional approval is not needed….
..of course this goes 100% against what he stated as a Presidential candidate and also the statement that we are in the “back seat”…is a flat out lie:

President Obama wrote a letter to congressional leaders this afternoon suggesting that the role is now so “limited” he does not need to seek congressional approval.

…since we have the most Soldiers and hardware in Libya…that must be one he!! of a back seat Obama is talking about:

Nato operations in Libya: data journalism breaks down which country does what
How much is each Nato country contributing to operations in Libya? Here’s the most comprehensive analysis yet of who is doing what
•http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/may/22/nato-libya-data-journalism-operations-country#

What it shows is that, besides the US – which dominates operations with over 8,000 personnel in the area in several ships and aircraft at the peak of the first weeks of the war

..now other countries might have taken the lead in sorties and bombing now…that is only after we bombarded Libya in the beginning and still provide to this day the foundation of this mission.

….but all of this ends up being nothing more a distraction since the Obama administration declares that they would go ahead without Congressional approval.

The White House would forge ahead with military action in Libya even if Congress passed a resolution constraining the mission, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said during a classified briefing to House members Wednesday afternoon.

….Obama sure has come a long way from declaring just a few years ago how important it was to go to the American people and Congress before taking military action……

……of course this clown circus going on at the White House probably had a lot to do with the fact Obama had no idea what he was doing in the first place:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Friday about the immediate future of Libya: ‘We don’t know what the outcome will be.’

Western leaders acknowledged, though, that there was no endgame beyond the immediate United Nations authorization to protect Libyan civilians, and it was uncertain that even military strikes would force Colonel Qaddafi from power.

……Well okay then…let’s do it anyway!!!!

Hey Pentagon!!…is there anyway to do this on the cheap and without boot on the ground???????

The White House wanted the Pentagon to come up with a low-cost regime-change plan for Libya. Ideally, this strategy would have toppled Col. Muammar Gaddafi without bogging the U.S. down in another inconclusive foreign adventure. And by no means could the plan have included young American infantrymen advancing under fire across the sand.
The military kept insisting that no such option existed. A real regime-change operation, some officers argued, requires “boots on the ground.” That was a cost the White House, given rising domestic pressure to bring the troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq, was unwilling to consider.
In long meetings and email exchanges, arguments over strategic details often led to more serious disagreements, the official told The Huffington Post. The White House thought the Pentagon was disrespecting the president by refusing to propose a politically acceptable action plan, while the Pentagon became furious that White House officials didn’t “seem to understand what military force can and cannot do,” the official said.

Well…..let’s do it anyway and see what happens….

Then we get the “it’s all about the civilians….we are not pursuing regime change”…..

and second, that to have acted alone or expanded the military mission to topple Qaddafi would have been too costly and repeated the mistakes of the Iraq War.

Nevertheless he cautioned: “But broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake.”

….but now we get this…..

This week the military mission in Libya changed. Now it’s all about regime change.
The New York Times reported:

President Obama has subtly shifted Washington’s public explanation of its goals in Libya, declaring now that he wants to assure the Libyan people are “finally free of 40 years of tyranny” at the hands of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, after first stating he wanted to protect civilians from massacres.

….that would be “regime change”…..

……So far the Obama administration has shown a consistency of ignorance and blatant hypocrisy in every move with Libya.

…..So even after we spend billions of dollars and months trying to topple Qaddafi…we still have no idea what will fill the power vacuum there…or we could simply look at the Rebels and what is happening in Egypt/Yemen to get a good idea:

Al Qaeda to Obama: Thanks
Toppling Arab governments feeds Islamist revolution

Al Qaeda central’s views are detailed in the latest issue of their English-language propaganda magazine Inspire, which features a special section on “The Revolution.” American-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki writes in an essay entitled “The Tsunami of Change” that, “Our mujahideen brothers in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and the rest of the Muslim world will get a chance to breathe again after three decades of suffocation. For the scholars and activists of Egypt to be able to speak again freely, it would represent a great leap forward for the mujahideen.”
Al Qaeda has always recognized that the greatest obstacles to jihadist progress in the Middle East were what they call the “apostate regimes,” the generally pro-Western kings and authoritarian rulers who have kept a lid on violent extremists like al Qaeda and other groups. As these regimes totter and fall, the conditions are being created for the kind of radical change the Islamists have been working towards for decades.

Gitmo alumnus, two other Islamists at head of Libya’s rebellion?

Two former Afghan Mujahedeen and a six-year detainee at Guantanamo Bay have stepped to the fore of this city’s military campaign, training new recruits for the front and to protect the city from infiltrators loyal to Col. Moammar Gadhafi.

Libyan Rebels to Reporter: “Now Is the Time of Jihad!”

“We were at Benghazi with many other volunteers. From there, we are at Ajdabiya, the center of the Jihad.”

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi’s regime.

Mr al-Hasidi insisted his fighters “are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists,” but added that the “members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader”.

The GOP needs to demand serious answers from Obama and a plan on Libya before continuing Sgt. Barrack’s war.

“Days not Weeks!!!!!”

Baxter Greene on June 2, 2011 at 11:19 PM

Link:

Nato operations in Libya: data journalism breaks down which country does what
How much is each Nato country contributing to operations in Libya? Here’s the most comprehensive analysis yet of who is doing what
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/may/22/nato-libya-data-journalism-operations-country

Baxter Greene on June 2, 2011 at 11:25 PM