This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/world-us-canada-13908202

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
House of Representatives votes against US Libya role House of Representatives votes against US Libya role
(40 minutes later)
The US House of Representatives has voted against a resolution giving President Barack Obama authority to order US operations in Libya.The US House of Representatives has voted against a resolution giving President Barack Obama authority to order US operations in Libya.
The Republican-dominated House voted it down by 295 votes to 123. Analysts say it is largely a symbolic protest. However, the House on Friday also voted down a Republican effort to cut off money for the Libya conflict.
US backing for the Nato operation in Libya has drawn criticism from many in Congress in recent weeks.US backing for the Nato operation in Libya has drawn criticism from many in Congress in recent weeks.
They say the three-month-old military operation is in breach of legislation requiring the backing of Congress. Opponents say the three-month-old operation is in breach of legislation requiring the backing of Congress.
"The president has operated in what we now know is called the zone of twilight as to whether or not he even needs our approval," Republican Representative Tom Rooney of Florida said. "So what are we left with?"
Mr Obama says he does not need additional congressional approval, as US forces are simply supporting Nato.Mr Obama says he does not need additional congressional approval, as US forces are simply supporting Nato.
His allies in Congress urged members of the House to vote for the resolution authorising the conflict.
"A sudden withdrawal of American support for the mission would strengthen Gaddafi's hand and increase his confidence that he can wait out the rebellion against his rule," Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland said on the House floor.
"It would put civilian lives at risk... I urge my colleagues: protect our valuable alliances and the principles of human rights that they safeguard."
War Powers resolutionWar Powers resolution
Under the terms of the resolution, the US would have been allowed to conduct "limited" operations for one year in Libya.Under the terms of the resolution, the US would have been allowed to conduct "limited" operations for one year in Libya.
The introduction of ground troops would have been banned.The introduction of ground troops would have been banned.
A related vote on limiting funding to the US operation in Libya is also scheduled for Friday.
Analysts suggest Democrats angry at Mr Obama's continued commitment of resources to the Libya campaign could refuse to vote against the resolution, delivering another rebuke to the president.Analysts suggest Democrats angry at Mr Obama's continued commitment of resources to the Libya campaign could refuse to vote against the resolution, delivering another rebuke to the president.
The disagreement between Congress and the White House stems from a Vietnam War-era law, the War Powers resolution, intended to constrain the president's ability to wage military conflict with congressional approval.The disagreement between Congress and the White House stems from a Vietnam War-era law, the War Powers resolution, intended to constrain the president's ability to wage military conflict with congressional approval.
Under the US constitution, only Congress can declare war, and the 1973 War Powers resolution requires that, without such a declaration, a president who sends US military forces into conflict must get authorisation from Congress if the hostilities last longer than 90 days. Under the US constitution only Congress can declare war, and the 1973 War Powers resolution requires that, without such a declaration, a president who sends US military forces into conflict must get authorisation from Congress if the hostilities last longer than 90 days.
Last week, Mr Obama informed Congress that administration lawyers deemed the Libya conflict did not require additional congressional approval, arguing US forces were merely playing a supporting role in the Nato campaign.Last week, Mr Obama informed Congress that administration lawyers deemed the Libya conflict did not require additional congressional approval, arguing US forces were merely playing a supporting role in the Nato campaign.
That role, the White House says, does not match the definition of "hostilities" as described in the War Powers resolution.That role, the White House says, does not match the definition of "hostilities" as described in the War Powers resolution.