Kucinich: Obama Libya War Violates Constitution and UN Resolution

[The Northerner]

Run time: 15:02 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ia3kRC8hVWM   Posted on YouTube: April 15, 2011 By YouTube Member: TheRealNews Views on YouTube: 492   Posted on DU: April 16, 2011 By DU Member: The Northerner Views on DU: 757

 
Dennis Kucinich: US/NATO intervention politics of hegemony

[midnight]

1. Dennis is always standing up for the people... The people

cannot afford to pay for any more wars.... We can't and we won't live with financial marshall law.... So that the elite can rake in blood money.....

[Dokkie]

2. Even if its constitutional

we cannot afford anymore wars. Go Dennis

[emilyg]

3. k/r for honest Dennis.

[slipslidingaway]

4. OLC Memo as Time Machine

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2011/04/08/olc-memo-as-time-machine/

http://static1.firedoglake.com/28/files/2011/04/110401-Krass-Libya-Memo.pdf

"I’m going to have more to say about the Libya memo the Administration released yesterday. But I just wanted to point out something about the structure of it.

Here’s the first paragraph:

This memorandum memorializes advice this Office provided to you, prior to the commencement of recent United States military operations in Libya, regarding the President’s legal authority to conduct such operations. For the reasons explained below, we concluded that the President had the constitutional authority to direct the use of force in Libya because he could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest. We also advised that prior congressional approval was not constitutionally required to use military force in the limited operations under consideration.

This is not the advice authorizing the Libyan engagement. Rather, it is a document written the day after–the memo notes–the Administration turned over control to NATO, claiming to memorialize the advice given before the Libyan engagement (therefore, presumably, before March 19).

Is this all the advice OLC gave the President? Did OLC authorize further activities? Did Obama’s description of why bombing Libya was in the national interest before March 19 match what appears in this memo, written after the fact? ..."

[slipslidingaway]

5. Obama Reaffirms Commitment to Regime Change in Libya

http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/04/15/obama-reaffirms-commitment-to-regime-change-in-libya/

"President Obama penned a joint op-ed with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron about the situation in Libya. The President has been awfully quiet about the Libyan mission since announcing it would take “days, not weeks” four weeks ago. But this statement reaffirms the commitment, and actually goes further by all but announcing a policy of regime change.

Our duty and our mandate under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 is to protect civilians, and we are doing that. It is not to remove Qaddafi by force. But it is impossible to imagine a future for Libya with Qaddafi in power. The International Criminal Court is rightly investigating the crimes committed against civilians and the grievous violations of international law. It is unthinkable that someone who has tried to massacre his own people can play a part in their future government. The brave citizens of those towns that have held out against forces that have been mercilessly targeting them would face a fearful vengeance if the world accepted such an arrangement. It would be an unconscionable betrayal.

Furthermore, it would condemn Libya to being not only a pariah state, but a failed state too. Qaddafi has promised to carry out terrorist attacks against civilian ships and airliners. And because he has lost the consent of his people any deal that leaves him in power would lead to further chaos and lawlessness. We know from bitter experience what that would mean. Neither Europe, the region, or the world can afford a new safe haven for extremists.

The three leaders go on to say that the NATO mission will continue even if the Gadhafi regime pulls back from all Libyan cities and undertakes a cease-fire. This is to ensure “civilian protection,” they say, but also explicitly to build pressure on Gadhafi to step down.

This is absolutely an escalation from the UN mandate..."


Libya’s Pathway to Peace
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/opinion/15iht-edlibya15.html?_r=1

"...However, so long as Qaddafi is in power, NATO must maintain its operations so that civilians remain protected and the pressure on the regime builds. Then a genuine transition from dictatorship to an inclusive constitutional process can really begin, led by a new generation of leaders. In order for that transition to succeed, Qaddafi must go and go for good. At that point, the United Nations and its members should help the Libyan people as they rebuild where Qaddafi has destroyed — to repair homes and hospitals, to restore basic utilities, and to assist Libyans as they develop the institutions to underpin a prosperous and open society..."