I'd like to share a letter I wrote to the editor of our local paper regarding the crimes of Obama surrounding the Libya War. In doing so, please also consider reading the speech made by Tom McClintock on March 31 (http://www.tommcclintock.com/blog/house-floor-speech-on-libya) and watching a video of another speech he gave in July (http://www.impeachobamacampaign.com/video-finally-a-congressman-tells-the-country-why-obama-is-so-dangerous/)
Now that forces supported by the US military are closing in on Qaddafi, I think it is again time to revisit the manner in which we became involved in this war. Yes, it IS a war, no matter how you try to paint it. Over the six months of this war, our representative, Tom McClintock has made several speeches regarding the unconstitutional nature in which this president brought our nation into the conflict. On March 31st, Congressman McClintock said:
"When the President ordered the attack on Libya without Congressional authorization, he crossed a very bright Constitutional line that he himself recognized in 2007 when he told the Boston Globe '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.'”
Later in that same speech her reminded us that even under the War Powers Act, the president is authorized to conduct war for sixty days (not six months) and only for the following reasons: “(1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.”
I contend, along with Mr. McClintock, that our president did, indeed, engage in an overt and aggressive act of war against Libya. These very acts are nothing short of war crimes and clear violations of the president's executive authority. They are nothing short of impeachable offensives, no matter who the president is.
Some may suggest that the president was within his right to do these things because of our country's long standing treaties with NATO and the UN. But, as Mr. McClintock, again, pointed out, "The United Nations Participation Act requires specific congressional authorization before American forces are ordered into hostilities in United Nations actions. The North Atlantic Treaty clearly requires troops under NATO command to be deployed in accordance with their country’s constitutional provisions. The War Powers Act specifically forbids inferring from any treaty the power to order American forces into hostilities without specific congressional authorization."
The president suggested that he didn't have time to consult with Congress before Libya faced a humanitarian crisis. Yet he had time to consult with the UN and NATO. Therein lay the foundation for the war in Libya. The United Nation's Doctrine of the Responsibility to Protect. The UN has declared their right to intervene in any country where they believe there is a threat to civilians of any significant nature. This is the most dangerous of all doctrines ever enacted by the United Nations. For by this doctrine the UN might feel compelled to send troops, or compel its member nations to send troops, to virtually anywhere in the world. By this doctrine, a sitting president of the United States was compelled to violate the very fabric of our Constitution and every law pertaining to such acts. Is this how we wish to have our country governed now? I certainly hope not. And I certainly hope Congress will have the courage to bring charges against our president for these egregious acts.