On Monday you delivered a speech in which you attempted to justify the use of U.S. military force in Libya. I had planned on not saying anything about your comments, but there were certain comments you made that kept eating at me until I could not take it anymore. Therefore, I feel obligated to explain why I do not support U.S. intervention into the internal affairs of another nation.
I am fully aware that, although I am addressing this to the President, if it is being read at all, it is by a lower level office staffer who may, or may not deem it worthy of even a simple form letter in response. I also realize that, by my speaking my mind, I may end up having my name added to some watch list at the Department of Homeland Security. Nevertheless, I feel obligated to speak out against the use of the U.S. military upon the forces of Muammar Gaddafi.
In your speech you stated that after you consulted with the bipartisan leadership in Congress you authorized military action in support of UN Security Council Resolution 1973. Mr. President, I may not have a college degree in Constitutional law, but I do believe that I have a rudimentary understanding of the powers granted the various branches of our government by that document.
Please, correct me if I am mistaken, but does not the Constitution grant the power of declaring war exclusively to the Congress? Also, if we are not at war, what exactly do you call U.S. attacks upon the military assets of another sovereign nation?
In my researching the founding fathers, and their writings, I have become somewhat of a connoisseur of quotes, having amassed thousands of quotes by our founding fathers. According to George Washington, “The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.”
Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglass once stated, “…a foreign nation is not an enemy until and unless war has been declared against it.” Therefore, no matter how offensive, and oppressive, the actions of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, the United States Constitution does not justify a sitting president to authorize the use of military force against him, or his regime.
Furthermore, in Federalist 69, Alexander Hamilton wrote, “The President is to be commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States. In this respect his authority would be nominally the same with that of the king of Great Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first General and admiral of the Confederacy; while that of the British king extends to the declaring of war and to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies…”
I believe I have made it sufficiently clear that our founders did not wish that the executive hold the exclusive power of when, and where to wage war. Such solemn of a power was not to be held in the hands of a single man, which is why it was given to Congress alone the power to declare war.
In your speech, you also stated “For generations, the United States of America has played a unique role as an anchor of global security and advocate for human freedom.” However, it was never the position of our founders that we become involved in the internal affairs of another nation, even to support the cause of democracy and liberty.
In 1821, then Secretary of State John Quincy Adams delivered a speech to the House of Representatives on the following comments in a speech given to the House of Representatives in celebration of American Independence day.
From his speech I quote, “America, with the same voice which spoke herself into existence as a nation, proclaimed to mankind the inextinguishable rights of human nature, and the only lawful foundations of government. America, in the assembly of nations, since her admission among them, has invariably, though often fruitlessly, held forth to them the hand of honest friendship, of equal freedom, of generous reciprocity.
She has uniformly spoken among them, though often to heedless and often to disdainful ears, the language of equal liberty, of equal justice, and of equal rights.
She has, in the lapse of nearly half a century, without a single exception, respected the independence of other nations while asserting and maintaining her own.
She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart.
She has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of that Aceldama the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right.
Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be.
But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.
She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all.
She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.
She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.
She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom.
The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force…. ”
What has changed since 1821? I see numerous amendments to the Constitution, however none of them grant the President the power to declare war, or to send our troops abroad to interfere in the internal disputes of another nation.
Whether you based your decision upon your concern for the human rights of people’s in another country, or in support of a resolution passed by the United Nations Security Council, you simply do not have the Constitutional authority to engage our military in hostile actions against anyone without a formal declaration of war by Congress. In fact, Congress itself is equally negligent in their bipartisan support of your decision to use the U.S. military in Libya without actually declaring war UPON Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.
I know my letter will do little, to nothing, to change your mind, or deter you from doing as you see fit. The voice of the people, and the limits imposed upon my government by the Constitution are meaningless. You, and when I say you, I mean my government as an entity, will continue to follow the wishes and desires of the puppet masters who pull your strings. Whether those puppet masters be at the United Nations, the Council on Foreign Relations, The Bilderberg Group, or the international bankers who reap the profits caused by war debt, my government no longer cares what I think or say.
Fear not, I am of no threat to you, or the members of Congress who routinely violate their sacred oath to support and defend the Constitution. Nobody listens to me, I am considered an extremist whose views our outdated in the world we live in.
However, I will continue to voice those views until the day the Lord calls me home. For I know that I will be held accountable to Him for my actions, and I want to be able to say that I did all I could to educate, and inform the people of the treachery perpetrated by their government. Actually, I feel sorry for you, as a duly elected representative of the people, as you will have a whole lot of explaining to do come judgment day.
Good day Mr. President.