# Libya and Obama; it's the last straw for me **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 19, 2011, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212 "2011-03-19T00:40:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 22
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/421 "2011-03-25T16:44:19Z")
Yes, I know who wrote that article, and if you notice, he states the resolution is more limited than the President’s constitutional authority to do whatever the heck he wants, but he’s still a decent legal mind, and I do believe he is correct in this matter, even if he’s a criminal who should be thrown in jail. I couldn’t find anything more on-topic that was a direct administration position paper. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/422 "2011-03-25T16:55:51Z")
[The United Nations Participation Act](http://jenkinsear.com/2011/03/19/a-legal-war-the-united-nations-participation-act-and-libya/) gives full legal cover. > [@](#): > > The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein > [@](#): > > Article 42 > > Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations. > [@](#): > > The implication of this is clear: Article 42 concerns actions where Article 41 sanctions fail (as have happened in Libya) and actions are necessary to maintain international peace and security. Art. 42 forces do not require Congressional authorization. > > There are some who see an art. 43 agreement as a necessary precedent to an art. 42 action. This does not make sense by either law – why would you ever have art. 42 if you needed an art. 43 agreement with each state having to refer to constitutional processes? And if you need a an art. 43 agreement for art. 42 to take place, then Section 287d makes almost no sense. – Why would Article 43 agreements need Congressional authorization if Article 42 agreements (which specifically refer to forces) do not? It makes no sense at all. > > Indeed, the UN repertoire on art. 43 refers to agreements as permanent contributions of force to the UN (imagine if the UN had forces available on call, as close to a standing army as you can imagine). Those agreements have never happened. The conclusion is that art. 43 governs formation of such agreements, and that is why 287(d) required Congressional authorization for article 43 agreements – because as permanent or set commitments instead of ad hoc actions, Congress would want to authorize. By contrast, pure 42 actions that do not require agreements between parties > > Bottom line: when the UN itself says Article 43 has never been used, it’s clear this action on Libya must fall under Article 42 (if there is any doubting that at all), at which point 287(d) would apply. And Congressional authorization is statutorily not required. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/423 "2011-03-25T17:32:49Z")
That act was passed in 1945. The WPR was passed in 1973. And you’ll note that even the 1945 act addresses issues of “international peace and security”, not issues of an internal civil war. Personally, I think even the UN is out of bounds interfering with the internal actions of a sovereign state. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/424 "2011-03-25T17:40:11Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > … It’s just that he should have only acted after obtaining approval by Congress. And how long might that take, **John**? Might we arrive just in time to take part in the burial detail? You present your case as though it were cut and dried. You are offered expert opinion on the matter that contradicts your position, and appear unfazed. (If not, you might at least say so, like, “I’m totally fazed over here.”) Amongst the senior Congressgits mentioned above, how many, do you think, are Obama’s political enemies? Are they not likely to jump on a clear and obvious breach of Constitutional authority? So, why didn’t they? Because it isn’t clear and obvious, or, at the very least, not so starkly apparent as you insist? Umbras, penumbras and emanations, oh, my! I have political and Constitutional principles, oodles and gobs of them. And if one of them would forbid me from acting to save uncounted thousands of innocent lives, I’ll chuck it overboard in a heartbeat. Perhaps later, I’ll quietly pick it up, clean it and polish it and put it back in place. But I see nothing to admire in putting political or Constitutional principle above humanity. And if that’s hypocrisy, I’ll get over it. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/425 "2011-03-25T17:49:08Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > And how long might that take, **John**? Might we arrive just in time to take part in the burial detail? Congress can act quickly when the use of military force is involved. They have done so in the past. Or, perhaps if Obama had not dithered until it was almost too late, he could have had more time to work with Congress. > [@](#): > > I have political and Constitutional principles, oodles and gobs of them. And if one of them would forbid me from acting to save uncounted thousands of innocent lives, I’ll chuck it overboard in a heartbeat. Perhaps later, I’ll quietly pick it up, clean it and polish it and put it back in place. But I see nothing to admire in putting political or Constitutional principle above humanity. And if that’s hypocrisy, I’ll get over it. Principles that are called upon only when it is expedient to do so are not principles. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/426 "2011-03-25T18:02:47Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > That act was passed in 1945. The WPR was passed in 1973. > > And you’ll note that even the 1945 act addresses issues of “international peace and security”, not issues of an internal civil war. > > Personally, I think even the UN is out of bounds interfering with the internal actions of a sovereign state. I [attempted to answer](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13614233#post13614233) the WPR vs. UNPA issue in the GD thread, and [attempted](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13591141#post13591141) the “international peace and security” question in this thread. You gave rebuttals, but they boiled down to: a) Qaddafi’s actions don’t fall under “crimes against humanity”, and b) the UNSC resolution which established the responsibility to protect principle wasn’t ratified into the charter by general vote so it is not binding. I would still disagree with both of those points. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/427 "2011-03-25T18:06:10Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Principles that are called upon only when it is expedient to do so are not principles. This is exactly what **elucidator** just said, except he’s talking about the primacy of moral principles over ethical/legal ones. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/428 "2011-03-25T18:07:06Z")
OK, then they’re “guidelines”. I don’t have any principles that paralyze my humanity, nor will I. Fuck that shit! The button is before you, press the button, save countless lives, but commit the dreadful sin of hypocrisy. You’ll press it, **John** , I have every confidence. If you can’t, stand aside and I will, I can live with the crushing burden of hypocrisy, and you can keep your pristine principles. _Mazel tov_, much good may they do you. ETA: Friggin’ **Xeno**! Presents my position better than I do myself! Asshole. Smarty pants. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/429 "2011-03-25T19:46:31Z")
John has replied to people following my post, but not my post. Interesting. It’s the one with the reasoned legal letter in it. The one that says the President is the Commander in Chief. And specifically notes his ability to attack Tripoli if he so feels like it. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/430 "2011-03-25T19:53:02Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > OK, then they’re “guidelines”. I don’t have any principles that paralyze my humanity, nor will I. Fuck that shit! > > The button is before you, press the button, save countless lives, but commit the dreadful sin of hypocrisy. You’ll press it, **John** , I have every confidence. If you can’t, stand aside and I will, I can live with the crushing burden of hypocrisy, and you can keep your pristine principles. _Mazel tov_, much good may they do you. > > ETA: Friggin’ **Xeno**! Presents my position better than I do myself! Asshole. Smarty pants. No. The moral course is to stick to your legal options until there is, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you are compelled, morally, to act. You keep putting up this false dichotomy. Obama didn’t even try. He now claims that, legally, he doesn’t have to. That’s not the actions of someone overriding a legal concern with a moral one. You see things that simply aren’t there. You create some hypothetical excuse when the plain facts are that he didn’t even try. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/431 "2011-03-25T19:59:56Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > John has replied to people following my post, but not my post. Interesting. It’s the one with the reasoned legal letter in it. The one that says the President is the Commander in Chief. And specifically notes his ability to attack Tripoli if he so feels like it. I honestly thought that was a joke. What “threats to the national security and foreign policy of the United States” are involved here? At least Jefferson was responding to attacks on US vessels. If anything, we are likely creating the conditions that your cite warns about. We had our duel with Kadhaffi about his support of terrorism and we reconciled. This is just making the world free to fight civil wars village-to-village and house-to-house. How lovely. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/432 "2011-03-25T20:16:01Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > No. The moral course is to stick to your legal options until there is, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you are compelled, morally, to act. You keep putting up this false dichotomy. Obama didn’t even try. He now claims that, legally, he doesn’t have to. That’s not the actions of someone overriding a legal concern with a moral one. You see things that simply aren’t there. You create some hypothetical excuse when the plain facts are that he didn’t even try. To quote a wiser person, balderdash sir! Tommyrot! You keep trying to turn this into a clear violation of legalities, when that is _far_ from clear, and you keep dismissing the moral cause for action as if it isn’t arguable, which it manifestly is. You’ve made a good case for your position, I’m not arguing that you haven’t or that my reasons, or **Shayna** ’s or **elucidator** ’s are somehow better reasons than yours. Please don’t pretend the issue is beyond reasonable disagreement, and please stop throwing up the patently ridiculous claim that Obama didn’t “try” to do a number of things prior to the UNSC action. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/433 "2011-03-25T20:17:24Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > No. The moral course is to stick to your legal options until there is, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you are compelled, morally, to act. You keep putting up this false dichotomy. Obama didn’t even try. He now claims that, legally, he doesn’t have to. That’s not the actions of someone overriding a legal concern with a moral one. You see things that simply aren’t there. You create some hypothetical excuse when the plain facts are that he didn’t even try. Oh, I see. So Ghadaffy threatening to wade in the blood of his political enemies, he was maybe just kidding around? Us nervous nellies overreacted to those armored columns heading toward Bengazzi, they were going camping? Now, “Obama didn’t even try”? That, boiled down, says he didn’t comply with what you insist are his obligations. There is knowledgeable opinion that suggests that he did what he was obliged to do, yet you insist otherwise. Permit me to believe that your expertise in this regard might not be definitive? His resume includes lecturer in Constitutional law at a well-regarded law school. And yours? ---
**Author:** ![Claverhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/13edae/32.png) [@Claverhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Claverhouse)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/434 "2011-03-25T20:33:19Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > No. The moral course is to stick to your legal options until there is, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you are compelled, morally, to act. You keep putting up this false dichotomy. Obama didn’t even try. He now claims that, legally, he doesn’t have to. That’s not the actions of someone overriding a legal concern with a moral one. You see things that simply aren’t there. You create some hypothetical excuse when the plain facts are that he didn’t even try. Indeed. I imagine that Elucidator regards it as **poor taste** , much as with his weary dismissals of any tedious retreading of some vulgar little inconvenient truth of the past dredged by tired hacks who haven’t the decency to move on… _Well, that didn’t take long._ \*Now that President Barack Obama has intervened in Libya, his army of apologists is mobilizing to defend his “humanitarianism,” declaring that **his** war isn’t at **all** like Bush’s wars. It’s something new, and different – and admirable. I’m not at all surprised. Are you? The anti-interventionist veneer of most American liberals and assorted “progressives” peels off quite readily when a little “humanitarian” lotion is applied – especially if it’s poured on thick by a liberal Democratic President with a domestic agenda they can endorse. \* … _We’re not cowboys: we’re **social workers** , the kind with mean, pinched faces and a moralizing, condescending air – armed with fighter jets, guided missiles, and nuclear weapons, and determined to Do Good._ _Now that the United States has bankrupted itself by spending more on “defense” than the rest of the world combined, the “multilateralists” take up the task of convincing the American people they’ve got to pursue the dream of empire to the very end. Oh no, they say, we’re good “liberals,” **we** don’t dream of empire – only of “international law” and a “global order.” Top dog? Not us! We’ll leave that onerous job to the UN Security Council._ _Yes, and you’ll note the Obama-ites went to the Council, not the Congress, to ask permission to strike: and just to show we’re **not** the Top Dog, they let the Brits and the Frenchies take the lead. What generosity._ \*The “argument” presented here is the one progressives have salved their perpetually guilty consciences with ever since this manifestly unqualified ex-“community organizer” took up residence in the White House: he’s **not Bush**! That’s why they remained silent when he extended our perpetual “war on terrorism” into Pakistan, why they kept mum as the PATRIOT Act was reauthorized at the behest of the administration, and why they put the covers over their heads and stuck their fingers in their ears as George Bush’s torture regime continued, unabated and even expanded, under Obama. It’s why they ignored our failure to withdraw from Iraq, as promised by candidate Obama, and why they smiled politely and changed the subject whenever anyone had the poor taste to mention these unpleasant subjects. \* Justin Raimondo – **[Liberals March to War](http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/03/22/liberals-march-to-war/)** : Antiwar 23 March 2011 ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/435 "2011-03-25T20:41:33Z")
Wow. Justin Raimondo’s a moron. Got any other sad bullshit you’d like to inflict on us? ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/436 "2011-03-25T20:42:43Z")
Gosh, the justification for military involvement matters. News at freaking 11. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/437 "2011-03-25T20:50:52Z")
I’m wondering, is this an effort from the right to co-opt “anti-war”? ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/438 "2011-03-25T21:12:39Z")
That’s right. Obama’s not a _real_ multilateralist. He just works with other countries to pretend he is. ---
**Author:** ![Claverhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/13edae/32.png) [@Claverhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Claverhouse)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/439 "2011-03-25T21:21:04Z")
Prolly not: since you have never heard of him, Mr. Raimondo is a paleo-libertarian non-christian who’s been running [Antiwar.com](http://Antiwar.com) since 1995 which opposes all wars and was been particularly prominent against the Bush regime. Obviously you will recognise these guests as decidedly right-wing, but it is scarcely a fly-by-night opportunist anti-Obama outfit, only objecting to his wars \*: **[The site syndicates](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiwar.com)** columns and op-eds by such authors as ``` Ron Paul Alexander Cockburn Charley Reese Cindy Sheehan John Pilger Jonathan Cook Joshua Frank Juan Cole Kathy Kelly Gareth Porter Kevin Carson Noam Chomsky Norman Solomon Pat Buchanan Paul Craig Roberts Robert Fisk William Lind Tom Engelhardt ``` - Three, and counting. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2011, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212/440 "2011-03-25T21:31:25Z")
The thing is, if he opposes all wars, why not just say that? Why make a charade of arguing the fine points of the justifications for this one and that one, when none of that really matters to him–no matter what the circumstances, no matter what the arguments, Raimondo is always going to oppose, right? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-and-obama-its-the-last-straw-for-me/575212.md?page=23)