Contact FreedomWorks

400 North Capitol Street, NW
Suite 765
Washington, DC 20001

  • Toll Free 1.888.564.6273
  • Local 202.783.3870

Blog

    American Virtue and Our Libya Debacle

    10/14/2012

    “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” 
    -John Adams

    American Virtue and Our Libya Debacle 

    Violating our Constitution, President Obama bombed Libya.    [Read:  Obama: Libya Intervention a "Core Principle that Has to be Upheld"Only Congress has the power to declare war.  In 2007, Senator Obama knew the President did not have the unilateral authority to order a military attack.  Senator Obama said:

    “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”  

    Knowing the President had authorized a military attack in violation of the Constitution, the administration called the bombing a "kinetic" action - obviously avoiding the word “war.”  Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Adviser, stated the following:

    I think what we are doing is enforcing a resolution that has a very clear set of goals, which is protecting the Libyan people, averting a humanitarian crisis, and setting up a no-fly zone," Rhodes said.  "Obviously that involves kinetic military action, particularly on the front end."

    Continuing with the “kinetic”  obfuscation,  President Obama wrote to Congress implying most of America's activity was non-kinetic and continuing to minimize the acts of war.

    “Since April 4,” the president wrote, “U.S. participation has consisted of: (1) non-kinetic support to the NATO-led operation, including intelligence, logistical support, and search and rescue assistance; (2) aircraft that have assisted in the suppression and destruction of air defenses in support of the no-fly zone; and (3) since April 23, precision strikes by unmanned aerial vehicles against a limited set of clearly defined targets in support of the NATO-led coalition's efforts.”

    President Obama and his supporters will claim that Congress has not declared war since World War II.  Correct; however, it raises a critical moral issue. The President and every Member of Congress take an oath to preserve and protect the Constitution.   They have totally abrogated the Constitution. Most certainly,  America would have been a more moral and competent country had all the military actions since World War II required Congress to declare war.  Not only, Congress would have to study and debate all military action in the best interest of America.  The Nation would be actively engaged in the decision process.  

    Libya is the latest example of failed military decisions.  Since the death of Qaddafi, the interim government lacks the military and police powers to make the country safe for its inhabitants.  Thus, Jihadists have greatly expanded their power and commandeered dangerous weapons making Libya very dangerous and impacting neighboring countries. 

    A Congressional and We the People debate would have completely explored all potential outcomes.

    Tragically, September 11, 2012, four Americans were murdered in Benghazi, Libya.  Again, the Obama administration had a moral decision to make.  Wrongfully, the administration attempted to deceive the American people into believing the attack was a spontaneous response to a blasphemous YouTube video.  The President, Secretary of State Clinton, United States Ambassador to the United Nation Rice, Press Secretary Carney and many more government officials maintained the “spontaneous” storyline until it was completely proven false.  The murders were a preplanned attack by anti-American militant forces.   The following are the false statements made by Carney, Rice and Clinton:

    MR. CARNEY: We certainly don't know. We don't know otherwise. We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack. The unrest we’ve seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims find offensive. And while the violence isreprehensible and unjustified, it is not a reaction to the 9/11 anniversary that we know of, or to U.S. policy.

    Ambassador Rice continued with Obama Administration's spin on ABC:

    “Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous – not a premeditated – response to what had transpired in Cairo.”

    Additionally, Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, maintained the falsehood:

    "The office of the director of National Intelligence has said we have no actionable intelligence that an attack on our post in Benghazi was planned or imminent."  

    At the founding of America, John Adams knew politicians craved power and would violate the Constitution:

    “Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our constitution as a whale goes through a net.” 

    Adams reasoned and appreciated that only virtuous officials would protect the Constitution and freedom: 

    “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion.” 

    Adams warned We the People must be moral and involved in governing:

    “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

    Military aggression is always a moral decision.  Our Constitution calls for Congress – not any one person – to debate and make the decision on when to engage in war.  We the People must be intergral to the process.  America will be a safer, stronger and more moral nation when we honor and respect our Constitution – especially when we have a national debate on exerting military force.



    1 comments
    Turner Foster
    10/15/2012

    I completely agree with the statements in your conclusion, but most ardently towards the theme of morality. Using under-handed measures and obviously sideways lingo to perform illegal military operations should be addressed, because, if anything, they cause the probability of harm on the American people to go up. That is the only statistic I really need to know to settle my personal morality with the situation. If it could further endanger any innocents, then it shouldn't be an option on the table, in my humble opinion.

    Pages