Resisting Temptation Over Libya
by Ernest Istook“It’s an uncomfortable fact that sending a message of solidarity with our NATO allies is more important than sending a message to President Obama.”
It’s tempting to cut off funds immediately for President Obama’s ill-conceived Libya offensive. But it’s not the right course. For the sake of our allies, Congress needs to be patient in using the power of the purse to correct Obama’s misadventure.
The policy is indeed a mess. Even if the ongoing air attacks chased Muammar Qadhafi from power, he might be replaced by a radical Islamist regime. We have no good intelligence on what the rebels would establish if they took over.
Obama’s ham-handed approach has been an insult to Congress’ constitutional role “to define and punish . . . Offences against the Law of Nations,” as specified in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. Obama failed to make any meaningful consultation with Congress before he committed American forces, much less obtain any type of actual approval.
Yes, it’s tempting for Congress to “teach him a lesson” by voting to cut off U.S. funding immediately for Libyan operations. The power of the purse is their strongest counter-balance to the President’s role as commander-in-chief.
But the countervailing argument is that our NATO allies—a key component of America’s national security—have been pulled into the Libya fray based on assurances and urgings from the Obama Administration. Those may have been improvident, but they are real.
A precipitous exit from America’s role in Operation Unified Protector would pull the rug out from under our allies, making it less likely they would ever be willing to stand with America in the future when we have real need for their help.
Nations conducting the air strikes have included Great Britain, France, Canada, Norway, Denmark and Belgium while other military support has come from Italy, Spain, The Netherlands, Albania, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania and Turkey, according to the BBC’s tallies. Others, like Germany, have refused to participate in an unclear mission.
The current NATO operation expires in September; Congress should stick with our allies until then, even as it asserts itself to make sure there is no further extension or expansion of the mission.
Meantime, other efforts such as arms and financial embargoes could be pursued.
It’s an uncomfortable fact that sending a message of solidarity with our NATO allies is more important than sending a message to President Obama.
Already, the House formally rebuked President Obama on June 3rd with a 268-145 bipartisan vote on a resolution that included a declaration that, “The President has failed to provide Congress with a compelling rationale based upon United States national security interests for current United States military activities regarding Libya.”
The bipartisan war of words against Obama’s mistaken course will take a toll on him. The lawsuit by some in Congress will be just a sideshow; the courts cannot be expected to be involved in this dispute over the President’s war powers, nor should they be.
It’s sad but true that the President has committed our forces and our funds unwisely. But Congress should resist the temptation to make it worse by abandoning our allies who followed us into the skies over Libya.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
74 Comments
Qadhafi looking like Judge Sonia Maria Sotomayor after a long night of cocaine with Barrack.
Impeach Obama or Impeach Republicans in the House.
Those are the only 2 choices.
The American Citizen no longer cares what Talking Heads have to say on issues, any issues.
The Rules have changed, the TEA Party has taken this Nation over.
And no Nation currently involved in the Libyan operation is our Ally.
No NATO Nation was attacked by Libya.
Wow. Another neo-con defense of an unconstitutional war. We have absolutely no business getting involved in Libya and putting American lives and money at risk. End it now.
I agree, outside the liberal cesspool I work in I see plenty of hatred and disgust directed at this administration and the ones I feel are most disgusted are new recruits anxious to start their boot camp…it's good they are on the side of the Tea Party because they have the biggest collection of the worlds largest weapons.
"It’s tempting to cut off funds immediately for President Obama’s ill-conceived Libya offensive. But it’s not the right course. For the sake of our allies, Congress needs to be patient in using the power of the purse to correct Obama’s misadventure."
BULL$HIT!!! Congress needs to get off their collective A$$E$ and stop this crap NOW!!!
AND –IMPEACH OBAMA!
I thought it was the NATO countries that pulled us into the war. It seems that they got involved first and then Obama followed.
Just two problems with this analysis, Congressman Istook:
• We no longer have the money to maintain standing troops in places like Germany, the UK, Japan, Italy, Spain, Brazil and Bulgaria. What makes you think we have billions more for Uuhhhbama's misadventures in Libya, Yemen and "Pockystahn" – never mind Iraq and Afghanistan? What part of "if we keep spending like this, there won't be a United States left from which to project force" don't current and former denizens of the Beltway understand?
• Speaking of the willingness to "stand with America in the future when we have real need for [allies'] help," I don't recall the Euro-peons expending any more effort then that necessary to fling poo when we last had a "real need for their help." Isn't it long past time for the US to stop subsidizing the Euro-peons' failed socialist states and tell them they'll need to stand on their own two feet militarily from now on?
Heck…0bumble has put more Americans lives at risk here at home than he has in Libya. Count the bodies at the end of his term next year. At the very least Qadhafi recognizes the importance of borders….unlike captain failure, the "O".
Mr Istook– I take issue with your article. The U.S. of A. has enjoyed little and spotty support from the "allies" . Obama was very simply out maneuvered by those European leaders (who get much of their petrol products from Libya).
Anyone who understands ANYTHING KNOWS that Obama is an egomaniac. All they had to do was appeal to that ego, and they had him. OH– and who's stuck paying for the idiot's ego??? WE ARE. What's the GOAL??? What's the end state? Ummmm—They're working on that–BUT, don't worry. This is the right thing to do.–BULL$HIT!!!
Still partying like it's 2003, pinhead? Times are changing. Too bad you can't change along with them…
"It’s sad but true that the President has committed our forces and our funds unwisely."
No, he's committed our forces UNLAWFULLY. If not initially, it has become unlawful since he ignored the War Powers Act, 60 day limit.
That's more than just "sad." That is arrogant and criminal.
And besides that, if "Great Britain, France, Canada, Norway, Denmark and Belgium, …….Italy, Spain, The Netherlands, Albania, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania and Turkey, are incapable of carrying out this operation, there is something terribly wrong with the operation.
What is the mission in Libya— does anybody know? The allies can move out when we move out, there is nothing we do that makes them stay.
Our troops are way — way over tasked and our military is spread far too thin. This is dangerous and stupid and must be stopped.
Obama is anti-American and I don't know what his purpose is in Libya but you can be sure its not to benefit us in any way whatsoever.
Yeah, but Qadhafi is prettier. And he's such a sharp dresser.
Agreed, with one caveat. Impeach options one two and three (democrats). Time for a reset!
I left Democrats out because they have no power to stop Impeachment in the House.
Hey, Istook, Ruck Up for once in your life and Fight for what you believe in yourself.
There is nothing stopping you from going to Libya and Fighting on the NATO side.
Damn Ex-Government Civilians who Lost Elections in Landslides never cease to amaze me, always seeking to send the Military into Battle, just to give you and your kind something to talk about at your damn cocktail parties.
Trying to cling to power over other peoples (your betters) lives, nothing more.
Roger that.
Brother Leader Muhamar sure is a sharp dresser.
I love those pseudo-military uniforms.
He looks like he is in a Michael Jackson contest
Probably..Libya has some of the planets sweetest crude oil. We have our own abundance of sweet crude here in America in the Bakken but we are infested with environmental extremists so Libya is where we drill….if you don't like it punch a environmental in the head.
This 'war' in Libya (and the situation in the whole area) is akin to lions vs hyenas.
We are doing what, battling the lions to benifit the hyenas?
He could have been the doorman at the Sofitel hotel when IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn was staying there.
No wonder the French are upset with him.
CONgress was warned that o-HOLE was set to usurp their power in every way, before he took the
oath of office. So WHY NOW, are they to become concerned? Over a little joke like Lybia?
But forget his ham-handedness at EPA, et al…
WHAT A COUNTRY!!!
.
This Istook fellow is a neocon, that means his opinions can be safely ignored as they are motivated by a failed ideology.
Mr. Istook there is this little thing called the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States of America, now I know you neocons think those are quaint outdated notions, but the people of this country do not. The war in Libya will be ended, and ended swiftly because it is illegal, end of story.
Thoughtful and thought-provoking piece. I think you're probably right, but there must be some way to sanction the WH for this travesty. Yes, we'll do what we must to help our allies, but if BO knows that he essentially has a free reign to rush headlong into crazy schemes without following our Constitution . . . well, he'll just keep doing it.
This guy is a danger to us all: our own nation and our allies. Heck, he's even a danger to our enemies. The entire world is completely destabilized in no small part because of him and his amateurishness, dithering, and wrong-headedness (and his inability to hear or accept reality). And it's not going to get any better when Iran starts handing out nukes like candy to every terrorist organization (or starts lobbing them into America from Venezuela).
“It’s an uncomfortable fact that sending a message of solidarity with our NATO allies is more important than sending a message to President Obama.” – Ernest Istook, criminally insane neocon hack.
Really so sending a message to our "allies" is more important than the rule of law? We wouldn't want something like the Constitution of the United States of America get in the way of us doing the bidding of euro-peon powers would we now Mr.neocon? Do you ever stop to think what kind of a message the open violation of the rule of law by the highest levels of government sends? What will our children think? the euro-peons be damned! Mr. Istook you are just another criminally insane neocon.
People like Istook believe it is the job of the lower classes to do the fighting that the upper classes get us into.
the author of this is wrong, its time to end nato and the UN.
Neocons do not believe in the rule of law, just the rule of man. It is impossible in their eyes for the leader to be a criminal, as his word is law.
And he served on the laughable Homeland Security committee. Oh, and the Appropriations committee. It's like throwing Br'er Rabbit in the briar patch, having the fox guard the henhouse.
BINGO.
I'm not a lib, but most of the mideast wars are for controlling the oil resources. This is hardly a controversial view. Eisenhower used the CIA to overthrow the constitutional monarchy of Iran because of Britain's oil interests. We worked in concert with Nazis and installed the dictator Shah. The Islamic Revolution was a result of the Shah's oppressive and brutal reign. The first Gulf War was absolutely about oil. Iraq invaded Kuwaut and seized their oil fields. They set them on fire as they were driven out. Open your eyes.
Of course it is. This is why France is the leader of the coalition.
France? leader?….sure….OK If France is involved it is because they have mastered the exit strategy.
Well, Istook, so far it looks like you are not welcome on this Forum…. thank God.
The Worm has turned. Your time in the sun is over.
Mr. Istook you sir are wrong! Allowing any Commander in Chief to risk the life of our brave men and women without the consent of congress in violation of the Constitution is DEAD WRONG!
Most of what you say is just plain wrong, I just want to be on the record about that.
Yeah, didn't you follow the news? Google it.
"It’s an uncomfortable fact that sending a message of solidarity with our NATO allies is more important than sending a message to President Obama."
Sorry, but we NEED to send a message to our allies that Obama is in the crapper and that they need to pay no further attention him or to assign to him any credibility.
" if "Great Britain, France, Canada, Norway, Denmark and Belgium, …….Italy, Spain, The Netherlands, Albania, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania and Turkey, are incapable of carrying out this operation"
Who you gonna call?
SEAL Team Six
In this fool Istook's mind the NATO alliance is more important than the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States of America that the rule of law is founded upon. It's a typical neocon argument that elevates the leader above the law.
I think you mean Soviet's, not Nazi's.
Ernest, with all due respect, it is never OK to set aside the Constitution and it most certainly is not acceptable to make it subservient to an organization like NATO.
I do not disagree with you that consequences, some of them quite meaningful, can and will result from an action like exercising a check and balance power, however, the responsibility for that rests with the entity who got checked, not with the entity doing the check.
Obama is not a victim to be protected here and trying to make the
national security" case isn't going to work either. Both of those cards are more of a failed strategy than the one Obama used to implement this policy in the first place.
Admit it – Soetoro thought he could oust Qadaffi in a few weeks and that would be it. He thought he could show the whole world how much better a commander in chief he is than was W. Once again, Soetoro's pie in the sky aloofness spoiled the party. Again he was just plain wrong. Again, this nation takes lumps because of Barry's arrogance and inability to see the writing on the wall.
No, imposition of Constitutional commands is indeed necessary here. But know this much, it is not about "punishing Barry". It is about holding the Executive BRANCH of government accountable for actions taken. This is not about an occupier of the Oval Office, this is about the Office itself. There exists a tremendous difference there.
The Constitution either matters or it doesn't.
Time to choose.
Mr. Speaker, John Boehner, are you Listening?
Ever read this? http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Chessboard-American-G... If you had our invasion of Afghanistan would not have been a surprise to you. It also wouldn't be a surprise on why so many of the elitist's want to stay. You might recognize the author, he serves the current president, or more correctly is one of the puppet masters.
Oh I do not like him at all. However when the puppet masters speak, I listen, so that I may be granted immunity from their propaganda. They are incredibly arrogant and think nothing of spelling out their agenda in plain English for all to read. Knowing full well the vast majority is too caught up in the excrement of American Idol, dancing with the stars, sporting events and other distractions to pay attention. So many of our conflicts are about oil, both the drilling and the piping of it, so that the elite may control the nations by holding them hostage to it. If the USA drilled it's own oil it would be set free of this cabal.
You should read this from Brzezinski while you are at it:
At the same time the capacity to assert social and political control over the individual will vastly increase. It will soon be possible to assert almost continuous control over every citizen and to maintain up-to-date files, containing even the most personal details about health and personal behavior of every citizen in addition to the more customary data. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities. Power will gravitate into the hands of those who control information. Our existing institutions will be supplanted by pre-crisis management institutions, the task of which will be to identify in advance likely social crises and to develop programs to cope with them. This will encourage tendencies though the next several decades toward a TECHNOTRONIC ERA, a dictatorship,leaving even less room for political procedures as we know them.
Finally, looking ahead to the end of the century, the possibility of biochemical mind control and genetic tinkering with man, including beings which will function like men and reason like them as well, could give rise to some difficult questions.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor for U.S.
President Carter and member of the Committee of 300 and
Council on Foreign Relations, above quoted from his book
"The Technotronic Era" (1981)
NATO should have been disbanded shortly after the USSR fell. Instead NATO was expanded to encircle Russia, no wonder they are freaking out. How would our country react if the Warsaw pact engulfed Canada and Mexico?
He's not my hero. I despise him and those like him. Just because I've read his works doesn't mean I approve of him. Understanding ones enemies is important.
"We have no good intelligence on what the rebels would establish if they took over."
Which is why we have no business involving ourselves in another country's civil war.
"Germany, have refused to participate in an unclear mission."
smart move on their part.
"The current NATO operation expires in September;"
Then what? What if Gaddafi is still in power? Do we still stick around? This mission had no clear objectives, nor definable end game because of point #1
At the end of the day, Mr. President screwed up, and it is imperative that Congress send him and future presidents a message: The Constitution is not a document only to be held up when it's politically convenient. Your desire to war-monger will not be supported by the Congress or the American people.
Awesome! Exactly what I was thinking!
Great minds really do think alike!
Yes, please accept my apology. I mistook what you were saying and that's why I deleted that comment to you. Yes, Brzezinski is a lying Commie in love with a New World Order approach.
They aren't even standing with us now in Libya. The cost of the operation and the dangerous work is all on the USA. Screw europe.
Exactly! Once your eyes are opened to their words, the agenda is transparent and you see through the charades of things like "cyber-security".
It’s tempting to pretend we can afford all this sh*t. Truth is, we're broke. Playing World Cop™ seemed like a fun game for a while, but there's no more money to keep playing.
I know plenty of folks hate the term "neo-conservative," but it's an accurate way to describe the people on the Right who thought World Cop™ was a great idea. It was — and still is — a mutation in traditional conservative thinking.
There isn't a single thing I've said that is false. Look up the Iranian Coup. Look up Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. But would you care to be specific?
No, I meant Nazis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d&...
I am encouraged by the overwhelming, uniform reaction to Istook's blog entry. Well done, my fellow Americans.
I actually think you might be surprised at the number of conservatives who agree with you completely FH. I personally want them all pulled out of Afghanistan as well and Iraq too. Let all the crazies blow each other up. I am not sure any of them are worth one more drop of American blood or dollars.
Granted. But if that's so, then shouldn't The Mendacious One be saying something like, "We're all neo-conservatives now?" Two wrongs and alla that.
For the sake of our allies? What is legal in France does not make it legal here.
If it is THAT important, maybe the poser should ask for confirmation.
John Kerry and John McCain can go back into the closet.
Most level headed article I have seen on the matter.
This is what I found on that page:
Britain and the USSR deposed and exiled the pro-Nazi Shah Reza, and enthroned his 22-year-old son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, as the Shah of Iran.
I'd point out that "We" are not Britain and the USSR are not the Nazis, although for all practical purposes, there is not much difference between a Nazi and a Communist.
Two suggestions for you. Read more carefully and never get your history from Wiki.
If you want to know about the Nazis I also suggest you read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William L. Shirer. There you will get the real history and not the politicize nonsense you get from most sources today, especially at Wiki.
You should have read further. So here's a suggestion for YOU: read the material someone links before you make a foolish claim that will blow up in your face.
"Iranian fascists and Nazis played prominent roles in the coup regime. Gen. Fazlollah Zahedi, who had been arrested and imprisoned by the British during World War II for his attempt to establish a pro-Nazi government, was made Prime Minister on August 19, 1953. The CIA gave Zahedi about $100,000 before the coup and an additional $5 million the day after the coup to help consolidate support for the coup."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d&...
Guess where he got that support? It wasn't the Kiwanis Club.
"The New York Times recently leaked a CIA report on the 1953 American-British overthrow of Mosaddeq, Iran's Prime Minister. It billed the report as a secret history of the secret coup, and treated it as an invaluable substitute for the U. S. files that remain inaccessible. But a reconstruction of the coup from other sources, especially from the archives of the British Foreign Office, indicates that this report is highly sanitized. It glosses over such sensitive issues as the crucial participation of the U. S. ambassador in the actual overthrow; the role of U. S. military advisers; the harnessing of local Nazis and Muslim terrorists; and the use of assassinations to destabilize the government. What is more, it places the coup in the context the Cold War rather than that of the Anglo-Iranian oil crisis—a classic case of nationalism clashing with imperialism in the Third World. "
Also, you still haven't backed up your "Most of what you say is just plain wrong" claim.
We never should have formed NATO to begin with.
I think that is the real mission…Obama wants Q's party dresses.
"We are doing what, battling the lions to benifit the hyenas?"
Yes.
Precisely.
Over the years, the Lions have become UNIONized, and refuse to hunt, or get off their collective arses. It is now up to US, to go in, and kill the food, to feed the hyenas.
Were congress to capitulate to Obama's flagrant violation of the war powers act, this might just be the last time they are able to.
http://larouchepac.com/node/18517
Even if this is all true, it does not support your claim that the Americans worked in concert with Nazis to do anything.
Nor do I intend to. I've got better things to do.
Awesome response.
Equally awesome response.
NATO is the US PROXY WAR machine. NATO IS THE US MILITARY. OUR MONEY, OUR TROOPS, OUR HARDWARE.
WE do the heavy lifting. This war is one more in a state of perpetual warfare. Imagine how powerful this country would be if we spent the money we spend on " invasions" on our weapons arsenal?
I thought it was the NATO countries that pulled us into the war. It seems that they got involved first and then Obama followed .http://www.watchesn.com
You must be logged in to post a comment.