Re: Déjà vu all over again!

by **Stephanie** Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:59 am

Well, those people must not heed the words of Congressman Paul.

March 14, 2011No-Fly Won't Fly Constitutionally

Last week we once again heard numerous voices calling for intervention in Libya. Most say the US should establish a “no-fly” zone over Libya, pretending that it is a benign, virtually cost-free action, and the least we could do to assist those trying to oust the Gaddaffi regime. Let us be clear about one thing: for the US to establish a “no fly” zone over all or part of Libya would constitute an act of war against Libya. Establishing any kind of military presence in the sovereign territory of Libya will require committing troops to engage in combat against the Libyan air force, as well as anti-aircraft systems. The administration has stated that nothing is off the table as they discuss US responses to the unrest. This sort of talk is alarming on so many levels. Does this mean a nuclear strike is on the table? Apparently so. In this case, I would like to make sure we actually follow the black letter of the law provided in the Constitution that explicitly grants Congress the sole authority to declare war. This week I will introduce a concurrent resolution in the House to remind my colleagues and the administration that Congress alone, not the president, decides when to go to war. It is alarming how casually the administration talks about initiating acts of war, as though Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution does not exist. Frankly, it is not up to the President whether or not we intervene in Libya, or set up “no-fly” zones, or send troops. At least, it is not if we follow the Constitution. Even by the loose standards of the War Powers Resolution, which cedes far too much power to the president, he would have no authority to engage in hostilities because we have not been attacked – not by Gaddafi, and not by the rebels. This is not our fight. If the administration wants to make it our fight, let them make their case before Congress and put it to a vote. I would strongly oppose such a measure, but that is the proper way to proceed. Constitutional questions aside, Congress also needs to consider the interests of the American people. Again, we have not been attacked. Whatever we may think about the Gaddafi regime, we must recognize that the current turmoil in Libya represents an attempted coup d’etat in a foreign country. Neither the coup leaders nor the regime pose an imminent threat to the United States and therefore, as much as we abhor violence and loss of life, this is simply none of our business. How can we commit our men and women in uniform to a dangerous military operation in Libya when they swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution? We must also understand that our intervention will undermine the legitimacy of whatever government prevails in Libya. Especially if it is a bad government, it will be seen as our puppet and further radicalize people in the region against us. These are terrible reasons to put our soldiers’ lives at risk.Finally we need to consider the economic cost. We don’t have the money for more military interventions overseas. We don’t have the money for our current military interventions overseas. We have to rely on the Fed’s printing presses and our ability to borrow from China to fund these wars. That alone should put an end to any discussion about getting involved in Libya’s civil war.

by **SheikBen** Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:34 am

Ziggy,

Are you asking a different question now?

by Aaron Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:39 am

Sam, once again you got your head where it don't belong. Some of us have opposed the creation of a no fly zone from the beginning. We're the ones who said the US should not get involved in Lybia to start with, which we shouldn't. It's none of our affair.

Apparently you disagree so why don't you explain exactly what it is we should be doing in Lybia. Of course, this is the 2nd time I ask you but just because you ducked the question the first time doesn't mean I'm going to stop asking.

Share with us ole GREAT one. What should we do?

by Aaron Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:40 am

ziggy wrote:
Keli wrote:
Aaron wrote:That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever Sam. Why is it that you can't answer simple questions based on comments you make?

So what should we do in Lybia? It's not hard. Dispense your wisdom for all to be astounded.

Which side are we on? What is victory?

Some of us were ridiculed for asking that same question as the U.S. was invading and occupying Iraq in 2003.

IF we depose--or kill-Qaddafi, who will be the leader--a pro-western democratic despot?

Again, some of us were ridiculed for asking that same question as the U.S. was invading and occupying Iraq in 2003.

There's a difference between those with valid questions and opposition and a copperhead. Don't confuse the two.

by SamCogar Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:39 am

Where the hell is da BOSS?

Where the hell is da Forum Master? Where the hell is da Moderators?

Now by damn I'se wanna know who did it, ...... n' why in hell they did it, ....... n' dat was to block my access to seeing all the new postings that specifically addressed the following, to wit:

Some of us have opposed the creation of a no fly zone from the beginning. We're the ones who said the US should not get involved in Lybia to start with, which we shouldn't.

By the way, how many new threads were started to "voice that opposition"?

by **Stephanie** Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:49 am

Stephanie Butcher
As much as I empathizewith the Lybian rebels, we cannot intervene.
No-Fly Won't Fly Constitutionally
paul.house.gov
Official web site for Representative Ron Paul (TX-14).
March 14 at 2:14pm ·LikeUnlike · · View Feedback (2)Hide Feedback (2) · ShareJon Cole Cooper and Erin Baldwin like this.

by Aaron Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:13 am

SamCogar wrote:Where the hell is da BOSS?

Where the hell is da Forum Master? Where the hell is da Moderators?

Now by damn I'se wanna know who did it, ...... n' why in hell they did it, ....... n' dat was to block my access to seeing all the new postings that specifically addressed the following, to wit:

Aaron said on 3-20-2011 at 10:41 am...

Some of us have opposed the creation of a no fly zone from the beginning. We're the ones who said the US should not get involved in Lybia to start with, which we shouldn't.

By the way, how many new threads were started to "voice that opposition"?

You make no sense whatsoever Sam. That was my quote (I fixed it for you) in which I voiced my opposition to intervention in Lybia. In fact, I ask you what we should do and you posted a similar horseshit rant similar to the one above.

I am curious though. I thought I was pretty clear when I said the US should not get involved in Lybia on THIS thread. That being the case, why should I have to start a new one?

by **Stephanie** Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:28 am

I thought what Sam was getting at was he didn't see any opposition to attacking Libya by members of this forum until after Libya was attacked.

Katie was home for 9 days. I tried to make the most of those 9 days. That left me little time for arguing against US hypothetically invading Libya.

by SamCogar Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:36 am

Stephanie wrote:I thought what Sam was getting at was he didn't see any opposition to attacking Libya by members of this forum until after Libya was attacked.
.

,

by Aaron Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:50 am

I disagree. I think the great Sam Co-Gar was rambling on about nothing because he forgot his meds.

Either way though, my comments to OC and my question to Sam about what to do in Lybia was BEFORE I knew of any attacks and I hardly see how I need to start a new thread to ask a simple question as the last thing the great Sam Co-Gar can do is answer questions.

by ziggy Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:05 pm

SheikBen wrote:Ziggy,

Are you asking a different question now?

No, still waiting for the answer to those we asked 8 years ago.

by **SheikBen** Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:31 am

Ziggy,

You may have noticed that Bush is no longer in office. Do you approve of the present bombing of a nation that has not recently attacked us? Perhaps it may even incur a retaliation from Islamists?

by SamCogar Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:53 am

Concrete thinkers keep asking the same questions over n' over n' over again until they get the answer that they were told was the "right one".

They are programmed to do that, ya know.

Anyway, don't be asking them "new" questions that they haven't been pre-programmed with an answer for ........ cause they won't be able to tell you and will just "weazelword" around to evade answering your request.

by Aaron Tue Mar 22, 2011 6:44 am

Who knew smoke and mirrors evasion was all the fault of concrete thinkers. At least that's what some would have us believe.

Personally, I think someone who refuses to answer simple questions are slinking out on a legitimate question and it is actually very telling about their character.

by **Stephanie** Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:45 am

Oh Aaron,

Sam did answer your question. He's screwing with you and while you think he's a moron he's Déjà vu all over again! - Page 2 33948

at you.

by ziggy Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:15 am

SheikBen wrote:Ziggy,

You may have noticed that Bush is no longer in office.

Yeah, I noticed that, Sheik- more than two years ago. And your point is what?

Do you approve of the present bombing of a nation that has not recently attacked us?

Of Lybia? No. It is just more of the same old fashioned American intervention in matters best left to the peoples of the region.

Perhaps it may even incur a retaliation from Islamists?

It may well do just that- sooner or later. Murphy's Law, you know.

by Aaron Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:30 am

Stephanie wrote:Oh Aaron,

Sam did answer your question. He's screwing with you and while you think he's a moron he's at you.

No, he didn't answer any questions and he's not the one Déjà vu all over again! - Page 2 33948

He may think he is but he's wrong. I don't think Sam's a moron. I think he's politically deft but otherwise he's a pretty fart smellar in on but one area and that's talking smack. In that area, he's babe in the woods and ain't got nothing on me.

I've been playing him for a couple of weeks now and have gotten him so riled up that he don't know whether he's coming or going. He's actually easier to play then TC.

by SamCogar Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:40 am

Concrete thinkers can't even see through the smoke ....... and they don't even think its their fault even when they watch themselves in the mirror doing it.

They have a self identify problem, ya know.

by Aaron Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:26 pm

Sammie ole boy, one thing I don't have is a self identity problem and if that's all you got, you're better off staying on the porch and leaving the smack talking to the BIG DOGS.

by Sponsored content