The Obama administration responded to pressure this week regarding the legality of American military involvement in Libya by claiming that the War Powers Resolution does not apply. Citing a limited support role in the NATO intervention, the President decreed the Vietnam-era legislation which requires Congressional approval for any military engagement surpassing 60 days irrelevant in the current context.
The House of Representatives passed an amendment last Monday onto a military appropriations bill that would prohibit any funding of the war in Libya, which will have cost $1.1 billion by September. Additionally, a group of ten representatives have filed a formal lawsuit against President Obama and outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates on the grounds that the intervention in Libya is illegal and unconstitutional. Still, the administration refuses to ask permission from Congress and continues to maintain, as State Department legal advisor Harold Koh said, “We are acting lawfully.”
The administration’s defiance in this regard notes an expanded authority ascribed to the Executive Branch, unrestricted by traditional checks and balances in war-making powers. And the legal position they are taking – that supporting, planning, and conducting attacks from the air does not amount to the “hostilities” specified by the War Powers Resolution – is not very strong. Indeed, the law requires the President to seek Congressional approval “in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced: (1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances …”
The ability of the President to go to war against the wishes of Congress and the American people has expanded dramatically over the years. But technological advances in airpower are beginning to allow entire wars to be conducted without the introduction of United States Armed Forces into any field of conflict. As former Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel under the Bush administration Jack Goldsmith told the New York Times, “The administration’s theory implies that the president can wage war with drones and all manner of offshore missiles without having to bother with the War Powers Resolution’s time limits.”
Obama has significantly increased the drone program in Pakistan during his tenure. The remote controlled aerial vehicles have allowed the administration to conduct an aggressive bombing campaign in Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier Province with pilots safely sitting far away from the targeted area. The program is managed by the Central Intelligence Agency and, while widely known about in the public, is technically covert, excusing the administration from answering any questions about it or from adhering to any legal requirements to seek the approval of Congress.
Various reports have confirmed that the Obama administration has been conducting another drone war in Yemen for about two years, with at least 15 attacks and 130 killed so far this month. These operations have been similarly free from any accountability, legal justification, or Congressional pressure as has been the case with Libya.
The important difference between Obama’s wars in Pakistan and Yemen and his war in Libya is not in the level of hostilities or security interests, but rather in the ability to call one kind of war secret and another kind public. This realization, coupled with the cutting edge technology that enables such shadow wars, carries dire prospects for the future. If this administration, or any successor, is faced with an option to either carry out war in the open and be held accountable, or in secret and avoid any responsibility or checks to his power, the allure of the latter option may prove too enticing. An impending disintegration of the rule of law which at one time limited the Executive’s ability to make war with impunity is the unfortunate predictable consequence.
Not only may laws limiting war become obsolete or disregarded, but America’s legal, geographical jurisdiction will extend to the entire globe. Any dark corner or ostensibly threatening pocket of any country in the world suddenly becomes subject to the President’s discretion in a drone war. If protocols of secrecy are followed as they have been in Pakistan and Yemen, no legal sanction from Congress will be required, no justification to the American people need be put forth, and no limit to the President’s war prerogative will be observed.
Whether the administration’s legal position regarding the war in Libya will be accepted by the majority of a typically ineffectual Congress remains to be seen. The pressure to be held accountable and adhere to the law may be over in this case, but Obama and his national security team have by this time learned their lesson. Their next war will likely avoid such public scrutiny.
Did the Empire just become official? Did the elected representatives just become token bodies, performing an ancient ritual of "voting", even though all the real decisons are made elsewhere? It is true that everything can be kept secret from the American people, but how to keep it secret accross the world? Since the public vote means absolutely nothing, why bother to keep it secret at all?
Hi I wrote a comment but then the articels changedin less than an hour so I will write it again because nobody would have seen it.Over the last ten years I seen Illegal wars with planes for more.Look at the person next to you and if normal you want to live in peace.But the ellite that control Americas and other governments want war and murder.Thet care less about life.We have a weapon that can be usedand thats to refuse to fight after all besides Pearl harbour America has never been atacted except from within.Now the will resort to another fauls flag attack but we have to nbe smart and not run wereever they point.We will need hard evedence whitch I'm sure will piont to an inside job like 9/11 and 7/7.
Editorial NY Times.., June 16, 2011
“Libya and the War Powers Act”
“It would be hugely costly — for this country’s credibility, for the future of NATO and for the people of Libya — if Congress were to force President Obama to abandon military operations over Libya. However, Mr. Obama cannot evade his responsibility, under the War Powers Act, to seek Congressional approval to continue the operation“.
It is interesting to know that editorial of NY Times have no option but questioning the question.
One thing needs to be mentioned and that is: US have no credibility and if it did it was lost when it went to war in Iraq on falsified terms which at the time NY Times.., without any kind of investigation.., was making sure that the falsified facts presented by then US government was true and for people to see and understand that US needs to go to war in Iraq.., here and Now NY Times doing it again.., by questioning the US “credibility,” in one hand and in the other the matter of the “future of NATO and for the people of Libya”.
NATO is a militarism regime and Libyan people hade no part in asking NATO to attack them and the NY Times editorial knows that very well. NATO was built for defending Europe against USSR attack.., like that would ever happen.., while Russian Communism and its red army were in power.., that was over 20 years ago.., in connection.., here and now one needs to ask the question: why NATO still operating and for last 20 years NATO been at war in Balkan, Iraq, Afghanistan and now Libya. Here.., and beside ant argument regarding US or NATO.., for last 60 years USA been at war with almost every country in this world.., and in the matter of Libya US is not only a partner to NATO but NATO is the long arm of US imperialistic or if you will supremacy agendas.., here based on the principals within the NATO.., NATO was built by US which US therefore becomes part of NATO if not managing the organization.
By know everyone, including the NY Times Editorial and its well subject educated reporters knows that this war is not about democracy nor about the Libyan people.., is for US, EU protecting those whom are involved in this.., such as Saudis and Arab Emirates Tyrants in Middle East.., the NY Editorial also should know that Muslim Brotherhood which is a Sunny fundamentalists and they are well supported by these Tyrants are the one who have the backing of US government and Obama administration knows about it.., at the same time we all know that this organization have affiliations with terrorist groups that US is fighting around the world.., at the same time this war is also about African Union and Libya being part of the African Union helping by being part of verity of programs developing African nations, so for the NY Editorial not willing to say the truth but rather questioning the question is nothing but following the same old fashion Editorial arguments wanting US to lose more of its credibility by conducting another war.., or is it possible that these little wars are in preparations for bigger wars perhaps with Russia or China and others.., yet the NY Editorial don’t want to post any of it.., at least not for know.
Question to the Editorials: 60 years of war isn’t that enough in losing all the credibility that US ever had.., beside.., when NY Times or for that matt other News Editorial want to learn that peace although is not making money for US or NATO industrial “war” complex but it dose create credibility’s and peace among nations creates jobs and prosperities.., that is if US and NATO wanting to have peace.., when is this democracy that President Obama or others been talking about and for last 60 years the wording itself been used and reasoning for all these wars.., when this democracy is going to work if and when the act of wars are NOT stopped by the senate or US house of representatives.., when the democracy and its principals going to be respected if is not for people being against the US hegemony…, Dear Editorial.., only 26% of the American people supporting the Libyan war.
as State Department legal advisor Harold Koh said, “We are acting lawfully.”..
NO war is legal unless a country been attacked.., Libya have not been attacking US nor England or Italy or France.., therefore Obama – NATO and in general EU argument is as illegal as the Iraq war was.
This slap in the face of democracy.., that is.., if there is any democracy exist and these people respecting it.
Now anyone involved or new about it should spend there natural life in a small jail cell and there familys striped of all there money except moderate living expences.This is how we fight back and win without violence.I prity sure this is how it bworks but the plan could be different.I said China because Gates putting them on his probably endless list bas people to deal with.Nice way nto thank the number 1 creditor to your countyr.They are scared of Chinas build up of there military when the US spends more than the rest of the world together.They are worride that it will cause a majore chance of them taking over the world and depopulating it.My sdimilar post had more but can't remember everthing.Antiwar please put this no all 3 please because the oine I wrote was only there for bless than 1 hour and no one would have seen it.(god bless and THANKYOU)
when it was said Obama wasa going to be worse than Bush I though impossible,but I guess immpossible can happen when speaking about the worlds most powerfull and corrupt government ever seen.Americans need to get a new government unlike the comunist ones they had as of late.In America democracy is a thing of the past,the country is a corperation that could care less about freedom or life.GOD bless.
And yet, we could have a new President and a new Congress in a little over a year.
All it takes is to stop voting for these crooks.
In 2008 and 2010, somewhere around 98% of all Americans voted for parties that want these wars. If McCain had been elected, we'd still be at war in Libya right now. Maybe he'd follow the WPA, maybe he'd do exactly what Obama's doing. But, we'd still be at war in Libya.
Yet, there were at least three candidates on that ballot that wouldn't have us at war in Libya if we'd elected them.
You speak of American democracy being a thing of the past, but we still have elections. There will be two highly publicized war-party candidates on most ballots. But, usually there's another name or two on the ballot as well. Try voting for them instead.
If you see a candidate on TV, that means they've got money. A candidate with money has already been bought. Don't vote for them. Don't vote for the candidates on tv. Look a little further down the ballot and try something different next time.
Soon ALL will be secret. Perhaps America will disappear from atlases and we will go roaming the globe distilling terror from the sky, an invisible power, returning episode after episode to dominate the world until like some gigantic Hindenburg dirigible we collapse in flames or implode as the balloon deflates..
Don't get your hopes too high. The Empire won't get to see the discovery/invention of the Cloaking Device. This shit is all but over.
The word secret is repugnate in a free and open society sound fimiliar JFK but america lost its freedom before JFK was murderd but now its 10 times worse than when people protestyed in vietnam.There was never a time Americans needed a change in government from top to bottom as now.In the last decade America lost more rights and freedoms than in the hole time before the constitution was writen.In otherward time for the people to stand as one and demand change and not violently that what the government and ellite corperations that run most of the western world and all major news want.Stand togethert as one don't let racism and ignorants stand in your way we are all created equal so stand together like never before.Freedom and your vary lifes depend on it.GOD bless.
Amerikan wars have been secret for a long, long time. Poll Amerikans and see how many know about the war in Pakistan. Or the war in Yemen. Or the war in Colombia. If that ain't secret, I dunno what is. The only wars that are not secret are those on the working class, common sense and civil rights.
I don't know whether those examples are "secret" or not. I think it is more the case that the majority of the American people are just ignorant due to a major case of not paying attention. The information is all out there for everyone to see, if they cared. And Congress most likely knows what's going on and usually allows the Executive to carry on because they know that eventually they (the opposition party) will be in the driver's seat and THEY want that freedom to act themselves. The Congress has abrogated their responsibility to proscribe the actions of the Executive. And the American people plod along, allowing themselves to be led by the nose by those who, of course, have their best interest at heart…
Hey Bogie, pass the pipe!!
The rationale here seems to be that if we can kill them and they can't kill us it's not a war. Then what is it ? I would suggest the word 'terrorism'. US is not involved in war, it's perpetrating state terrorism.
A question. If this is not a war, then what is it? Then killing people via air strikes is an act of murder? To my knowledge only an act of war makes murder legal. Am I confusing something?
Obama is as bad as Bush.
The second a US airplane flies into Libyan airspace, then the US Armed Forces are introduced into the hostilities.
For that matter, since drones are equipment owned by the US Armed Forces,the second a drone flies into foreign airspace, then the US Armed Forces are introduced into those hostilities.
The intent of the writers of the Constitution is very clear. They viewed war as a dangerous situation which was a direct threat to the liberties they had just fought and won. They'd just lived under a King who had unlimited power to declare war. They didn't want this for their new, free country. So, they put the power to go to war under the control of the elected representatives of the people.
The members of Congress took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. A President that declares he has the right to fight wars in Pakistan, Yemen and Libya without Congreesional approval is attacking the Constitution. Where are its sworn defenders?
1974 — "I am not a crook"
2011 — "We are acting lawfully"
Some things never change.
Obama's view seems to be that unprovoked war is okay and covert wars are even better.
With the internet so freely available for the past 10 to 20 years, there is no excuse for Americans to not use their best instincts and efforts and grow and evolve with this internet opportunity. Each citizen's input is way better informed and thoughtout than in the past, if the soul so desires. Benny the Rat with his wind-up jesus and the Church of England and that shark's eye at the top of the pyramid all preach about "god's plan" which makes necessary the sacrifice of anything which stands in the way of personal blessed profit. This attitude is SOOO neanderthal. Like the confusion with the recent attacks on America as 'Acts of God'. What a load of crap. The only reason more and more secret wars will happen will be because of the success of the CFR and Hollywood in hypnotizing the public with their cat toy entertainment. Spielberg did the Jurassic Park trilogy, which I still believe actually happened after watching it 50 times. But it is not enough. A brief clip on the net of Tom Delay doing the tango on Dancing With the Stars snapped me out of EVER watching TV again. TV should be forced to have a XXX-rating for depravity because of that clip and lying network news. I will always hold the Jurassic Park movies as evidence of real dinosaurs running around.
So we just sit back and let the President do whatever he wants then. Republican or Democrat, does it really matter?
Does anyone have an answer to this problem or are we watching sports?
What would happen if the Joint Chiefs all resigned in protest? What would happen if unit commanders in the field just stopped offensive operations? What would happen if drone operators and meat pilots 'accidentally' dropped their payloads into the ocean? What would happen if carrier catapults ceased to function properly?
While 'mutiny' is certainly a repugnant option, perhaps it's the only thing left to do for the military to save itself. Certainly the civilian politicians who send them into harm's way don't give a hoot in hell about what happens to Private Snuffy out there in one of the 'stans.
The joint chiefs resign! Are you kidding? All that money and prestige? Resign and sit around in a park feeding pigeons? Not a chance!