White House defends legality of U.S. action in Libya
2011-06-17 0:00

By Matt Spetalnic | YahooNews.com / Reuters.com



The White House told Congress on Wednesday that President Barack Obama has the legal authority to press on with U.S. military involvement in Libya and urged skeptical lawmakers not to send "mixed messages" about their commitment to the NATO-led air war.

Delivering a detailed report to Congress to justify Obama’s Libya policy, the administration argued he had the constitutional power to continue the U.S. role against Muammar Gaddafi’s forces even though lawmakers had not authorized it.

Tensions in Washington over the Libya conflict reflected growing unease over U.S. entanglement in a third conflict in the Muslim world in addition to costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and pressure for Obama to clarify the U.S. mission in the North African country.

The 32-page response to lawmakers’ complaints followed a warning on Tuesday from House Speaker John Boehner that Obama was on thin legal ice by keeping U.S. forces involved in Libya for nearly three months without congressional approval.

But the White House insisted that Obama had not overstepped his authority because U.S. military participation in Libya had already been scaled back to a support role that did not require congressional consent.



Video from: YouTube.com
"Bruce Fein: Nothing in the Constitution permits US war in Libya"

Boehner accused Obama of failing to respect the role of Congress in military operations and asked him to explain the legal grounds for the Libya mission, saying that by Sunday the president would be in violation of a 1973 law called the War Powers Resolution if nothing changed.
The U.S. Constitution says that only Congress can declare war, while the president is commander in chief of the armed forces.

The White House cautioned lawmakers against signaling a wavering U.S. commitment as they pressed their concerns about Libya. "We believe that it’s important for Congress not to send mixed messages about a goal that we think most members of Congress share," Obama spokesman Jay Carney said, referring to hopes for the success of the NATO-led mission.

’THE LAW WAS VIOLATED’
Ten members of Congress filed suit against Obama in federal court on Wednesday over Libya. The group, led by Democrat Dennis Kucinich and Republican Walter Jones, challenged Obama’s decision to commit U.S. forces to Libya without congressional authorization.
"With regard to the war in Libya, we believe that the law was violated," Kucinich said in a statement.

But senior administration officials briefing reporters argued that Obama was not in violation of the War Powers Resolution because U.S. forces, which initially spearheaded the assault on Gaddafi’s air defenses in March, had pulled back to a support role in the NATO-led air campaign in early April.

"We’re not engaged in any of the activities that typically over the years in war powers analysis is considered to constitute hostilities," one official said. "We’re not engaged in sustained fighting."

The law prohibits U.S. armed forces from being involved in military actions for more than 60 days without congressional authorization, and includes a further 30-day withdrawal period, which would expire on Sunday.

The White House’s arguments seemed unlikely to defuse tensions with Congress over Libya, where rebels have made only halting progress against government troops and strains have emerged in the Western alliance.

Brendan Buck, Boehner’s spokesman, said the White House had presented "creative arguments" that would have to be examined, but he made clear that Republicans remained skeptical.

"The commander-in-chief has a responsibility to articulate how U.S. military action is vital to our national security and consistent with American policy goals," he said. "With Libya, the President has fallen short on this obligation."
The White House report reiterated the U.S. rationale for joining the U.N.-approved air war against Gaddafi -- to keep the Libyan leader from creating a "humanitarian catastrophe" and prevent further instability in the region.

It also said the NATO-led mission was making progress and that Gaddafi was finding himself increasingly isolated internationally, but made no predictions on when he might be ousted, except to say it would be "only a matter of time."

Obama has also faced pressure from some NATO allies to take a more assertive military role in the conflict, but he has resisted and vowed no U.S. ground forces would be deployed.

The debate over Libya comes as concerns grow in Washington over the costs and duration of the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan, where Obama has pledged to start withdrawing troops in July.

The report said the cost of U.S. military operations and humanitarian assistance in Libya was $716 million as of June 3 and was projected to reach $1.1 billion by September 30.

But seeking to make clear it would not add to U.S. fiscal woes, the report said those funds would be found in the existing Defense Department budget and therefore not require a supplemental appropriations request to Congress.


Article from: news.yahoo.com









Related Articles
"Libya war driven by O-I-L: Oil, Israel & Logistics" - Cynthia McKinney (Video)
Canadian gov’t extends Libya mission with a vote of 294 to 1, gives formal recognition to rebels
Globalist Org Reports 15,000 Dead in Libya
British Foreign Secretary Says Bombing of Libya to Last Beyond Christmas
Human Rights Watch demand Libyan rebels stop detentions (Video)
Obama, Congress battle it out over ’war powers’ in Libya


Latest News from our Front Page

Netanyahu ‘spat in our face,’ White House officials said to say
2015-01-23 22:28
The White House’s outrage over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to speak before Congress in March — a move he failed to coordinate with the administration — began to seep through the diplomatic cracks on Friday, with officials telling Haaretz the Israeli leader had “spat” in President Barack Obama’s face. “We thought we’ve seen everything,” the newspaper quoted an unnamed senior ...
The Return of the Protected Jewish Minority in Europe
2015-01-23 2:53
Contrary to the standard narratives of Jewish ‘history,’ a prominent feature of the historical presence of Jews in Europe has been their protected status. The common context for this status was a symbiotic relationship between the Jewish minority and exploitative or tyrannical elites. As agents of the feared elite, as foreigners, as exploiters in their own right, and with interests ...
Truth Revealed: McCain’s ‘Moderate Rebels’ in Syria ARE ISIS
2015-01-23 1:50
Poor John McCain and Lindsey Graham, Washington’s real first couple. They only want to arm the ‘moderate opposition’ in Syria. Three years on, how come their master plan isn’t working, while ISIS has grown so strong? Despite what media lauded as, “the largest demonstration in France’s history – bigger than liberation at the end of WWII!” (can you rightly compare the ...
European 'No-Go' Zones: Fact or Fiction?
2015-01-22 0:37
Comment: This is an interesting article about Muslim no-go Zones in Europe. However, keep in mind that the focus in this piece is not addressing the root of the problem, but a symptom of the problem. Yes, there is an issue with large Islamic colonies in Europe today, but the article mentions nothing about who has changed the immigration laws ...
A Radical Traditionalist Critique of the Anti-Islam Movement
2015-01-22 0:20
The terrorist attack against the staff at the magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris shook an entire continent. In a European climate in which protests against the perceived Islamization of our civilizational sphere becomes ever more widespread, showing in increased electoral success for moderate nationalist parties, as well as in expressions of mass public dissent, the recent resurgence of violent Islamic ...
More News »