THE KINETIC MILITARY ACTION—Libya
First, I am not the true author of the buzz word, “Kinetic Military Action”, in fact, this buzz word came from the Whitehouse.
“In the last few days, Obama administration officials have frequently faced the question: Is the fighting in Libya a war? From military officers to White House spokesmen up to the president himself, the answer is no. But that leaves the question: What is it?.....In a briefing on board Air Force One Wednesday, deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes took a crack at an answer. "I think what we are doing is enforcing a resolution that has a very clear set of goals, which is protecting the Libyan people, averting a humanitarian crisis, and setting up a no-fly zone," Rhodes said. "Obviously that involves kinetic military action, particularly on the front end."
Let us DEFINE the definition of “WAR”:
WAR as a noun:
(1) : a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations (2) : a period of such armed conflict (3) : state of war b : the art or science of warfare c (1) obsolete : weapons and equipment for war (2) archaic : soldiers armed and equipped for war;
(2) a state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism b : a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end <a class war> <a war against disease>
WAR as a verb:
(1) to be in active or vigorous conflict
(2) to engage in warfare
Definition of WARFARE
1 military operations between enemies : hostilities, war; also : an activity undertaken by a political unit (as a nation) to weaken or destroy another <economic warfare>
2 struggle between competing entities : conflict
SENATOR OBAMA- “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," the memo quotes then-Senator Obama saying on Dec. 20, 2007.”
The President, Obama, consulted and gained the “authorization” from all of the following:
- THE UNITED NATIONS and VARIOUS MEMBER COUNTRIES – E.g. UN resolution 1973
- THE ARAB LEAGUE
- THE United States CONGRESS who represents US has not provided any authorization for any conflict or WAR with Libya-NONE.
Obama Contradicts his own statements about gaining authorization from Congress for the use of military force.
Under the UN CHARTER there is NO MANDATE that any country follow a resolution—NONE.  Even if there were a treaty or some type of agreement mandating such a thing the same would be NULL and VOID if said resolution or agreement or treaty violates U.S. Law and especially the U.S. Constitution. 
Under 22 U.S.C. 287d the President of the United States must seek the APPROVAL or AUTHORIZATION of the CONGRESS if military force is to be used in conjunction with a U.N. Resolution.  HOWEVER, if an action is truly HUMANITARIAN the U.S. President need not seek Congressional approval/authorization (No military action) 
Under the WAR POWERS ACT, the President MUST , as in IT IS REQUIRED, to gain the AUTHORIZATION of CONGRESS to bring the military into a conflict or WAR, unless there is some kind of actual threat or actual attack and there after seek approval/authorization of Congress. These REQUIREMENTS are pursuant to 50 U.S.C. § 1541(c), 50 U.S.C. § 1542, 50 U.S.C. § 1543, and 50 U.S.C. § 1544. 
Under the U.S. Constitution Article 2, Section 2, reads in part:
“Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments………..The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
Under the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, reads in part:
“ * Section 8 - Powers of Congress
* The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
* To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
* To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
* To provide and maintain a Navy;
* To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
* To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
* To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;”
(Do I NEED to reference this? OK here it is:)
------ Has Libya attacked the United States? NO.
----- Is Libya a threat or has Libya threatened the United States? NO
According to Defense Secretary Gates, Libya is a no factor, “Despite the heavy involvement of U.S. forces and the rising costs of the Libyan operation, Gates said that Libya did not rank high on the list of U.S. national security concerns. "I don't think it's a vital interest for the U.S.," Gates said on NBC's "Meet The Press," but he added that Libya was part of a Mideast region that was a vital interest.”
According to Secretary Clinton, “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, however, had her own spin. “Let’s be fair here,” she said. “They did not attack us, but what they were doing, and Qaddafi’s history, and the potential for the disruption and instability was very much in our interests.” The mission, she added, “is seen by our European friends and our Arab partners as very vital to their interests.”
However, MOST OF THE MIDDLE EAST has the potential of disruption and instability… Iran, Syria.. etc. et. Al.—LIBYA DID NOT ATTACK THE UNITED STATES. Let us not forget North Korea….though not in the Middle East…
Why are we then bombing er waging WAR on Libya?
Per President Obama, “In the face of the world's condemnation, Gadhafi chose to escalate his attacks, launching a military campaign against the Libyan people. Innocent people were targeted for killing. Hospitals and ambulances were attacked. Journalists were arrested, sexually assaulted, and killed. Supplies of food and fuel were choked off. Water for hundreds of thousands of people in Misurata was shut off. Cities and towns were shelled, mosques were destroyed, and apartment buildings reduced to rubble. Military jets and helicopter gunships were unleashed upon people who had no means to defend themselves against assaults from the air.
Confronted by this brutal repression and a looming humanitarian crisis, I ordered warships into the Mediterranean. European allies declared their willingness to commit resources to stop the killing.”
YOU MEAN like Iran? Who put down a student revolt that we ignored.
YOU MEAN like Syria? Like Syria who is right now doing as Libya was doing.
YOU MEAN like North Korea? Like North Korea who is either killing or starving there own.
YOU MEAN like the Sudan? Like the Sudan who are butchering their own more so than Libya ever did.
YOU MEAN like Darfur? Like those people in Darfur are committing genocide.
According to Joseph Biden, the now Vice President of the United States the failure to gain Congressional Approval or Support is an impeachable offense (Biden says YES).
In Biden’s own words:
We are AT WAR with Libya-PERIOD. Plain and simple as well Mr. Rhodes is a liar with regard to if we are at WAR or not as with President Obama.
The only authority the President has to use the military is when this nation, the United States is threatened or actually under attack, or when Congress authorizes such use except for things akin to what we are doing in Japan—ACTUAL HUMANITARIAN EFFORTS. Dropping bombs and shooting missiles is NOT a Humanitarian exploit –it is a conflict it is committing and an Act of WAR. WAR is only authorized by CONGRESS as noted above and the Constitution.
Mr. Obama has not gained authorization from CONGRESS (us) to wage any conflict or War whatsoever no matter his reasoning or excuses-Yet consulted with and made agreements with foreign nations / Entities and the U.N.
Mr. Obama contradicted his own words in 2007, Biden has contradicted his own words as well with regard to President using the Military and gaining authorization from Congress to do so-they were right but ignore their own pontifications.
Mr. Obama is in violation of Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, 22 U.S.C. § 287d, 50 U.S.C. § 1541 (c), 50 U.S.C. § 1542, 50 U.S.C. § 1543, 50 U.S.C. § 1544 and the spirit and letter of REID V. COVERT, 354 U. S. 1 (1956).
SEE the UN Charter here:
"There is nothing new or unique about what we say here. This Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty. [Footnote 33] For example, in Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U. S. 258, 133 U. S. 267, it declared:
"The treaty power, as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments, and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or in that of one of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter, without its consent."
This Court has also repeatedly taken the position that an Act of Congress, which must comply with the Constitution, is on a full parity with a treaty, and that, when a statute which is subsequent in time is inconsistent with a treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict renders the treaty null. [Footnote 34] It would be completely anomalous to say that a treaty need not comply with the Constitution when such an agreement can be overridden by a statute that must conform to that instrument."
REID V. COVERT, 354 U. S. 1 (1956)
22 U.S.C. § 287d
“The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council -----which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution,---providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter. ---The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein: --- Provided, That, ----except as authorized in section 287d–1 of this title, ----nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to the President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council---- for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.
The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council ---which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution,--- providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter. ----The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein:---- Provided, That, ----except as authorized in section 287d-1 of this title, nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to the President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.----
“US Code - Section 287D-1: Noncombatant assistance to United Nations”…
50 U.S.C. § 1541 (c):
Presidential executive power as Commander-in-Chief; limitation The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
50 U.S.C. § 1542:
The President in ----every possible instance shall consult with Congress BEFORE introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations---- where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.
50 U.S.C. § 1543
(a) Written report; time of submission; circumstances necessitating submission; information reported In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced - (1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances; (2) into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or (3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation; the President shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth –
(A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces;
(B) the constitutional and legislative authority under which such introduction took place; and
(C) the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.
(b) Other information reported The President shall provide such other information as the Congress may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United States Armed Forces abroad.
(c) Periodic reports; semiannual requirement Whenever United States Armed Forces are introduced into hostilities or into any situation described in subsection (a) of this section, the President shall, so long as such armed forces continue to be engaged in such hostilities or situation, report to the Congress periodically on the status of such hostilities or situation as well as on the scope and duration of such hostilities or situation, but in no event shall he report to the Congress less often than once every six months.
50 U.S.C. § 1544
(a) Transmittal of report and referral to Congressional committees; joint request for convening Congress Each report submitted pursuant to section 1543(a)(1) of this title shall be transmitted to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate on the same calendar day. Each report so transmitted shall be referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate for appropriate action. If, when the report is transmitted, the Congress has adjourned sine die or has adjourned for any period in excess of three calendar days, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate, if they deem it advisable (or if petitioned by at least 30 percent of the membership of their respective Houses) shall jointly request the President to convene Congress in order that it may consider the report and take appropriate action pursuant to this section.
(b) Termination of use of United States Armed Forces; exceptions; extension period
Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 1543(a)(1) of this title, whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces, (2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or (3) is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces.----
(c) Concurrent resolution for removal by President of United States Armed Forces Notwithstanding subsection (b) of this section, at any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.