The rule of the North African country of Libya by dictator Moammar Gadhafi is certainly obnoxious.
But should American military forces be involved there when Libya poses no apparent threat to our country?
Republican U.S. Sen. Bob Corker of Chattanooga raised vital questions about U.S. involvement in Libya in a recent letter to Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
The attacks, which also were undertaken by some other countries, were "authorized" by a U.N. resolution.
Unfortunately, however, President Barack Obama did not seek a congressional declaration of war, which obviously should be more important than a U.N. resolution when U.S. forces are involved.
Concerned about whether such action by the president was constitutional, Corker called on Kerry to hold hearings to review the war powers spelled out in the Constitution "and consider recommendations to amend or clarify the conditions required for the employment of U.S. forces.
"We owe it to every man and woman who puts on a uniform to serve our country, and every taxpayer who funds the operations, to be clear that our entry into any conflict - whether in response to an attack on the homeland or a threat to our broader national security - has been entered into in a lawful and appropriate manner," he added.
He's right.
Whenever our forces attack, it should only be with proper authorization.