Tchau: Germany Pulls Out of Libyan Campaign as Brits Call To Assassinate Libyan Leader

As the costs of the latest military campaign in Libya reaches hundreds of millions of dollars for the United States, Germany is pulling out of the operation out of concern over being pulled deeper in the conflict. In the meantime, Britain is expanding the mission to call for the assassination of Gaddafi — the leader of a sovereign nation in the midst of a civil war.

The United States is backing away from assassination calls while acknowledging that they are hoping for the rebels to prevail. U.S. officials are now openly claiming credit for slowing down Gaddafi’s efforts to fight the rebels — clearly associating the air attacks with supporting one side in the civil war.

In the meantime, critics continue to denounce Obama’s decision to take this country to war without a declaration of war — a continuation of the circumvention of Article I of the Constitution.

Obama once understood the value and necessity of such an declaration:

“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.

As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.”

Biden once took this even further, stating on Hardball as a Senator that “If he gives authorization to war… without Congressional approval, I will make it my business to impeach him!”

Source: Daily Mail

Jonathan Turley

21 thoughts on “Tchau: Germany Pulls Out of Libyan Campaign as Brits Call To Assassinate Libyan Leader”

  1. Lottakatz, my favorite is the War on Autism. I mean, talkaboutcher undefended countries!

    It’s hard to name a thing since WWII on which war, either explicit or implicit, was declared that has yet to end. Each lingers on in some horrible way, even Viet Nam, its lessons unlearned, and one of its deranged “heroes” gave us Sarah Palin.

    One word sums up why the end of WWII was so eminently satisfying: Nuremberg.

  2. Doh… Basra? SB Benghazi. The only reason any of these place names have any relevance to me is because we are in some conflict there. I still have no good reasons why wether it’s Benghazi Libya or Basra Iraq. IMO we shouldn’t even know those names in any personal/nationalist way. LOL, to many wars to keep straight.

  3. assassination as a national policy tends to blur the line on who is the terrorist.

    besides it worked so well with castro

  4. We do keep hearing about handing over the leadership of this operation but what exactly does that mean? Who is in charge of decisions about if an individual action is to be taken, when and where? Assigning that mission to a particular nations forces? Who decides when the military mission is fulfilled? What then? Who decides that? When and wether a political action will be taken, if some dialogue will be taken with elements of the Iraqi government and who will act as the intercessor?

    If the UN mandate includes killing the ruler of another nation will the new ‘leader’ of the coalition get to choose wether or not that happens? Who decides what if there are disagreements among the parties?

    Every question has a variety of answers which leads to more questions. If in the end the participants can just walk away (which is the bottom line) then what happens if one or two nations get stuck holding the bag?

    Reports I have read say that the rebels are not a trained or properly armed group and need advisors, material and training; who does that? Is that mission creep or implied in stopping the killing of rebels and non-combatants. Who is going to do that?

    If Quaddifi can just bides his time and withdraws troops from the Basra area then does everyone go home or are we, or some nation going to hang around and protect Basra and/or other cities? For how long?

    If we can’t stop the killing on the ground using planes and drones in Basra or Misrada or any other city in the no-fly zone for fear of killing civilians then what, ultimately, are we doing there? If preventing the slaughter of rebels and non-combatants is what prompted the intervention then what are our next steps, if any? I have not read or heard any actual plan that answers my questions.

    I’m just confused. What’s the plan?

  5. The President has all the authority he needs for this action within the War Powers Act.

    The strong language of the UN resolution appears to have been driven by the French first and foremost with enthusiastic support and encouragement from Sec’y Clinton and UN Ambassador Rice more so than Mr. Obama. Speculation is that they are both quite keen to avoid another Rwanda-type massacre as Ghaddafi had threatened.

    From what I gathered last last week the Joint Chiefs are NOT excited about our Libyan involvement at all. It is they who have pushed the President to hand over the leadership asap.

  6. I can oly speculate that this is being done with an eye towards Libyan oil reserves. Ghaddafi is a pig and a despot, but no more so than another dozen or so in nations around the world. Kim Jeong
    Il or the Saudi’s perhaps. If we assume the best about our President, than he is following the bad advice of the D.C. Wise Old Men of Foreign Policy and the Joint Chiefs, knowing his own foreign policy knowledge base is weak. However, if that is to me the best case assumption that can be made, he is doing bad, badly.
    I shudder to think that there are worse case scenarios for why the
    US is doing this, when even the best case is unacceptable.

  7. ONSLOW COUNTY — We’ve seen Camp Lejuene Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan and now they are joining the fight against Libya.

    About 2,200 Marines from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, or 26th MEU will take part. Their mission is to help end the violence directed at the Libyan people.

    “In Libya right now they are doing exactly what we need them to do. They are doing what they are told and right now that’s protecting Libyan people against Qadhafi forces,” said Captain Timothy Patrick, a Marine with the 26th MEU.

    UPDATE: Conditions set forth by the U.N. Security Council towards resolving the unrest in Libya included the removal of Libyan Leader Muammar al-Qadhafi’s forces from Ajdubiyah. These latest strikes by the MEU aimed at preserving the sanctity of the city and the safety of the civilians within it. In an effort to safeguard the Libyan populace and infrastructure in and around the city of Ajdabiyah from further attacks by regime forces, 26th MEU, as part of Joint Task Force Odyssey Dawn, launched a second round of strikes by AV-8B Harrier jump jets.

    “Our primary concern was ensuring the people inside Ajdubiyah were safe from Qadhafi’s artillery and tanks,” said Col. Mark J. Desens, commanding officer of 26th MEU. “Everything we are seeing following these strikes indicates that his forces are now less capable of threatening the town than before.”

    Patrick says that marines from the 26th MEU are coming on the end of their deployment. They will be replaced with marines from the 22nd MEU.

    A press release from the 26th MEU reads, in part:

    “Protecting the innocent and conducting combined operations are what we are designed to do, our forces are doing both as part of the U.S commitment to protect Libyan citizens.”

  8. Germany wasn’t part of the “Libyan Campaign” to begin with.
    The withdrawal of the two frigates is purely symbolic.

    Why this symbolic gesture which will annoy the France, US, and the UK?

    Next Sunday are elections for the state legislatures in Rhineland-Palatinate (aka Rheinland-Pfalz) and Baden-Württemberg.
    Because Germany is organized according to the parliamentary system, this means that there are two (of sixteen) Prime-Minister (think: Governors) seats up for grabs.

    And because of our peculiar federal system, where the administrations of the states act as the federal “upper chamber” (think: UN SC), this means that there are 10 votes (out of 69) in the Federal Council in the balance as well.

    Especially the loss of the 6 votes of the Baden-Württemberg administration would seriously hurt Merkels party.

    And the current Prime-Minister of Baden-Württemberg, PM Mappus, was a very prominent supporter of nuclear power. Something that is politically really unhelpful post-Fukushima Dai-ichi. He really can’t afford to be seen as the guy from the “war party” also.

  9. First of all, I don’t believe for one moment that Britain is the prime mover on calls for assassination. This wasn’t well reported in what passes for the US press, but Gates and Petraeus knew we were going to war before the UN resolution. (transcript below) Before we illegally invaded Iraq, the US threatened a lot of countries into becoming “the coalition of the willing”. The fact that those two war mongers knew this resolution was going to pass makes me believe the US railroaded through the UN. Further, it was Obama who insisted on the extremely broad language, which could include regime change, in the resolution. He was fighting hard for that broad language, and he got it. (reported by NPR)

    Britain has been the US poodle, the go to guy, for a lot of our misdeeds. I think this call for assassination is no exception. When you consider also that the US greenlighted the armed attack on peaceful protesters in Bahrain, just days before they decided to get rid of Gaddafi, then one cannot truly believe the US is involved in a humanitarian effort in Libya. We are going in for our corporations’ interests, the right to their oil and some really great arms deals to boot.

    Germany is correct to get out of such an illegal action. Obama is engaged in yet another impeachable offense, one more war crime. We need peaceful regime change at home and we need it now. (transcript below at World Can’t Wait)

    “Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, shared what was meant to be a private joke about Libya when the two met on the tarmac in Kabul today. But the exchange was caught on an open microphone and didn’t remain private for long.

    PETRAEUS: “Welcome back, sir, flying a little bigger plane than normal … You gonna launch some attacks on Libya or something?”

    GATES:”Yeah [laughter]. Exactly.”

  10. Every cruise Missile costs over $1 million – so far the USA has fired around 150. Britain has fired 12 and has only got 50 left.
    France has used strong diplomatic language.
    A cruise missile has already been fired at Gaddafi’s compound, in an obvious assassination attempt that may have killed one of his sons.
    The Brits are in worse financial shape than Greece, so you have to ask: why are they doing this? Could it be that the approval ratings of both the British Prime Minister and the French President are abysmal and they are both hoping that a bit of bullying of a weak nation will get them re-elected as Margaret Thatcher’s Falkland Island adventure did?
    The Germans have the moral high ground and are smart to stay away from this ill-advised, disastrous adventure.

  11. “Obama once understood the value and necessity of such an declaration:”

    I submit that “understanding” and “respecting” are distinctly different verbs.

  12. Maybe we can learn a lesson from the Germans and pull out and let the Brits do the dirty work this time! Then again, I could be day dreaming again!

Comments are closed.