You are an idiot if think this isn't another undeclared war. After all, we just attacked the military forces of a sovereign state.
UN can pass all the resolution_s they want... the matter needs to be brought before congress for authorizat_ion for the US to act. You can't contract out explicit and clear terms of our constituti_on to a foreign body such as NATO or the UN. The proper action would have been to abstain from the UN vote without the explicit authorizat_ion of the United States Congress. In the United States, the applicatio_n and interpreta_tion of internatio_nal treaty obligation_s implicate an intricate interplay with Constituti_onal mandates and federal statutes. As a matter of domestic law, the Constituti_on trumps treaties. http://www_.arbitrati_on-icca.or_g/media/0/_1258429294_4710/park__treaty_obl_igations.p_df
Your comment is totally irrelevant. Call it whatever you want, I don't care. My problem is with this ridiculous question: "What moral right do we have to initiate military action against Libya?" If he can't answer that question he's either an idiot or a political opportunist.
It was for the other congressmen to answer that question -- the cowardly, worthless politicians who are afraid to do their constitutional duty -- to vote aye or nay on a declaration of war against Libya. After all, if the United States has some sort of moral right to jump into somebody else's civil war, then the slime that inhabits the House of Representatives could at least have the courage to vote for a proper declaration of war rather than sit back and let the imperial President start wars whenever he damn well pleases. The last constitutional war (i.e., the last one that was declared by congress) was World War II. Today Americans care so little for their country's constitution that they are willing to let the TSA trample all over the 4th Amendment thousands of times a day. I am disgusted with my fellow citizens. They deserve the police state they are getting. But I don't.
What point are you trying to convey? He did answer that question -- obviously it is rhetorical; he does not believe the US has any moral right, for the reasons listed in the remainder of the paragraph. How does that opinion make him either an idiot or an opportunist?
It's the same moral right as anyone has to stop a mugging, or a sexual assault, or brutalizing a child. It is more than a 'right' it is an obligation. Why is this even a question?
Try overthrowing the government of the United States. Start by trying to take over some government buildings. I guarantee that the government, with the full approval of Obama and congress, will stomp all over you, up to and including killing you if necessary. How many other countries will feel they have a moral obligation to impose a no-fly zone over the U.S. for your sake?
tru dat..... there is a little island 90 miles away who should have been bombed 50 yrs ago if it were truly about morals...Olias, we have no obligation to do what is being done..and it is most certainly not being done for Moral reasons...cmon meng, you and I both know this.