Obama's illegal war

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 10:18 PM GMT
    This article by the openly-gay Executive Vice President of the Cato Institute is well worth reading. I, like him, wonder what ever happened to the Anti-War movement that was so vocal during the Bush Administration.

    http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2011/05/president-obamas-illegal-war/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 10:46 PM GMT
    There is an anti-war movement but the media doesn't cover it. They're too busy worrying about Anthony Weiner's, er, "weiner" and Sarah Palin on the back of a motorcycle.

    The War Powers Act and how it has crept toward less and less authority for Congress to actually declare war is a huge problem. I don't think Lybia is the best example...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 11:27 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidThere is an anti-war movement but the media doesn't cover it. They're too busy worrying about Anthony Weiner's, er, "weiner" and Sarah Palin on the back of a motorcycle.
    Not saying the latter isn't true, but I think it is undeniable that it is but a shadow of what the anti-war movement was in the Bush years. The Libyan intervention is as much of an outrage as the Iraqi one. We have no business being there.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 01, 2011 11:45 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    The media has their guy in the White House, so it's best to just hush up all that talk we heard from Democrats in 2006-2008 about ending the wars.
    Yup.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 02, 2011 12:06 AM GMT
    Bullshit thread.

    The public's anger was over the Iraq war, and Obama has pulled most of the troops out of Iraq and is slowly carefully and responsibly passing over complete control of Iraq to the Iraqis.
    Bush did nothing of the kind and opposed doing anything of the kind.
    So, Obama's handled the war in Iraq differently than Bush did.

    Obama promised in his campaign to finish the job in Afghanistan and he's been doing what he promised to do since he was elected.
    There is still some anti-war movement against the war in Afghanistan, but it's vastly smaller than the large angry anti-war movement against the Bush war in Iraq because the two wars are VERY different.

    Different wars = different response.
    Duh.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 02, 2011 2:15 AM GMT
    19c79 said
    southbeach1500 said
    The media has their guy in the White House, so it's best to just hush up all that talk we heard from Democrats in 2006-2008 about ending the wars.
    Yup.


    Incorrect. In fact, if you read the more leftist media you would see reports of numerous anti-war rallies, most far larger than the Tea Party ones that are not covered even on MSNBC. War is "good for business", so they don't discuss it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 02, 2011 3:04 AM GMT
    rickrick91 saidBullshit thread.

    The public's anger was over the Iraq war, and Obama has pulled most of the troops out of Iraq and is slowly carefully and responsibly passing over complete control of Iraq to the Iraqis.
    Bush did nothing of the kind and opposed doing anything of the kind.
    So, Obama's handled the war in Iraq differently than Bush did.

    Obama promised in his campaign to finish the job in Afghanistan and he's been doing what he promised to do since he was elected.
    There is still some anti-war movement against the war in Afghanistan, but it's vastly smaller than the large angry anti-war movement against the Bush war in Iraq because the two wars are VERY different.

    Different wars = different response.
    Duh.
    Did you read the article? It is about the war in Libya, which is now officially illegal, and Obama is violating the constitution by continuing it.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jun 02, 2011 3:37 AM GMT
    19c79 said
    rickrick91 saidBullshit thread.

    The public's anger was over the Iraq war, and Obama has pulled most of the troops out of Iraq and is slowly carefully and responsibly passing over complete control of Iraq to the Iraqis.
    Bush did nothing of the kind and opposed doing anything of the kind.
    So, Obama's handled the war in Iraq differently than Bush did.

    Obama promised in his campaign to finish the job in Afghanistan and he's been doing what he promised to do since he was elected.
    There is still some anti-war movement against the war in Afghanistan, but it's vastly smaller than the large angry anti-war movement against the Bush war in Iraq because the two wars are VERY different.

    Different wars = different response.
    Duh.
    Did you read the article? It is about the war in Libya, which is now officially illegal, and Obama is violating the constitution by continuing it.




    "The war in Libya is officially illegal ?"
    A) There is no war in Libya
    B) Who "officially" declared the uprising (and US participation in it) illegal ?
    C) Where in the Constitution does it say that the President is forbidden from sending troops anywhere in the world, any time he wants ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 02, 2011 3:45 AM GMT
    19c79 said
    rickrick91 saidBullshit thread.

    The public's anger was over the Iraq war, and Obama has pulled most of the troops out of Iraq and is slowly carefully and responsibly passing over complete control of Iraq to the Iraqis.
    Bush did nothing of the kind and opposed doing anything of the kind.
    So, Obama's handled the war in Iraq differently than Bush did.

    Obama promised in his campaign to finish the job in Afghanistan and he's been doing what he promised to do since he was elected.
    There is still some anti-war movement against the war in Afghanistan, but it's vastly smaller than the large angry anti-war movement against the Bush war in Iraq because the two wars are VERY different.

    Different wars = different response.
    Duh.
    Did you read the article? It is about the war in Libya, which is now officially illegal, and Obama is violating the constitution by continuing it.




    I responded to your comment regarding the fact that the anti-war movement responded differently to the war in Iraq under Bush than it has to the other wars.
    As I said - "different wars = different reactions".

    Regarding the rest of your post - this nonsense about our participation in a NATO-led campaign in Libya being a "illegal war" is a bunch of right-wing BS that's being mouthed by right-wingers like George Will.
    It's a fucking joke and doesn't merit serious comment.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 02, 2011 4:00 AM GMT
    rickrick91 said
    19c79 said
    rickrick91 saidBullshit thread.

    The public's anger was over the Iraq war, and Obama has pulled most of the troops out of Iraq and is slowly carefully and responsibly passing over complete control of Iraq to the Iraqis.
    Bush did nothing of the kind and opposed doing anything of the kind.
    So, Obama's handled the war in Iraq differently than Bush did.

    Obama promised in his campaign to finish the job in Afghanistan and he's been doing what he promised to do since he was elected.
    There is still some anti-war movement against the war in Afghanistan, but it's vastly smaller than the large angry anti-war movement against the Bush war in Iraq because the two wars are VERY different.

    Different wars = different response.
    Duh.
    Did you read the article? It is about the war in Libya, which is now officially illegal, and Obama is violating the constitution by continuing it.




    I responded to your comment regarding the fact that the anti-war movement responded differently to the war in Iraq under Bush than it has to the other wars.
    As I said - "different wars = different reactions".

    Regarding the rest of your post - this nonsense about our participation in a NATO-led campaign in Libya being a "illegal war" is a bunch of right-wing BS that's being mouthed by right-wingers like George Will.
    It's a fucking joke and doesn't merit serious comment.

    I get a feeling that you still have read neither the article nor the Constitution (at least not in a while, I'd imagine).