Kony: What Jason did not tell the Invisible Children - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

The LRA is a raggedy bunch of a few hundred at most: poorly equipped, poorly armed, and poorly trained. Their ranks mainly comprise those kidnapped as children and then turned into tormentors. It is a story not very different from that of abused children, who in time turn into abusive adults. In short, the LRA is no military power. 

Addressing the problem dubbed "the LRA" does not call for a military operation. And yet, the LRA is given as the reason why there must be a constant military mobilisation, at first in northern Uganda, and now in the entire region, why the military budget must have priority and, now, why the US must send soldiers and weaponry, including drones, to the region. But rather than being the reason for accelerated military mobilisation in the region, the LRA is merely the excuse for it.

The reason why the LRA continues is that its victims - the civilian population of the area - trust neither the LRA nor government forces. Sandwiched between the two, civilians need to be rescued from an ongoing military mobilisation and offered the hope of a political process.

Kony: What Jason did not tell the Invisible Children - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

Republican lawmakers divided on Obama sending 100 Combat Troops to Uganda

**Editors Note: This story was written around October 18, 2011

(GoinsReport.com) – When asked whether he supports the President’s recent decision to send military advisors to Central Africa, Sen. John Thune says he hasn’t thought much about that—but added that he hopes it will be an “international, worldwide” commitment to address the problems in Uganda.

GoinsReport.com asked Senator Thune (R-S.D.) on Capitol Hill Tuesday, “Do You support the president unilaterally sending 100 troops to Uganda?”

Thune said: “I have to say I haven’t thought a lot about that. I know that’s something some of my colleagues who are more familiar with the issue have been discussing.”

He continued: “But obviously there is some tremendous atrocities being committed that hopefully it will be an international, worldwide commitment to try and address and the United States clearly is always taking a leadership role and we’ll probably continue to do that. But I need to look more at the details and particulars of it.”

In an electronic newsletter sent Tuesday, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) wrote that he supported President Obama in sending military advisors to Uganda to assist in apprehending Joseph Kony and his Lord’s Resistance Army.

“This latest development is another step to bringing much awaited justice to the children and victims in Uganda devastated by the monstrous acts of Kony and the LRA,” Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla) wrote.

“As the pioneer for this cause in Congress for the past decade, it is my prayer that Kony will be held accountable for the violent acts the LRA has committed against the youth of Uganda and throughout the continent of Africa” he continued.

However, several members of Congress in the Senate and the House of Representatives have warned against sending troops to a foreign country without congressional approval.

Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) said in a Friday Townhall in Iowa that she wasn’t very aware of President Obama’s recent action, according to CBSNews.

“I do not know enough about it to comment on it,” the report quoted Bachmann as saying. But she added “we will have to first demonstrate a vital American national interest” before sending troops overseas.

Referring to the president’s decision to aid pro-Democracy forces in Libya she is quoted as saying, “he did not get permission from Congress; he just did it unilaterally.” She added: “It just happened again.”

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said this past Sunday in an interview CNN’s “State of the Union” that he thinks it’s appropriate to “do what we can to prevent and eradicate” the Lord’s Resistance Army. However, he added that he doesn’t have all of the details and that a slippery slope situation could happen in Uganda.

“We don’t know any of the details,” McCain said. “I remember Somalia. I remember Lebanon. We’ve got to be very careful about how we engage. This slippery slope thing could happen there. I think it’s mainly humanitarian in this case.”

Legal Scholar says Obama act impeachable, but far from most impeachable act

*Editors note: This story was written around October 18, 2011

(GoinsReport.com) – President Obama’s recent decision to send 100 military advisors to Uganda to assist Ugandan forces to depose of the Lord's Resistance Army leader Joseph Kony is an impeachable act—but far from the most impeachable thing he’s done in his presidency, says a constitutional scholar.

“The thing is of course that we have many statutes outstanding giving the president all kinds of legal authority, some of which are conflicting, and so clearly you have to look into his formal statements about what authorizes him to do this before you can reach a conclusion” says Kevin Gutzman.

He added: “Just from what I know about this current action in South Central Africa, we don’t really know exactly whether it’s legal. We don’t know exactly what he wants these soldiers doing.”

“It’s hard to believe that people would make very much out of 100 troops when we’ve had weeks and weeks of American military involvement in Libya and nothing has come of it,” Gutzman said.

Last March, the President invoked the War Powers Act to conduct U.S. missile strikes against Libya's air-defense systems. Nine Democratic lawmakers, including Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.), raised objections to constitutionality of the president's actions, reports said back in March.

At the time, a non-partisan advocacy group, the War Powers Committee of the Constitution Project, called the continued U.S. military action in Libya "unlawful" since even the most generous interpretations of the War Powers Act can't stretch the time limit the Commander-in-Chief has to get congressional approval beyond 60 days.

“They consulted the Arab League. They consulted the United Nations. They did not consult the United States Congress,” one Democrat lawmaker reportedly said on the White House's decision to become involved in Libya.

“They’re creating wreckage, and they can’t obviate that by saying there are no boots on the ground. … There aren’t boots on the ground; there are Tomahawks in the air,” the Democrat lawmaker continued.

Under the War Powers Act, established in the president has to seek congressional approval within 60 days of committing U.S. troops abroad and inform Congress that troops will be deployed for military action.

“Consulting” congress has its origins in the War Powers Act, an act which Gutzman calls unconstitutional to the extent that it allows the president to deploy troops for months before seeking authorization from Congress.

“The bottom line is these things are supposed to be done after getting authorization from congress,” Gutzman said.

The pattern of presidents sending troops off to war without congressional authorization is a pattern that has become common after World War II, and is unlike precedents set by America’s earliest presidents like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison who both received congressional approval before sending ships off to North Africa to protect American ships there and defending American ships at sea by declaring war against Great Britain, respectively, Gutzman said.

“This pattern of behavior that we have in presidents now really comes from World War II, at least of basically doing whatever they want and then asking Congress ‘would you please approve it?’ is the opposite of what the Constitution contemplates,” Gutzman said.

Kevin Gutzman is professor of History at Western Connecticut University and co-author of Who Killed the Constitution?