Skip to comments.
Panetta: Obama Can Unilaterally Use Military to Protect ‘National Interests’
CNSNEWS.COM ^
| Monday, June 13, 2011
| Matt Cover
Posted on 06/17/2011 5:46:44 PM PDT by Robert Drobot
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-39 next last
Leon Panetta, either flunked high school civics courses, or is opposed to the oath of office he took as a congressman, CIA director and now Secretary of Defense to defend and adhere to the Constitution's checks and balances of a three tier authority system, we the people established ( legislative, judicial and administrative branches of federal government ).
He is challenging the limitations of authority established by the supreme authority within the Republic - we the people. Further, one member of our Senate dares stand with him in this challenge. John McCain.
Both traitors should resign from the system they so despise.
To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...
2
posted on
06/17/2011 5:48:34 PM PDT
by
Nachum
(The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
To: Robert Drobot
Oh goodie!
Let’s Bomb Mexico!
3
posted on
06/17/2011 5:50:33 PM PDT
by
smokingfrog
( sleep with one eye open ( <o> ---)
To: Robert Drobot
The government has gone so wrong so fast that I just don’t know what to say anymore.The rule of law has died right before our eyes.
4
posted on
06/17/2011 5:54:16 PM PDT
by
Farmer Dean
(stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
To: Robert Drobot
Oh, good. So now, future Republican administrations can cite the “Obama Doctrine” whenever anybody needs killin’.
5
posted on
06/17/2011 5:55:08 PM PDT
by
Flag_This
(Real presidents don't bow.)
To: Robert Drobot
This is an absurdity not even worthy of comment... and yet I’m commenting.
To: Flag_This
Panetta is merely being honest to his true nature. Men like Panetta (and sinkEmperor clintoon chose him because of it) do not consider the Constitution a valid obstruction to them being a law unto themselves, to their administrations. We have elected the enemy to rule over us and now we expect them to abide by our Constitution? Absurd
7
posted on
06/17/2011 5:58:26 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
To: Robert Drobot
Even if I were to concede that was true, what does bombing Libya have to do with US national interests?
I swear this reads like one of John Semmens' satires.
8
posted on
06/17/2011 6:01:22 PM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! Tea Party extremism is a badge of honor.)
To: Robert Drobot
I always believed the role of the Military WAS to protect our National Interest. What the hell is REALLY going on???
9
posted on
06/17/2011 6:03:31 PM PDT
by
merryberry
(.In dog beers I had about one)
To: Robert Drobot
National interest? In Libya? I say we bomb Zimbabwe next!
To: Robert Drobot
What will Americans do when a mechanized forces is sent into Libya to be killed by the al qaeda forces opposing Momar? How will Americans even learn the truth that our soldiers are to be ground up between two enemies, when the treacherous media will not report but what they are told to report? How far are we from final capitulation to the fascist dreams of the dnc/bankers/commies if we have leadership which sweeps aside our Constitution and sends our finest off for slaughter on his own ‘recognizance’? Wathc the news. Units are already being staged for deployment without Congressional authorization. Such fine military leadership we have, that follow an ineligible sonofabitch and order our sons and daughters to die for his empowerment.
11
posted on
06/17/2011 6:04:09 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
To: Robert Drobot
Obama now has his yes man at her Pentagon.
12
posted on
06/17/2011 6:04:34 PM PDT
by
headstamp 2
(We live two lives, the life we learn and the life we live with after that.)
To: headstamp 2
13
posted on
06/17/2011 6:06:10 PM PDT
by
headstamp 2
(We live two lives, the life we learn and the life we live with after that.)
To: Nachum; SoldiersPrayingMom; SoldierDad; Howie66; vette6387; flat; unkus; JLAGRAYFOX; MamaDearest
Aiding Al Qaeda mixed in with the Libyan Rebels is in our national interest? Since when? Who decided that? Not our military I’m sure.
To: Robert Drobot
Leon Panetta is a Communist crook who worked his way up the ladder doing clinton’s dirty work.
What national interest is involved in Libya, Leon? Why are we fighting that war on the wrong side? It makes about as much sense as Clinton going in and giving Kosovo to the Muslim Albanian drug cartel. And now they’re trading body parts as well as drugs.
Great work, Leon!
15
posted on
06/17/2011 6:08:22 PM PDT
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: Robert Drobot
Leon Lickspittle is a career pol with his nose so far up Obama’s butt, the president had to have the Surgeon General make a window in his navel so Panetta wouldn’t trip over his own - or Obama’s - feet.
Does the word ‘mouthpiece’ mean anything?
To: Robert Drobot
I would like to hear his definition of “national interest.” Without a clear definition anything can be, and will be used, as “national interest.”
17
posted on
06/17/2011 6:09:17 PM PDT
by
engrpat
(A village in Kenya is missing their idiot...lets send him back)
To: merryberry
First Bush/Paulson/Obama send a hundred billion to the European bankers, to keep them afloat in our taxfunded cash, then barry the bastard sends our sons and daughters to die for the flow of their European energy policy. Nothing to see here. Move along. All your resource are belong to the bastard boy and his bosses.
18
posted on
06/17/2011 6:09:52 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
To: Robert Drobot
“....he believes the president can unilaterally use military force, without congressional authorization to protect our national interests.”
Ok Leon, so who defines “national interests” and how is a military officer to draw the line at what is a lawful order when there is an ambiguous doctrine of “national interests” now?
What if in Obama’s opinion it’s in the “national interests” to turn on a restless segment of Americans?
To: Robert Drobot
“Panetta: Obama Can Unilaterally Use Military to Protect National Interests”
And what, pray tell is our vital national interest in Libya?
20
posted on
06/17/2011 6:12:41 PM PDT
by
Grunthor
(Make the lefts' collective brain cell implode; Cain/Bolton 2012.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-39 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson