If some foreign nation dropped a bomb on your house, destroying your property and killing loved ones, would you accept the explanations "we're liberating you" and "it's not REALLY a war"?
The libertarian principle of non-aggression is the only consistent and moral position.
Just listen to all the Obamatons scrambling to justify clearly immoral and unconstitutional action the same way the Bush supporters did with Iraq and Afghanistan!
Frankly, it's disgusting.
Can you justify allowing Khadafi to "show no mercy" as he turns his forces on his coastal cities? How is that moral?
As for the Constitution and the wars: Obama did not need Congressional authority. Many Presidents have used the armed forces without an "imminent threat" to the US and without a Congressional resolution. He also did consult and brief Congress. As for Bush, he had two clear Congressional resolutions authorizing both actions. They were completely consistent with the Constitution.
What's disgusting is how people will recklessly throw around terms like "Unconstitutional" and "illegal" and "immoral" when what they are really saying is "I disagree with this particular action." You are more than entitled to be a libertarian...I myself have fairly strong libertarian leanings. But none of the three actions were Unconstitutional. That much is clear.