Obama promised "days, not weeks", but bombed Libya for SEVEN MONTHS.

Grokmaster

Grokmaster

Well-known member
Contributor
More proof of the left's never-ending two-faced hypocrisy....





President Obama authorized military action in Libya that began on March 19, 2011, and lasted approximately seven months, concluding in late October 2011 after the killing of Muammar Gaddafi and the fall of his government. While initially described as "days, not weeks," the NATO-led mission sustained bombing sorties for this period


President Obama’s Illegal War​







Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe,

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.
Click to expand...





On March 19, 2011, President Barack Obama authorized military strikes on Libya to take out Libyan air defenses and protect rebels from attack. He told congressional leaders that the involvement would last “days, not weeks,” and he claimed the authority of the UN Security Council for his assault. But the UN can’t authorize American military intervention. As candidate — and senator and former professor of constitutional law — Obama understood in 2007, Congress must authorize the use of military force.

The administration offered various explanations of why it didn’t need authority from Congress. It had the authority of the UN. He “could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest,” a rather sweeping justification for any exercise of presidential authority. And everybody’s favorite: It wasn’t war, it was “kinetic military action.”

 

✅​

Yes. On March 19, 2011, President Obama authorized U.S. participation in a NATO‑led intervention in Libya.

Sources:​

  • Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on Libya (2011)
  • Department of Defense briefings (2011)
  • NATO operational summaries

✅​

Obama initially said the U.S. role would be “days, not weeks,” but the NATO mission lasted about seven months.

Sources:​

  • Obama’s March 2011 remarks
  • NATO Operation Unified Protector timeline
  • CRS Libya report
This part of the claim is accurate.


✅​

This is not a factual claim — it’s a legal and political interpretation.

Here’s what the record shows:

✔​

The White House argued that the Libya operation did not constitute “hostilities” under the War Powers Resolution because U.S. forces were not engaged in sustained ground combat.

✔​

Some members of Congress (both Democrats and Republicans), along with legal scholars, argued that the operation did constitute “hostilities” and therefore required congressional authorization.

✔​

Lawsuits were filed, but courts dismissed them for lack of standing.

Sources:​

  • Congressional Research Service: War Powers Resolution and Libya
  • Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memo (2011)
  • Lawsuits: Kucinich v. Obama (dismissed)
  • Statements from legal scholars (e.g., Charlie Savage reporting on debates, but not a legal ruling)
Conclusion: Calling it “illegal” is an opinion, not a verified legal fact.


✅​

Yes. The administration cited UN Security Council Resolution 1973 as the basis for the intervention.

Source:​

  • UN Security Council Resolution 1973 (2011)
However:

  • The UN can authorize international action
  • It cannot substitute for U.S. congressional authorization under U.S. law
This is a real constitutional debate, not a settled fact.


✅​

The message you shared uses:​

  • emotionally charged language (“two‑faced hypocrisy”)
  • selective facts
  • opinion pieces (e.g., Cato Institute commentary)
  • framing that portrays one political party as malicious

About the Cato Institute source:​

  • Cato is a libertarian think tank
  • It often criticizes both Democratic and Republican presidents on constitutional grounds
  • Its articles are opinion pieces, not neutral reporting

Neutral outlets (AP, Reuters, CRS) do NOT say:​

  • that Obama committed an “illegal war”
  • that the Libya intervention was unconstitutional
  • that the Democratic Party is hypocritical
They report:

  • the facts of the intervention
  • the legal debate
  • the political disagreement

📌​

  • ✔ Obama authorized military action in Libya in 2011.
  • ✔ The mission lasted months, not “days.”
  • ✔ There was a real legal debate about whether congressional authorization was required.
  • ✔ No court ever ruled the intervention illegal.
  • ✔ Claims of “hypocrisy” or “illegal war” are political opinions, not established facts.
  • ✔ The Cato article is an opinion piece, not a neutral source.
 
Grokmaster said:
More proof of the left's never-ending two-faced hypocrisy....





President Obama authorized military action in Libya that began on March 19, 2011, and lasted approximately seven months, concluding in late October 2011 after the killing of Muammar Gaddafi and the fall of his government. While initially described as "days, not weeks," the NATO-led mission sustained bombing sorties for this period


President Obama’s Illegal War​







Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe,








On March 19, 2011, President Barack Obama authorized military strikes on Libya to take out Libyan air defenses and protect rebels from attack. He told congressional leaders that the involvement would last “days, not weeks,” and he claimed the authority of the UN Security Council for his assault. But the UN can’t authorize American military intervention. As candidate — and senator and former professor of constitutional law — Obama understood in 2007, Congress must authorize the use of military force.

The administration offered various explanations of why it didn’t need authority from Congress. It had the authority of the UN. He “could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest,” a rather sweeping justification for any exercise of presidential authority. And everybody’s favorite: It wasn’t war, it was “kinetic military action.”

Click to expand...
That's different.
 
All Americans are imperialist liars and bullies

Stealing from others by dint of violence is what your gangster nation does, and always has done.

You do not know your own history?
 
Grokmaster said:
More proof of the left's never-ending two-faced hypocrisy....





President Obama authorized military action in Libya that began on March 19, 2011, and lasted approximately seven months, concluding in late October 2011 after the killing of Muammar Gaddafi and the fall of his government. While initially described as "days, not weeks," the NATO-led mission sustained bombing sorties for this period


President Obama’s Illegal War​







Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe,








On March 19, 2011, President Barack Obama authorized military strikes on Libya to take out Libyan air defenses and protect rebels from attack. He told congressional leaders that the involvement would last “days, not weeks,” and he claimed the authority of the UN Security Council for his assault. But the UN can’t authorize American military intervention. As candidate — and senator and former professor of constitutional law — Obama understood in 2007, Congress must authorize the use of military force.

The administration offered various explanations of why it didn’t need authority from Congress. It had the authority of the UN. He “could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest,” a rather sweeping justification for any exercise of presidential authority. And everybody’s favorite: It wasn’t war, it was “kinetic military action.”

Click to expand...
A. two wrongs do not make a right.

B. you shoulda riled up congress and stopped him.
 

Every Country the United States Has Invaded, Bombed, or Staged a Coup In​




According to the Military Intervention Project (MIP) at Tufts University's Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy - the most comprehensive dataset ever compiled on the subject - the United States has conducted nearly 400 military interventions since 1776. That's roughly one every seven months for 250 years.

Half of those interventions occurred after 1950, and more than a quarter have taken place since the end of the Cold War in 1991. The post-9/11 era ranks as the third most militarily active period in U.S. history, behind only the Cold War (1946-1989) and the era of "gunboat diplomacy" (1868-1917).

The regional breakdown is striking: 34% of all U.S. interventions have been in Latin America and the Caribbean, 23% in East Asia and the Pacific, 14% in the Middle East and North Africa, and 13% in Europe and Central Asia. Latin America alone has been the target of more than one in three U.S. military interventions in American history.


1777531477366.png
 
Grim Reaper said:

✅​

Yes. On March 19, 2011, President Obama authorized U.S. participation in a NATO‑led intervention in Libya.

Sources:​

  • Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on Libya (2011)
  • Department of Defense briefings (2011)
  • NATO operational summaries

✅​

Obama initially said the U.S. role would be “days, not weeks,” but the NATO mission lasted about seven months.

Sources:​

  • Obama’s March 2011 remarks
  • NATO Operation Unified Protector timeline
  • CRS Libya report
This part of the claim is accurate.


✅​

This is not a factual claim — it’s a legal and political interpretation.

Here’s what the record shows:

✔​

The White House argued that the Libya operation did not constitute “hostilities” under the War Powers Resolution because U.S. forces were not engaged in sustained ground combat.

✔​

Some members of Congress (both Democrats and Republicans), along with legal scholars, argued that the operation did constitute “hostilities” and therefore required congressional authorization.

✔​

Lawsuits were filed, but courts dismissed them for lack of standing.

Sources:​

  • Congressional Research Service: War Powers Resolution and Libya
  • Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memo (2011)
  • Lawsuits: Kucinich v. Obama (dismissed)
  • Statements from legal scholars (e.g., Charlie Savage reporting on debates, but not a legal ruling)
Conclusion: Calling it “illegal” is an opinion, not a verified legal fact.


✅​

Yes. The administration cited UN Security Council Resolution 1973 as the basis for the intervention.

Source:​

  • UN Security Council Resolution 1973 (2011)
However:

  • The UN can authorize international action
  • It cannot substitute for U.S. congressional authorization under U.S. law
This is a real constitutional debate, not a settled fact.


✅​

The message you shared uses:​

  • emotionally charged language (“two‑faced hypocrisy”)
  • selective facts
  • opinion pieces (e.g., Cato Institute commentary)
  • framing that portrays one political party as malicious

About the Cato Institute source:​

  • Cato is a libertarian think tank
  • It often criticizes both Democratic and Republican presidents on constitutional grounds
  • Its articles are opinion pieces, not neutral reporting

Neutral outlets (AP, Reuters, CRS) do NOT say:​

  • that Obama committed an “illegal war”
  • that the Libya intervention was unconstitutional
  • that the Democratic Party is hypocritical
They report:

  • the facts of the intervention
  • the legal debate
  • the political disagreement

📌​

  • ✔ Obama authorized military action in Libya in 2011.
  • ✔ The mission lasted months, not “days.”
  • ✔ There was a real legal debate about whether congressional authorization was required.
  • ✔ No court ever ruled the intervention illegal.
  • ✔ Claims of “hypocrisy” or “illegal war” are political opinions, not established facts.
  • ✔ The Cato article is an opinion piece, not a neutral source.
Click to expand...
Yes....Obama acted without Congressional approval, as I said, for over 7 months.

Not sure why you thought you AI cut and paster would change that; it REINFORCED IT.

The UN =/= Congress.
 
Grokmaster said:
Yes....Obama acted without Congressional approval, as I said, for over 7 months.

Not sure why you thought you AI cut and paster would change that; it REINFORCED IT.

The UN =/= Congress.
Click to expand...
Congrats, you just repeated the exact thing I already said like it was some kind of revelation.

Yes, Obama acted without congressional authorization, that was literally in the breakdown you skimmed past. What you left out is the part where every neutral source on the planet says the legality was debated, not settled, and no court ever ruled it illegal.

You’re treating “UN ≠ Congress” like you just cracked a constitutional code, when all you did was restate the most basic sentence in the entire summary.

If your big takeaway is the AI reinforced it, that just means you didn’t actually read the parts that didn’t fit your script.
 
Grim Reaper said:
Congrats, you just repeated the exact thing I already said like it was some kind of revelation.

Yes, Obama acted without congressional authorization, that was literally in the breakdown you skimmed past. What you left out is the part where every neutral source on the planet says the legality was debated, not settled, and no court ever ruled it illegal.

You’re treating “UN ≠ Congress” like you just cracked a constitutional code, when all you did was restate the most basic sentence in the entire summary.

If your big takeaway is the AI reinforced it, that just means you didn’t actually read the parts that didn’t fit your script.
Click to expand...
Completely irrelevant bullshit, other than it furtherr supports my point.

You're desperately trying to pretend your silliass AI bullshit, somehow, has meaning....again.


As I said, all you've done is reinforce my point, and are now arguing with yourself again.
 
Grokmaster said:
More proof of the left's never-ending two-faced hypocrisy....





President Obama authorized military action in Libya that began on March 19, 2011, and lasted approximately seven months, concluding in late October 2011 after the killing of Muammar Gaddafi and the fall of his government. While initially described as "days, not weeks," the NATO-led mission sustained bombing sorties for this period


President Obama’s Illegal War​







Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe,








On March 19, 2011, President Barack Obama authorized military strikes on Libya to take out Libyan air defenses and protect rebels from attack. He told congressional leaders that the involvement would last “days, not weeks,” and he claimed the authority of the UN Security Council for his assault. But the UN can’t authorize American military intervention. As candidate — and senator and former professor of constitutional law — Obama understood in 2007, Congress must authorize the use of military force.

The administration offered various explanations of why it didn’t need authority from Congress. It had the authority of the UN. He “could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest,” a rather sweeping justification for any exercise of presidential authority. And everybody’s favorite: It wasn’t war, it was “kinetic military action.”

Click to expand...
if you find yourself saying "better than obama", realize you're lowering your standards just might be an imbecile.
 
Grokmaster said:
Completely irrelevant bullshit, other than it furtherr supports my point.

You're desperately trying to pretend your silliass AI bullshit, somehow, has meaning....again.


As I said, all you've done is reinforce my point, and are now arguing with yourself again.
Click to expand...
You keep yelling irrelevant because you can’t handle the parts you didn’t read.

You’re not proving a point, you’re just arguing with your own imagination and pretending it’s me.

The second the facts stop matching your script, you melt down and scream AI bullshit like that magically fixes it.
 
Grim Reaper said:
You keep yelling irrelevant because you can’t handle the parts you didn’t read.

You’re not proving a point, you’re just arguing with your own imagination and pretending it’s me.

The second the facts stop matching your script, you melt down and scream AI bullshit like that magically fixes it.
Click to expand...
Pointing out your irrelevant bullshit is neither melting down nor screaming; it's entertaining.

Your complete lack of logical deduction/linear thought capabilities is hilarious, as you just blubber on about nothing.


My point: Obama bombed Libya w/o Congressional approval for far longer than we have been at war w/Iran, to demonstrate the never-ending hypocrisy of the anti-American left.


Your point? Silliass blubbering over nothing, per usual, while you try to pretend you have a point.

IOW: your usual bullshit.


Now, post some more senseless idiocy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top