View Photo Gallery — As international airstrikes continue against forces loyal to Moammar Gaddafi, rebels face difficult battles.
By Scott Wilson, Thursday, June 16, 7:12 AM
The Obama administration argued Wednesday that its nearly three-month military involvement in Libya does not require Congressional approval due to the supporting role most U.S. forces are playing there, a position that puts it at odds with Republican congressional leaders and the anti-war wing of its own party.
The White House argument, included in a 32-page report to Congress released late Wednesday, is the administration’s first detailed response to complaints from lawmakers of both parties, who say President Obama has exceeded his authority as commander in chief by waging war in Libya without congressional authorization.
Those complaints have grown louder and attracted more lawmakers with each passing week of the Libya operation, which the Obama administration has said is making significant progress in forcing Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi from power.
The demand that Obama secure congressional approval to continue the Libya operation has brought together House Republicans and liberal Democrats, some of whom joined together Wednesday to file suit in federal court to stop U.S. participation in the war.
The administration’s report is unlikely to appease Congressional leaders concerned over Obama’s strategy in Libya or the rising costs of the war, one of three the administration is fighting in Muslim nations at a time of severe fiscal strain at home.
But senior administration officials say Obama has participated in the Libya campaign in a way “consistent” with the War Powers Resolution, passed by Congress in 1973 in an attempt to constrain a president’s war-making capabilities following the undeclared conflicts in Vietnam and Korea.
“We’re not engaged in any of the activities that typically over the years in war powers analysis is considered to constitute hostilities within the meaning of the statute,” said one senior administration official, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity during a conference call arranged by the White House.
“We’re not engaged in sustained fighting. There’s been no exchange of fire with hostile forces. We don’t have troops on the ground. We don’t risk casualties to those troops,” the official continued. “None of the factors, frankly, speaking more broadly, has risked the sort of escalation that Congress was concerned would impinge on its war-making power.”
Under the War Powers Resolution, a president has 60 days from the start of military operations to obtain Congressional authorization or withdraw forces from the fight.
In the case of Libya, that deadline expired last month with the Obama administration failing to do either.
The House voted June 3 to give Obama two weeks to comply with the resolution, a deadline that expires Friday.
In a letter to Obama dated Tuesday, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) wrote that “the ongoing, deeply divisive debate originated with a lack of genuine consultation prior to commencement of operations and has been further exacerbated by the lack of visibility and leadership from you and your administration.”
________
Top Comments (8)All Comments (60)
aaronweiner
Well, THIS is real news. Congratulations to Congress for doing something, by the way: unfortunately, that something is a bipartisan suing of our President. Just when we thought our government wasn't insane enough, here come the lawyers. I was completely okay with the Libyan conflict as long as Congress wasn't protesting - and they do have some legal grounds to protest.
All of my following notwithstanding, Obama at this point should go to Congress and ask for Congressional appr...See Moreoval. One understands why he didn't - Republicans would have found the worst possible light to express their dissatisfaction - but it's time to accept that both parties in Congress are displeased; he should make peace with the beast and ask for Congressional approval; barring that, he should pull out American assistance.
I think the anonymous White House rep said it best; we haven't done anything in Libya which suggests we're at war with Libya. No exchange of fire. No combat troops. No sustained fighting. No risk of loss of American lives.
I still haven't seen any evidence that we're in a war in Libya. We're providing support for European allies who are supposedly a big part of a multilateral effort. We have no troops in Libya. We haven't quite spent a billion dollars yet in four months, and we've stepped back the efforts dramatically after taking out the air defenses, rather than having gone forward.
I think the bigger problem is that we haven't been able to end the wars we're currently running, so any military action now seems ten times bigger than it actually is. See Less
Today 6/16/2011 7:59:28 AM UTC+1000
dottydo
Excuse me, but it is too late to back pedal, he will be impeached for breech of rules.
You seem to forget Pakistan 2009.
We do not have dictatorships in the Oval offices.
Today 6/16/2011 8:01:31 AM UTC+1000
dastubbs
Oh, dotty, dotty, dotty. Nobody is going to impeach anyone.
In fact, Congress is going to put on a show of disagreeing with the president, but they aren't going to do a darned thing. For one simple reason: the next time a republican sits in the White House, he will cite Obama's legal opinion for whatever action is taken.
That's the reason neither Republicans nor Democrats have ever challenged the constitutionality of the War Powers Act in court. (They've c...See Morehallenged the executive's interpretation of the act, all unsuccessfully. But not the Act itself.)
Simply put, republicans want to have the same options as Obama the next time one of their guys is in the White House. See Less
Today 6/16/2011 8:11:00 AM UTC+1000
aaronweiner
We're a long, long way away from impeaching Obama, and, besides, it would be ineffectual: he won't get removed from office. This action won't make him a felon (which was the problem with Clinton, remember; he was accused of an actual felony). Presidents of both parties have ignored the act in the past, and some called it unconstitutional.
We'll spend a lot of time and energy grandstanding and acting silly over something very straightforward and easy to understand: Congress wa...See Morents its due when war's declared, and the President has every right to both comply or defend his action.
I'm suggesting that good sense here is to capitulate, even while I think Congress is wrong to do what they're doing. See Less
Today 6/16/2011 8:11:11 AM UTC+1000
MDLaxer
"...we haven't done anything in Libya which suggests we're at war with Libya...."
Seriously? We fired over 120 Tomahawk Missiles in the opening weekend of this ...action.
I'm pretty sure if any nation (or even a crime syndacate like al-Quaeda) launched 120cruise missiles at the U.S., we'd consider that an act of war.
Today 6/16/2011 8:17:36 AM UTC+1000
kitchendragon50
"Obama at this point should go to Congress and ask for Congressional approval."
The act requires Congressional authorization.
Today 6/16/2011 8:18:10 AM UTC+1000
aaronweiner
Done in the first 60 days, thus utterly legal, followed by a dramatic pullback.
Today 6/16/2011 8:19:04 AM UTC+1000
MDLaxer
Excellent NeoCon rationalization. Dick Cheney welcomes you to the team.
Today 6/16/2011 8:34:51 AM UTC+1000
__________
Mỹ đã và đang lãnh đạo thế giới tự do dân chủ, các anh chị nghĩ thế nào về bài viết "Obama administration: Libya action does not require congressional approval" và những ý kiến phê bình trên của độc giả ???
Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog"
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc .
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị .
conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
16062011
___________
CSVN là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC
No comments:
Post a Comment