 | If there are no hostilities in Libya, why is the Defense Dept. paying service member "Imminent Danger Pay???"Scotty Starnes | June 21, 2011 at 6:30 AM | Tags: 1973 War Powers Act, hostilities, imminent danger, imminent danger pay, Libya, Pentagon, President Obama | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-5uP |
Obama is your typical progressive. Progressives, for years, have tried to change their name to hide their failed ideologies. Now they are trying to change the meanings of words to circumvent Congress and the U.S. Constitution.
Obama wants his brain-dead followers to believe there are no hostilities happening in Libya. Just ignore the bombs being dropped on Libyan troops, tanks, military vehicles and buildings, and you too can be an Obama-bot.
From WaPo:
The White House has officially declared that what's happening in Libya is not "hostilities."
But at the Pentagon, officials have decided it's unsafe enough there to give troops extra pay for serving in "imminent danger."
The Defense Department decided in April to pay an extra $225 a month in "imminent danger pay" to service members who fly planes over Libya or serve on ships within 110 nautical miles of its shores.
That means the Pentagon has decided that troops in those places are "subject to the threat of physical harm or imminent danger because of civil insurrection, civil war, terrorism or wartime conditions." There are no U.S. ground troops in Libya.
President Obama declared last week that the three-month-old Libyan campaign should not be considered "hostilities." That word is important, because it's used in the 1973 War Powers Resolution: Presidents must obtain congressional authorization within a certain period after sending U.S. forces "into hostilities."
Obama's reasoning was that he did not need that authorization because U.S. forces were playing a largely supportive and logistical role, and because Libyan defenses are so battered they pose little danger. U.S. drones are still carrying out some strikes against Libyan targets.
Overall, the White House reasoned, "U.S. military operations [in Libya] are distinct from the kind of 'hostilities' contemplated by the resolution."
On Monday, a spokesman for House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said the Pentagon's decision was further proof that Obama's logic is flawed.
"If members of our armed forces involved in the military action in Libya are getting 'imminent danger' pay, it's one more indication that the White House claim that we aren't involved in 'hostilities' just doesn't pass the straight-face test," said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel.
..."Hostilities by remote control are still hostilities," said Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), normally a close Obama ally, on Sunday's "Meet the Press." "We are killing with drones what we would otherwise be killing with fighter planes. And we are engaged in hostilities in Libya."
 | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment