Obama Libya Action Unconstitutional and Costly

See video
Dennis Kucinich
avril 7, 2011


Obama Libya Action Unconstitutional and Costly
par grtv

Amid the ongoing coalitional bombardment of Libya, it turns out President Obama may have had no constitutional authority for ordering US military involvement.

US Rep. from Ohio Dennis Kucinich says the use of US armed forces is unconstitutional, explaining Obama had no authority to commit US resources without congressional approval.

The US now finds itself involved in another war in addition to Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Bombing villages in order to save villages -- that didn't work in Vietnam," Kucinich explained.

In fact, he argued this time around the Libyan intervention could end up strengthening US enemies.


2011 / 04 / 07
E.K. Bevins says:

Represenative Kucinich appears to be the only person in congress willing to tell the american people the truth about the sickness that pervades our government. Long live Dennis Kucinich|

2011 / 04 / 07
Mustafa says:

Dont forgot Republican Ron Paul and Independant Ralph Nader!

2011 / 04 / 07
bahmi says:

Kucinich is a wimp. Translation? He's one of them. He utterly fails to call a spade a spade. Why? Our Congress is a worthless body comprised of lobbyist prone wimps. It matters not what party we criticize. Both stink and we are being sold down the river so the war boys can get the lion's share of OUIR douigh. We live in a pathetic country and the war lovers are winning while we are going utterly broke. A stupid president and people still support this oaf. WE are what's wrong with this jerk.

2011 / 04 / 08
USAma Bin Laden says:

Dennis Kucinich is another controlled opposition hack and phony antiwar critic.

But then again, that describes most of the bogus American peace (sic) movement.

The game that Kucinich and other fraudulent antiwar advocates play is to offer some limited *tactical* criticisms of America's wars--in order to downplay their predatory nature.

Namely, Kucinich whines that America's Libyan war is too costly, unconstitutional, or that the USA won't benefit from this war geopolitically!

But this type of “criticism” is based purely upon American imperial self-interest and is not a principled opposition to US wars.

The fundamental issue that Kucinich and others like him deliberately minimize is that America's attack on Libya is an act of naked aggression based upon lies. Just like America's aggression against Iraq, Afghanistan, or the War of Terror in general.

And this war is only one part of America’s broader imperial campaign to subjugate the entire world. See the Project for New American Century, the Pentagon’s Full Spectrum Dominance policy, or the 2002 US National Security Strategy.

This American aggression is thus the "supreme international crime" (per the Nuremberg Trials) and deserves to be punished as such.

For Kucinich and other fake peace activists, however, they aren't opposed to the imperialist nature of America’s wars or even American aggression per se.

They just want American wars of aggression that are cost-effective, constitutionally sanctioned, and beneficial to the USA!

This is how the phony political opposition ALWAYS operates. They present themselves as leaders or advocates of the peace movement--in order to politically domesticate and co-opt it.

In fact, this is exactly what Kucinich did for 8 long years during the Bush Regime and his fatuous promises about impeaching Bush, which unsurprisingly never materialized. These tired tricks are now being rehashed with the empty rhetorical criticism he is now making about Obama and possible impeachment.

Kucinich, the Democrats and the impeachment of Bush

“Antiwar” candidate Kucinich backs leading Democrat in Iowa primary

“Antiwar” candidate boosts illusions in a pro-war party
Kucinich runs again for Democratic presidential nomination

It’s revealing that Global Research is pimping for Kucinich. Perhaps, this says much about the deceptive nature of this organization’s own "antiwar" politics.

2011 / 04 / 08
Dr Stuart Jeanne Bramhall says:

It strikes me that covert CIA support for the Baloch separatist movement in the Pakistan tribal areas isn't constitutional, either. The Pentagon/CIA make no secret of their desire to see energy and mineral rich Balochistan secede from Pakistan to become a US client state - just like the energy and mineral rich former Soviet republics Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan. Moreover it's virtually impossible to distinguish terrorist acts by the CIA-backed Balochistan Liberation Army from those committed by the Taliban or Al Qaeda -especially around the Chinese-built Gwadar Port in Gwadar, Balochistan (the energy transit route for Iranian oil and natural gas destined for China). Given that both China and Iran are both major political/economic rivals, it's a pity the US media doesn't report on any of this.

I blog about this at "Our CIA freedom fighters in Pakistan"

Cette question permet de s'assurer que vous êtes un utilisateur humain et non un logiciel automatisé de pollupostage.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Vidéos reliées

Notre bulletin