Natural rights as a criterion for war for the United States begins with Thomas Jefferson writing, “all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. Eleanor Roosevelt defines our U.N. commitment to collective security by writing that equal and inalienable rights for the human family encompass rights to life, liberty and security of person. John Kennedy reinforced this commitment saying, “We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” Finally, Ronald Reagan said we cannot escape destiny as the last best hope of afflicted mankind.
However, Barack Obama cannot claim natural rights as criteria for Libyan action, because he considered preventing genocide inconsistent reasoning for maintaining troops in Iraq; pointing out our un-involvement in the Congo and Darfur.
This leaves John Kerry’s international test making the U.S. subservient to worldwide conscience. Under that criteria Libya becomes more equal than the Congo, Sudan, Rwanda, and Uganda. Uninterrupted European access to natural resources seems the paramount reasoning, with humanitarian protection purely random.
Such reasoning required that Congressional debate accompany Obama’s leisurely deliberations with the U.N.
White House Hopeful Barack Obama Says Preventing Genocide Isn’t Reason to Keep U.S. Troops in Iraq
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,290073,00.html
Obama: Don’t stay in Iraq over genocide
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19862711/ns/politics-decision_08/
Obama: Don’t stay in Iraq over genocide.
So far it look like his plans are to unite all the wrong people for the wrong reason,so many reason to feel he’s a very dangerous ruler congress is helpless with this guy.
Thats all I ever needed to hear about him.