Showing posts with label Libya. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Libya. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Jonathan Turley Representing Ten Congressmen In Lawsuit Against Obama's Illegal War In Libya

Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley is representing U.S. Rep. Dan Burton and nine other members of the House of Representatives in a lawsuit challenging the constitutional basis of President Barack Obama's war in Libya. Turley writes at his blog:
Today, I have the honor of representing ten members of the United States House of Representatives in challenging the constitutional basis for the Libyan War — and the underlying claims made by President Obama. These members include Democrats and Republicans from across the political spectrum. They share a belief that Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution expressly requires the authorization of Congress before a president can commit the nation to war. The lawsuit will be heard in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. We filed this afternoon and held a press conference with the members in front of the courthouse . . .
This is an action for injunctive and declaratory relief. In addition to challenging the circumvention of express constitutional language, it will also challenge arguments that no one (including members of Congress) has “standing” to submit this question to judicial review. These members will ask the federal district court for review of the constitutional question and for recognition that the Constitution must allow for judicial review of claims of undeclared wars under Article I . . .
We are deeply honored to represent these courageous members of Congress in their defense of important constitutional limitations on executive power. While there are many uncertain questions under the Constitution, this is not one of them. The Framers spoke repeatedly and forcibly of their desire to bar presidents from committing the nation to war without congressional authorization and inserted an express limitation into Article I. The last few years have vividly demonstrated the dangers that the Framers sought to avoid in dividing the war powers between the Executive and Legislative branches. Despite their sharp ideological differences, these members are bond by deep faith in the Constitution and a sense of responsibility in defending its provisions. We shall their concerns and are eager to advance their claims in the Judicial Branch in this lawsuit.
In addition to Indiana's Dan Burton, the other congressmen joined as plaintiffs in the lawsuit, which includes both Republican and Democratic members, are:  Roscoe Bartlett (R., Md); Mike Capuano (D., Mass.); Howard Coble (R., N.C.); John Conyers (D., Mich.); John J. Duncan (R., Tenn.); Tim Johnson (R., Ill.); Walter Jones (R., N.C.); Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio); and Ron Paul (R., Tx). A copy of the complaint can be viewed here. President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates are the named defendants.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Lugar Still Has It Right On Libya

Sen. Richard Lugar isn't satisfied with the belated explanation President Barack Obama offered in a speech last night for starting a war in Libya without so much as reaching out for advice, let alone seeking consent from Congress. Strangely, President Obama was vacationing with his family in Rio when American warplanes began military strikes in Libya last week. All other recent presidents always addressed the American people directly at the commencement of a military action to make the case for foreign intervention. Obama didn't bother to offer a public rationale for the military action until he was met with widespread criticism from a broad political spectrum. Obama's speech last night was delivered to an audience at the National Defense University in Washington, and he appeared to be talking over the heads of average Americans. His speech seemed contradictory at times. He suggested Gadaffi must step down at the same time he argued against broadening the mission to include regime change. Sen. Lugar explains to the Star why Obama has still not made a case for the military action.

“Most of the concerns I had before, I still have with regard to the budgeting for this, the plan for how it ends, what the benchmarks of success are, what the repercussions are for other countries that have dictators but are very helpful to us in the war against terror,” the Indiana Republican said a day after the president gave a televised address defending U.S. intervention. “These are issues the president still will need to deal with.”


Lugar, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, had said weeks before the U.S. participated in establishing a no-fly zone in Libya that the U.S. should not get involved. He also said the administration needed authorization from Congress if it did want to intervene.

Lugar said that when the president briefed congressional leaders on the situation Friday, Lugar pressed for the purpose of the action and was told it was to save civilians, an argument the president made in his national address.


“I think there are all sort of civilians that might be saved in many countries all over the world, almost every day,” Lugar said of that rationale.

Obama said Monday that while the U.S. can’t stop repression everywhere, Libya faced the prospect of “violence on a horrific scale.”

“We had a unique ability to stop that violence: an international mandate for action, a broad coalition prepared to join us, the support of Arab countries, and a plea for help from the Libyan people themselves,” Obama said.
Lugar also wonders what the total cost of the action will be and whether it will include the invariable rebuilding cost to repair the damage a sustained bombing campaign will cause. He notes the cost to American taxpayers has already exceeded $1 billion.

Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock is waging a campaign to unseat Lugar in the Republican primary next year as he seeks an unprecedented seventh term. Mourdock has criticized Lugar for being too liberal and too close to Obama, but he has remained silent so far on the Libyan action while Lugar has been an outspoken critic of Obama. I would be interested in hearing where Mourdock stands on the Libyan mission.

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Lugar Wonders When Kerry Plans To Hold Hearings On Libyan War

It seems like a reasonable question to ask. The President of the United States has effectively declared war on Libya and authorized military strikes against the country without so much as consulting Congress, let alone getting some form of advanced authorization for the military action. Sen. Richard Lugar has written to Sen John Kerry (D-MA), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, asking that he conduct hearings on the Libyan War. In a "Dear John" letter, Lugar writes:

I write to request Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on the U.S. government’s ongoing intervention in the Libyan civil war and the innumerable policy considerations that flow from that intervention. I noted a newspaper story today that cited one of your spokesmen as saying that there are no plans for hearings on Libya. That statement may not accurately reflect your own intent. But I wanted to make clear that I believe prompt hearings on Libya in our Committee are essential.


Any U.S. military intervention in a foreign country would require oversight hearings by the Foreign Relations Committee. In my judgment, hearings on Libya are especially vital because the Obama Administration did not consult meaningfully with Congress before initiating military operations. Members have not yet had an opportunity to question the Administration on its policy goals or its diplomatic and military strategy. The Administration has not defined the U.S. strategic interest in Libya or adequately articulated how the conflict ends. Questions remain about how the coalition will function going forward and what role the U.S. will play among our allies. Administration ambiguity on these points is impacting our military activities, the cohesion of the coalition, and public attitudes towards the war.

We also know little about the Libyan opposition or the Administration’s plans for paying for the war. It is not clear that the Obama Administration has thought through the consequences of this action for regional stability, the fight against terrorism, the impact on oil markets, and other factors.

I believe hearings not only would provide some important answers to Senators and to the American people, they would induce the Obama Administration to conduct in-depth contingency planning that does not seem to have occurred. Is the Administration planning for the range of potential outcomes, including a prolonged stalemate in which Col. Qadhafi remains in power in Tripoli? All scenarios in Libya will have significant budget implications at a time when Congress is focused on achieving budget savings. We need to discuss this now, so the American people know what may be asked of them . . .
It is remarkable that the Obama administration has done nothing to reach out to members of Congress either of the President's own party or Republican members like Lugar who have shown a willingness to offer bipartisan support for Obama's foreign policy initiatives, such as the START Treaty with Russia, even if those initiatives were ill-advised in my opinion.

Even more troubling is the growing disarray among our allies. Germany has already pulled out of the coalition, while the Brits are calling for the assassination of Quadafi. We are offering support to rebels which some news reports suggest are backed by al Qaeda. To think Barack Hussein Obama was issued the Nobel Peace Prize before he ever demonstrated to the world he was deserving of the great honor. His actions are totally unconstitutional and placing our country at great peril at a time it is already reeling from the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. It's as if he is deliberately promoting the destabilization of the entire Middle East and causing oil prices to skyrocket, which is only pinching the wallets of struggling Americans further. It also disappointing that Republicans can't seem to speak with a unified voice in opposition to this military action. I've been very critical of Sen. Lugar on a number of issues, but he seems to be one of the few adults in the room when it comes to this issue.

Monday, March 21, 2011

Lugar Speaks Out Against Obama's Open-Ended Military Intervention In Libya

It seems the U.S. Constitution has little continued viability in the wake of President Barack Obama's decision to go to war with Libya without any congressional declaration of war or game plan for what he expects to achieve. Sen. Lugar's criticism of the Obama administration's open-ended military action is spot on. Here's a statement Lugar's office released today:

Senator Dick Lugar, the Ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, reiterated his call today for "full congressional debate on the objectives and costs" of President Obama's military actions in Libya, "and a declaration of war" to proceed.


"There needs to be a plan about what happens after Gadhafi,” Lugar said. “Who will be in charge then, and who pays for this all. President Obama, so far, has only expressed vague hopes.”

“Congress has been squabbling for months over a budget to run the federal government for a fiscal year that is almost half over,” Lugar said. “We argue over where to cut $100,000 million here and there from programs many people like. So here comes an open-ended military action with no-end game envisioned.

With the Arab League already having second thoughts, and Turkey nixing NATO taking over, today there are even more questions. We also have to debate how all this effects the Saudis, Bahrain and Yemen."

“The facts are that our budget is stretched too far and our troops are stretched too far,” Lugar said. “The American people require a full understanding and accounting, through a full and open debate in Congress.”
The silence from other members of Indiana's congressional delegation is deafening. It is beyond me how they can stand by and watch Obama commit billions of new spending on a military action that has received no congressional authorization and for which no explanation of why this action is necessary has satisfactorily been presented to the American people at a time our country is facing the worst budget deficit in its history. Have we learned nothing from our disastrous experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan? It's as if we hopped into a paddle boat to navigate the Niagra Falls. It's insane. Have all the adults with decision-making authority left the room in Washington?