Reply #26: If the UN Charter isnt illegal or Unconstitutional, your entire argument falls down. Here are links

[stevenleser]

The UN Charter provides for the UN Security Council and for member states to heed the security council's resolutions.

Its all very simple. As I said, congress (specifically the senate by 2/3rds vote) can approve treaties like mutual defense pacts that compel the use of US Armed Forces in certain situations. The approval of the UN Charter in this way is no different.

Once approved, any treaty becomes Federal law. You can claim that this is false, but a very quick internet search will show I am right.

So, lets review the facts:

1 The UN Charter is considered an approved treaty
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/us-senate-approves-united-nations-charter
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Treaties.htm

2 Approved treaties are considered federal law
See http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=treaties+considered+federal+law&aq=&aqi=&aql=&oq=treaties+considered+federal+law&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=87a89c5b1abc39eb

and any of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause

3 The UN Charter accounts for the actions by the Security Council and that member states must try to carry out these actions http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter5.shtml

4 The Security Council has called for a No fly zone in Libya and all measures necessary to protect civilians (a pretty elastic resolution really)

I assume you do not need a link for this

5 You are making no argument that the UN Charter is Unconstitutional

As you yourself have pointed out

6 The Presidents actions are thus legal both nationally and internationally.

There is nothing sophisticated about this. Its all very simple and you have no argument against it. You try to claim I am wrong but each of these things is easily verifiable. You want so badly for this action by Obama to be illegal and it just isn't.