• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

20 Lawmakers send letter to Obama

Montecresto said:
Lol, I essentially agree as a whole, but I do believe there are those (these 20 included of course) that would like to do their job where this is concerned.
Click to expand...

personally, I am fine with congress not being able to make a decision in this case at all. Stalemate means no going to war. Unfortunately it seems whenever we want congress to be indecisive and fail at doing anything, they always seem to actually do something bad. I am glad to see at least 20 coming out for keeping out of this.
 
tererun said:
So according to you Obama can declare war. That is good to know.
Click to expand...
If you knew our history you wouldn't make such a dumb statement. We're America, we don't declare war anymore, or pay for them for that matter, we just blow **** up.
 
TiredOfLife said:
If you knew our history you wouldn't make such a dumb statement. We're America, we don't declare war anymore, or pay for them for that matter, we just blow **** up.
Click to expand...

That is not declaring war. Oh, and just a dumb point, we did declare war in Iraq and in afganistan. maybe you took a break in the past decade, but that had congressional approval. You might want to do that studying history thing you claim you do.
 
That only applies to Republican presidents....billyjeff and bama play their own rules.

BTW last I heard 140 in congress have signed this now.

Beaudreaux said:
They have a point that the War Powers Act may in fact apply, due to it not being an emergency since we've known about the chemical attacks for months, and that there isn't a direct threat to the US. In fact, it could be argued that the direct threat to the US could come from us actually attacking, given what Russia has told the world they would do if we do attack.
Click to expand...
 
Bush asked in both Afghanistan and Iraq. rules don't apply to liberal presidents only it seems.


Ikari said:
To ask for authority before expanding legs of our War on Terror that has seen over a decade of military campaign and activity in the ME. Was it really necessary to ask?
Click to expand...
 
CalGun said:
Bush asked in both Afghanistan and Iraq. rules don't apply to liberal presidents only it seems.
Click to expand...
Bah, rules didn't apply to King George W. Bush. He was "the decider" and didn't think he needed congressional approval to invade Iraq at all....

The Presidents Constitutional Authority to Conduct Military Operations Without Congressional Approval

"CRAWFORD, Texas - President George W. Bush's lawyers believe he has authority to attack Iraq without asking Congress, the White House said on Monday, but Democrats urged the president not act without seeking approval..."
White House lawyers: Bush doesn't need Congress to attack Iraq Israel News Broadcast | Haaretz


Bush started diverting funds, troops and resources authorized by congress for Afganistan and diverting them to Iraq in February 2002....almost nine months before he got a congressional resolution for Iraq in October of 2002. During that entire nine months he was heavily bombing Iraq.....


Annals of National Security: The Stovepipe : The New Yorker

Bush's Lost Year

"...Britain and the US waged a secret war against Iraq for months before the tanks rolled over the border in March 2003. Documentary evidence and ministerial answers in parliament reveal the existence of a clandestine bombing campaign designed largely to provoke Iraq into taking action that could be used to justify the start of the war.

In the absence of solid legal grounds for war, in other words, the allies tried to bomb Saddam Hussein into providing their casus belli. And when that didn't work they just stepped up the bombing rate, in effect starting the conflict without telling anyone...."

The war before the war
 
Last edited:
CalGun said:
Bush asked in both Afghanistan and Iraq. rules don't apply to liberal presidents only it seems.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting take on history.
 
tererun said:
That is not declaring war. Oh, and just a dumb point, we did declare war in Iraq and in afganistan. maybe you took a break in the past decade, but that had congressional approval. You might want to do that studying history thing you claim you do.
Click to expand...
Show me the declaration of war?
 
tererun said:
That is not declaring war. Oh, and just a dumb point, we did declare war in Iraq and in afganistan. maybe you took a break in the past decade, but that had congressional approval. You might want to do that studying history thing you claim you do.
Click to expand...

Congress issued a declaration of war in Iraq and Afghanistan? No, the last time we officially declared war was WW II; the last justified military intervention we've had.
 
tererun said:
So now all of a sudden Bush didn't have two wars? That is a level of dishonesty one cannot be bothered arguing with.
Click to expand...

We did not declare war in either of those cases. We didn't declare it in Vietnam either. In fact we as a nation have not declared war since WWII.

Doesn't mean we haven't been involved in fighting since then only that they have not been declared wars. Only Congress can declare war.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
We did not declare war in either of those cases. We didn't declare it in Vietnam either. In fact we as a nation have not declared war since WWII.

Doesn't mean we haven't been involved in fighting since then only that they have not been declared wars. Only Congress can declare war.
Click to expand...

Just one question, why did bush seek approval then? if what you are saying is true he never needed to seek approval from congress to do what he did.
 
tererun said:
Just one question, why did bush seek approval then? if what you are saying is true he never needed to seek approval from congress to do what he did.
Click to expand...

He sought approval for the use of force. He has to request the use of force under the War Powers Resolution. He did not request a declaration of war.


It's Wiki but has a decent enough explanation of it.

War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
He sought approval for the use of force. He has to request the use of force under the War Powers Resolution. He did not request a declaration of war.


It's Wiki but has a decent enough explanation of it.

War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

OK, so the concept is still the same. Obama still would need to get approval for use of force *luke I am your father*. If he doesn't then congress should have recorse to smack him down. If they do not then it is as good as consent.

Seriously, you guys could have just said no declaration of war, but it is the same process. Instead you made a huge issue over semantics just so you can toot your own horns. You win I used the wrong term, but it still needs congress if he is going to do something like Iraq or afganistan. Whatever you wish to call that this week, I call it a war.
 
If a president has an urgent need in defense of our nation to make an attack, such as to prevent saddam hussein from giving WMD's to al queda then he is free to attack without the consent of congress. Bush sought the consent of congress in attacking Iraq, and the same in Afghanistan. Bush Sr. sought the approval of congress for a humanitarian mission in somolia. billyjeff and obummer did not seek congressional approval for their ventures in Bosnia or Libya. There is an apparent dictator like quality to the socialist leftist who occupy the white house that doesn't apply to the conservative members.


Moot said:
Bah, rules didn't apply to King George W. Bush. He was "the decider" and didn't think he needed congressional approval to invade Iraq at all....

The Presidents Constitutional Authority to Conduct Military Operations Without Congressional Approval

"CRAWFORD, Texas - President George W. Bush's lawyers believe he has authority to attack Iraq without asking Congress, the White House said on Monday, but Democrats urged the president not act without seeking approval..."
White House lawyers: Bush doesn't need Congress to attack Iraq Israel News Broadcast | Haaretz


Bush started diverting funds, troops and resources authorized by congress for Afganistan and diverting them to Iraq in February 2002....almost nine months before he got a congressional resolution for Iraq in October of 2002. During that entire nine months he was heavily bombing Iraq.....


Annals of National Security: The Stovepipe : The New Yorker

Bush's Lost Year

"...Britain and the US waged a secret war against Iraq for months before the tanks rolled over the border in March 2003. Documentary evidence and ministerial answers in parliament reveal the existence of a clandestine bombing campaign designed largely to provoke Iraq into taking action that could be used to justify the start of the war.

In the absence of solid legal grounds for war, in other words, the allies tried to bomb Saddam Hussein into providing their casus belli. And when that didn't work they just stepped up the bombing rate, in effect starting the conflict without telling anyone...."

The war before the war
Click to expand...
 
tererun said:
OK, so the concept is still the same. Obama still would need to get approval for use of force *luke I am your father*. If he doesn't then congress should have recorse to smack him down. If they do not then it is as good as consent.

Seriously, you guys could have just said no declaration of war, but it is the same process. Instead you made a huge issue over semantics just so you can toot your own horns. You win I used the wrong term, but it still needs congress if he is going to do something like Iraq or afganistan. Whatever you wish to call that this week, I call it a war.
Click to expand...

It's not semantics. The War Powers Act limits the amount of force that can be used.

If we declare war we better be ready and willing to put the full force of the country and military behind it to end it as quickly as possible.
 
Ikari said:
To ask for authority before expanding legs of our War on Terror that has seen over a decade of military campaign and activity in the ME. Was it really necessary to ask?
Click to expand...

Yes, because they gave him authorization in 2001. So why would they send him a letter telling him to ask for authorization?
 
CalGun said:
If a president has an urgent need in defense of our nation to make an attack, such as to prevent saddam hussein from giving WMD's to al queda then he is free to attack without the consent of congress. Bush sought the consent of congress in attacking Iraq, and the same in Afghanistan. Bush Sr. sought the approval of congress for a humanitarian mission in somolia. billyjeff and obummer did not seek congressional approval for their ventures in Bosnia or Libya. There is an apparent dictator like quality to the socialist leftist who occupy the white house that doesn't apply to the conservative members.
Click to expand...

Saddam did not have WMDs.

Iraq had no ties to Al Qaeda.

Attacking Iraq was not urgent.

Bush did not consult congress before bombing Iraq.
 
jonny5 said:
Yes, because they gave him authorization in 2001. So why would they send him a letter telling him to ask for authorization?
Click to expand...

Not for Iraq, authorization for Iraq didn't happen until after Bush had begun bombing campaigns in Iraq.
 
Ikari said:
Not for Iraq, authorization for Iraq didn't happen until after Bush had begun bombing campaigns in Iraq.
Click to expand...

We never stopped bombing Iraq. We bombed them from 1991 on.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
We never stopped bombing Iraq. We bombed them from 1991 on.
Click to expand...

yeah...probably need to end that practice as well. Bombs are expensive and we're broke
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom