We're at war (again)

Pat Buchanan explains why we are, once again, enmeshed in an unnecessary and unjustifiable war in Libya. The excuse that we are helping the "rebels" achieve freedom under the guise of U.N. authority just doesn't wash. American interests are not threatened -- unless, of course, America's interest is to kill or depose anyone who does not give us what we want.

Gadhafi did not attack the West. He faced an uprising to dethrone him and rallied his troops to crush it, as any ruthless ruler would have done. We have no vital interest in who wins his civil war.         

Indeed, Gadhafi has asked of Obama, "If you found them taking over American cities by force of arms, what would you do?"         

Well, when the South fired on Fort Sumter, killing no one, Abraham Lincoln blockaded every Southern port, sent Gen. Sherman to burn Atlanta and pillage Georgia and South Carolina, and Gen. Sheridan to ravage the Shenandoah. He locked up editors and shut down legislatures and fought a four-year war of reconquest that killed 620,000 Americans -- a few more than have died in Gadhafi's four-week war.        

Good thing we didn't have an "international community" back then.         

The Royal Navy would have been bombarding Lincoln's America.

Do we really want the U.N. calling the shots, dictating who lives and who dies, or what governments may be allowed to exist? Who's next?

EDIT: Terrance P. Jeffrey and Alan Keyes articulate in greater detail why this usurper ought to be impeached for violating the Constitution he swore to uphold. (Indeed, has he not defied the Constitution by his very occupancy of the office, given his ambiguous, suspect and unproven nativity, in direct opposition to Article 2, Section 1?)