No but he played one on TV

Well..

I was going to stay out of this discussion, but I changed my mind..

A little history..

In 1981 Libya launched an airstrike against US ships in international waters.

An act of war? Possibly..

Again, in 1986 Libya launched surface to air missiles at our Jets flying over the same international waters..

An act of war? Possibly..

After this confrontation, Libya ordered retaliatory actions against US military bases in Europe.

Libya actually declared war on the US..

A week after this the bomb went off in the Berlin disco killing a US soldier..

War Powers Act

Section 2 (C)

The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/warpower.asp/


There is clearly a difference between the reasons Reagan bombed Libya and Obama bombing Libya..

Reagan had clear authority to use the War Powers Act because of the Libyan attacks against US military personnel.

http://personalliberty.com/2012/03/16/the-obama-impeachment-bill/?eiid=

there is no 'clear' record of Libya having declared a war against the US

there was a SINGULAR terrorist assault at a nightclub for which Libya was ASSUMED responsible...

the War Powers Act was not relevant when he sent the troops,,,,

You're wrong!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe-6EsSqDb4&feature=player_embedded

the right to defend the country does not apply

other presidents have been wrong

,,,seems I am right then, until NOW, other presidents werent impeached

until NOW, there was no clear legal precedent to conclude those actions were 'wrong'


until NOW, it was apparently not an impeachable offense,,,,

According to the Library of Congress other Presidents didn't break that law.

According to the Library of Congress, other Presidents didnt break the law.....exactly my point

the precedent set would imply this one didnt either,,,

you seemed to leave out the attacks on US naval forces in international waters carried out by the Libyan military forces..

are you saying they didn't happen either?

Im saying at the time there Reagan gave the order, he was responding not to any attack by any government on the US,, he was responding to an ISOLATED incident by individuals against us military in another country,,,,


not covered as 'declaration of war' by Libya, and therefore prone to approval by Congress,,,

If the US military attacks a Canadian ship off the coast of Maryland, but in international waters you are saying that is an attack carried out by individuals and not the US?

So using the War Powers Act to surgically strike a country that had its military attack you in international waters does not meet YOUR standard..

Where in God's name did Obama get the authority to attack with absolutely NO provocation?

if a US ship attacks, that is a US strike, if US citizens organize to attack that is a TERRORIST strike

in 1986, when Raegan sent troops, there had been a TERRORIST strike in April which killed three american troops and injured 60 american citizens and 140 non americans

in retaliation, on April 15, Raegan sent in troops

Libya attacked US military personnel in international waters in May 1981 and again in March 1986..

LIBYAN MILITARY PLANES.. LIBYAN MILITARY SURFACE TO AIR MISSILES..

NOT INDIVIDUALS >>>>> LIBYAN MILITARY PERSONNEL...

You didnt answer my question of where Obama got the authority to attack without provocation..

by precedent....other PRESIDENTS had the authority before him

can you give me the name(s) of the ship(s) that was attacked, or the numbers of americans injured or killed in this 'march 1986' aggression towards us military personnel...?

Statement by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Speakes on the Gulf of Sidra Incident

March 24, 1986

U.S. naval aircraft and ships carrying out a peaceful freedom of navigation and overflight exercise in international waters and airspace in the Gulf of Sidra were fired on Monday by missile forces of Libya. This morning at 7:52 a.m. e.s.t. Libyan forces without provocation fired two long-range SA - 5 surface-to-air missiles from Sirte on the northern coast of Libya at U.S. aircraft operating in international waters in the Gulf of Sidra. U.S. forces had been operating in that area since Sunday afternoon. Two additional SA - 5's and an SA - 2 were launched from Sirte at 12:45 p.m. An additional SA - 5 was fired at 1:14 p.m. At this point Libyan forces had fired a total of six surface-to-air missiles at U.S. forces.

At approximately 2 p.m., a U.S. aircraft fired two Harpoon antiship missiles at a Libyan missile patrol boat which was located near the 32o30'N line and was a threat to U.S. naval forces. The Libyan fast-attack craft was hit. The ship is dead in the water, burning, and appears to be sinking. There are no apparent survivors. At approximately 3 p.m., U.S. forces operating south of the 32o30'N line responded to the missile attacks by launching two HARM's (high-speed antiradiation missiles) at the SA - 5 site at Sirte. At that time the SA - 5 complex was attempting to engage our aircraft. We are assessing the damage now. We have no reports of any U.S. casualties and no loss of U.S. aircraft or ships.

This attack was entirely unprovoked and beyond the bounds of normal international conduct. U.S. forces were intent only upon making the legal point that, beyond the internationally recognized 12-mile limit, the Gulf of Sidra belongs to no one and that all nations are free to move through international waters and airspace. We deny Libya's claim, as do almost all other nations, and we condemn Libya's actions. They point out again for all to see the aggressive and unlawful nature of Colonel Qadhafi's regime.

It should be noted that because of these numerous Libyan missile launches and indications that they intended to continue air and missile attacks on U.S. forces, we now consider all approaching Libyan forces to have hostile intent. We have taken appropriate measures to defend ourselves in this instance. We did not, of course, proceed into this area with our eyes closed. We reserve the right to take additional measures as events warrant.

http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1986/32486b.htm/

I highlighted the Libyan forces part.. To show it wasn't some random people with a few spare surface to air missiles laying around and curious how they work..


and your reasoning on Obama's authority is a surrender flag..

On August 19, 1981, 2 Libyan SU-22 aircraft fired an “Atoll”
air-to-air missile at 2 U.S. F-14 aircraft from the carrier Nimitz over the Gulf of Sidra. The Atoll missed but the F-14's did not; the U.S. Navy pilots shot down both Libyan aircraft.


1986 Air and Sea Battle. The U.S. Navy began a naval exercise on January 23,1986, in the Mediterranean north of the Gulf of Sidra. (The United States followed accepted international procedures and notified all interested countries, including Libya, of the exercise.)During the week of February 11-15, 1986, Libyan and U.S. aircraft had more than a dozen encounters, although neither side fired shots. On March 24, 1986, Libya fired 6 SA-5 high
altitude, long range, slow speed, surface-to-air missiles and 2 SA-2 low altitude, short range,high speed surface-to-air missiles at U.S. aircraft; all missed their targets. A-7 aircraft from
U.S. carriers knocked out the SA-5 installations, and repeated the attack 4 hours later after the installation resumed activity. Also, A-6 carrier based aircraft attacked and sank or
damaged four small Libyan attack boats that approached the U.S. ships

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/9577.pdf/

Now you can continue denying any of this happened if you want..

Or trying to equate what happened in the 80s as being the same for obama in some twisted fashion..

The fact is they aren't similar and anyone outside an obama kool aid drinker can clearly see it..

if you say so

sounds like a 'they started it' excuse to me though, considering the bit about how we had already had 'encounters'

still, it falls short of a 'national emergency' (which gives authority to act without congress) a full three weeks later,,,,,
(what kind of emergency takes a month?)

Why couldn't somebody think of this when Bush II was prez? He was the one during which several countries were invaded by US troops, and the militia and the unarmed citizens of those countries suffered heavy losses. Then let's also impeach Prez Kennedy, who sent troops to 'Nam and started the New World Destruction.

But nnnoooo, bush fruckhead was white, and we don't mess with our white bros, do we, you blodie cccnnts.

Black man is is in season any time in America. You righteous biggot fruckking tastards.