Dem. Rep: Obama's handling of Libya "premeditated," "irresponsible"

Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) speaks on November 17, 2010 in Washington, DC.

/ Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Ohio Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur on Wednesday lambasted President Obama's handling of the situation in Libya, arguing that his decision to intervene without consulting Congress was "premeditated" and "irresponsible."

In remarks on the House floor, Kaptur questioned the justification of the mission at large, and said she was "highly concerned" about the way the mission had been launched.

"Surely there was time to seek congressional approval," Kaptur said of the president's decision to authorize U.S. force in Libya. "I'm highly concerned that this military intervention took the familiar pattern of launching attacks just when Congress left town to go back to our districts for a week, thus silencing our voices in Congress even more as this floor was shut down."

"How premeditated, and how irresponsible, I believe the current course of events to be," she added.

Kaptur said that while the president apparently consulted with some congressional leaders before joining the mission, who those leaders were was unclear.

"Who exactly were they?" Kaptur asked. "None of these gestures meet the spirit or letter of the law under our Constitution relating to military engagement abroad."

The president spoke with a few select leaders on March 18, the day after the U.N. authorized a no fly zone and the day before the first military air strikes began. Those leaders, according to CBS News producers, included House Speaker John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, No. 2 House Democrat Steny Hoyer, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers and ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee Dutch Ruppersberger. From the Senate, the president spoke with Leader Harry Reid; Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin; Sen. Richard Lugar, ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee; and Sen. Saxby Chamblissm, top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Along with Kaptur, Republican Rep. Austin Scott raised questions about the timing of the mission last Friday, wondering, in an interview with The Hill, "Why did [Mr. Obama] wait until the day after we adjourned Congress [to launch military strikes]?"

"I believe that timing was intentional by the president," added Scott, who serves as president of the GOP freshman class.

Kaptur, in her remarks, also questioned the justification of the intervention itself, emphasizing what she believed to be a shortage of allies on the mission, and wondering, "is America to intervene wherever there is an uprising?"

"Why is America taking a military role in an internal civil conflict without a vote of Congress?" Kaptur asked. "Is this America's 21st century Monroe Doctrine, to now intervene militarily under the guise of humanitarian aid, wherever a president chooses?"

Democratic Rep. Lynn Woolsey (Calif.) expressed similar hesitations regarding the military strikes.

"The president gave a fine speech Monday night, as he certainly does, but I found him more eloquent than persuasive," she said. "I'm not satisfied that he's made a thorough case for military action in Libya."

"Does the Pottery Barn rule apply in Libya?" she asked. "If we break it, do we own it?"

Kaptur said she had written to the Obama administration requesting proof of legal authority to intervene in Libya.

Added Kaptur as her time on the floor ran out: "Mr. Speaker, on the operations in Libya, there should have been a vote here."

[theaffluentsociety2]

Whats premeditated and irresponsible is how these Democrats are turning on their party leader, and potentially screwing up any chance for them to win in 2012 or 2014. What's irresponsible is how these Dems probably did not oppose Iraq and W, because if they had, corporations would have cut their finances, and Fox would have called them traitors.

[endurorob_5]

RedWings_ninety_one March 31, 2011 12:02 PM EDT
THERE IT IS!! Someone now criticizing Obama for even going...does it matter that he didn't consult congress? NO, what matters is that Qaddafi is no longer bombing his citizens.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Yes it does matter that he didn't get legislative approval seeing as how we were not attacked.

[RedWings_ninety_one]

No, to my understanding..Congress is only neede to declare war, which this isn't.

[RedWings_ninety_one]

THERE IT IS!! Someone now criticizing Obama for even going...does it matter that he didn't consult congress? NO, what matters is that Qaddafi is no longer bombing his citizens.

[discussthis]

The desperation of the left, to support 0bamma, by offering spurious arguments and evasive logic, is amazing.
When will the left admit they made a mistake in believing in some vague "hope and change"?

[bennyblack1]

I think that President Obama made the right decision in helping the rebellion. I think that this is as far as it should go, though. The Libyan people have made themselves clear that they do not want Ghadaffi ruling over them, killing their friends and families. It is clear that they do not hate the Jews, and that they don't wish to be at war with them. The Libyan people, it seems to me, are not a status quo population willing to accept a government with cruel devices for leadership. The bombing should have given the rebels time to unify and coordinate a clear plan to not only take over the country for themselves, but to rule responsibly. I think that if the Libyan's continue on the right track, and avoid deceptive partnerships that would lead to another tyrranical government, that they will succeed in their endeavor.
I agree with President Obama, in this case, because the Libyan people don't need another set of troops coming in from outside their borders. They needed air superiority. Which is what the NATO alliance provided. I personally think that it is all we SHOULD provide.
Also, remember, that this was a joint decision between the members of the United Nations. It wasn't just President Obama's decision. He didn't just go out and do this on his own, and it was purely for the benefit of the Libyan people. I don't think there was an ulterior motive involved. Benefits, if the Libyan people are successful, will come later - when the Libyans have settled and have begun trade relations and interacting positively with other NATO countries.

[BBFmail]

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27651.htm

Ron Paul says no-fly zone over Libya is an 'act of war,' needs approval from Congress

By Pete Kasperowicz

March 10, 2011 "The Hill" -- Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) on Thursday argued that establishing a no-fly zone over Libya is an act of war that should require congressional approval, and will introduce a sense-of-Congress resolution saying the administration should seek input from the branch before imposing a no-fly policy.

"Congress should act," Paul said. "I'm preparing to introduce a resolution next week, and it's a sense of Congress, that the executive branch can't do this without approval from the Congress.

"We have to remember, a no-fly zone is an act of war," he added.

Paul equated a no-fly zone with an act of war based on the U.S. experience in Iraq, which started with a no-fly zone in the 1990s and ultimately ended in war. He also said it is difficult to establish a no-fly zone without some military activity.

"You can't just all of a sudden turn a switch and say don't fly over Libya," Paul said. "You have to bomb a lot of anti-aircraft sites and a lot of military establishment. So the war is on."

Paul also argued that there is no legitimate reason for a no-fly zone over Libya, which is entering a civil war but does not pose any national security threat to the United States.

"Now, what moral right do we have to participate in war activity against Libya?" he asked. "Libya hasn't done anything to the United States. It would be foolish, it would have a downside, and we should think very, very carefully before we go expanding the wars that we're already involved in."

Paul is one of 10 House members who sponsored a resolution on Wednesday to direct the president to remove U.S. troops from Afghanistan.

--

[retm-w]

Kaptur and kucinich both trying to suck up to the republican governor, so they won't lose their seats. Both of their seats are on the line with redistricting.

[BBFmail]

And who is Ron Paul supposedly "sucking up to"?

[gsa400]

It is alright for George to commit an treason But Obama can't save thousands of lives? Sounds like Rep. Kaptur should get out of the country we don't allow traitors in America.

[Tulsa CSI]

for crying out loud give the man a freaking break,hes been critized since the beginning of his presidency...

[carolo43]

The only thing John McCain and Lindsay Graham are upset about is that Obama did not act sooner. I think it's just so much better if you go to Congress for a vote but lie about the details to get those votes like Bush did? A humanitarian effort is not an act of war and this is what this has been labeled.

[BBFmail]

Obama's speech showed a person more capable of DoubleSpeak and DoubleThink than Big Brother and the denizens of George Orwell's 1984.

The bombing of Libya will began on or nearly to the day, of the eighth anniversary of the beginning of the destruction of Iraq, 19th March, in Europe. Libya too will be destroyed - its schools, education system, water, infrastructure, hospitals, municipal buildings. There will be numerous "tragic mistakes", "collateral damage", mothers, fathers, children, babies, grandparents, blind and deaf schools and on and on. And the wonders of the Roman remains and earlier, largely enduring and revered in all history's turmoils as Iraq, the nation's history - and humanity's, again as Iraq and Afghanistan, will be gone, for ever.

The infrastructure will be destroyed. The embargo will remain in place, thus rebuilding will be impossible. Britain, France and the US., will decide the country needs "stabilizing", "help with reconstruction." They will move in, secure the oil installations and oil fields, the Libyan people will be an incidental inconvenience and quickly become "the enemy", "insurgents", be shot, imprisoned, tortured, abused - and a US friendly puppet "government" will be installed.

The invaders will award their companies rebuilding contracts, the money - likely taken from Libya's frozen assets without accounting - will vanish and the country will remain largely in ruins.

And the loudest cheerleaders for this, as Iraq, will be running round tv and radio stations in London, Europe and the US, then returning to their safe apartments and their UK/US/Europe paid tenures, in the knowledge that no bombs will be dropping on them.

[Forbus56]

The chickens....are coming home....to roost.