[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
U.S. Constitution Title: President Obama Goes to War - Without Congress Regardless of one's inclination toward the "freedom fighters" and the "monster" in Libya, or the wisdom of United States military intervention, there are certain formalities that are required, and that President Obama and his administration, including Secretary of State Clinton, appear determined to ignore, in violation of both the Constitution and United States Law. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution specifies that it is the Congress that has the power to declare war. United States Code (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548), the War Powers Act, specifically states that the president may undertake the use of military force only in the case of "... a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces." It further states that the President must consult with Congress, "...in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities ..." Membership in the United Nations does not grant the Security Council the authority to order U.S. forces into action, and being the President does not permit Obama to violate the Constitution and the Law, to commit an act of war without the authorization of the People, through their Congress. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 30. . and not a FUCKING word from so the called CONSTITUTIONAL and TRADITIONAL "CONSERVATIVES" meme here. Ah yes. Affectation as opposed to natural honesty. Bullshit is the language. Self is the true cause. "Send lawyers guns and money, the sh!t has hit the fan!"
#2. To: Mad Dog (#1) I'm absolutely amazed that the Republicans, ANY Republicans, are not saying a word about this. The only outrage I've heard has come from Democrats, unless I've just missed it.
#6. To: We The People (#2) I'm absolutely amazed that the Republicans, ANY Republicans, are not saying a word about this. The only outrage I've heard has come from Democrats, unless I've just missed it. The War Powers Act gives the President 60 days before he needs Congressional approval.
#25. To: lucysmom (#6) (Edited) The War Powers Act gives the President 60 days before he needs Congressional approval. That is not true. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548) was a United States Congress joint resolution providing that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or if the United States is already under attack or serious threat.[citation needed] The War Powers Resolution requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution
#26. To: We The People (#25) That is not true. Not so fast. What does that little "[citation needed]" following the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or if the United States is already under attack or serious threat. mean?
#27. To: lucysmom (#26) (Edited) Not so fast. We both know what it means, but let's not play games. Let's forget the wiki site and go straight to the text of the resolution... www.law.cornell.edu/uscod..._50_00001541----000-.html
(a) Congressional declaration It is the purpose of this chapter to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations. (b) Congressional legislative power under necessary and proper clause Under article I, section 8, of the Constitution, it is specifically provided that the Congress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution, not only its own powers but also all other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer hereof. (c) Presidential executive power as Commander-in-Chief; limitation The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces. www.law.cornell.edu/uscod..._50_00001542----000-.html
The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations. There is no way around it, facts are facts. Obama has violated the US Constitution as well as the War Powers Resolution of 1973.
#29. To: We The People (#27) The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances... Obama is following the Reagan doctrine established when Reagan sent troops to Lebanon, Grenada, and bombed Libya. On April 14...Reagan again sent U.S. warplanes into Libyan air space, on this occasion bombing terrorist-related targets in Tripoli and Benghazi. By the time Congress learned of the operation, U.S. forces had done their job and had been removed from the situation of foreign hostilities.
snip Congress took no action to oppose or undercut Reagan's military initiatives against the Marxist-Leninists in Grenada and against the Qaddafi regime in Libya. In the case of each of these initiatives, some of the more Leftist-leaning members of Congress and their political allies in the "news" media screamed like stuck pigs, but did very little more than that.
www.proconservative.net/WarAmericaP5l.shtml It is a mistake to give one guy a pass and then insist the guy you don't like be held accountable fore the same behavior - it makes the insistence look partisan rather than principled.
#30. To: lucysmom (#29) It is a mistake to give one guy a pass and then insist the guy you don't like be held accountable fore the same behavior - it makes the insistence look partisan rather than principled. I haven't given anyone a pass for anything. I've spoken out about Reagans leftist leanings for years. Proof of that can still be read at LP. I am not a party boy, I am a conservative. But are you giving Obama a pass? Pointing out like behavior in another doesn't give Obama a pass, does it? I would have them both in prison if it were up to me.
Replies to Comment # 30. There are no replies to Comment # 30.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 30. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|