The war powers bill is crucial, and Rand Paul mapped out why
storage
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Replies: 65
| visibility 1
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
The war powers bill is crucial, and Rand Paul mapped out why
Jan 9, 2020, 8:06 AM
|
|
He spoke on CNN yesterday about the Senate briefing on the Iran missile strike. Paul, who is still a Trump supporter, outlined what a farce the meeting was: secretive, dismissive of senators, limited, and discouraging of their questions/debate. Paul highlighted that we cannot get mired in another short-sighted conflict like Iraq, a horrific decision that, as you can see, we're still paying for today.
Long before Trump, Congress and the American people have ceded far too much power to the executive branch to wage war. Misinterpretations of Article II of the Constitution, mainly going back to Nixon, have gradually shut out Congress from its ability to decide when we go to war. Obama launched countless drone strikes. Cheney--excuse me--Bush misused it to invade Iraq. Clinton bombed Iraq during his own impeachment mess.
Not that we have a loose cannon in the White House, it's evident more than ever that Congress has to wrest control back from the executive branch. It looks like this measure is gaining more and more bipartisan support. Let's hope it passes and goes back to a closer adherence to the Constitution.
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83625]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63724
Joined: 12/31/06
|
funny typo to start last paragraph...
Jan 9, 2020, 8:21 AM
|
|
my interpretation based on your prior opinions, that you meant "Now" and not "Not"
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93703]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95436
Joined: 12/25/09
|
We don't allow no english teachers in here, bro.***
Jan 9, 2020, 8:24 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93703]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95436
Joined: 12/25/09
|
So the wrong guy is pulling the trigger?
Jan 9, 2020, 8:23 AM
|
|
It amazes me that all of a sudden which hand holds the gun has gained a topic of such importance.
BTW, those six B52s are capable of carrying 20 warheads each which can strike anywhere in Iran without invading Iranian airspace. While you guys spent 3 yrs hunting witches Trump got locked and loaded. Maybe the left should have been more focused on the other hand.
The one thing Iranian leaders do not want is to be removed from power.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: So the wrong guy is pulling the trigger?
Jan 9, 2020, 8:33 AM
|
|
I'm not sure you're really getting what I said, but the point is that one person having that much power to commit acts of war is dangerous, and that is becoming clearer and clearer with the fool we have in office.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93703]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95436
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Thinking anyone in any political office...
Jan 9, 2020, 8:46 AM
|
|
is willing to cede any power of that office to anyone is not part of a practical though process. My suggestion is that the house appeal to the SCOTUS if it's going to try and regain the power congress bestowed upon the POTUS. You might want to hurry, RBG is getting pretty frail.
I do not believe Trump is anyone's fool. At no time in history has any president been attacked more by the opposing party yet support for him is as strong as ever. I also do not believe killing the world's most notorious terrorist leader is an act of war unless one claims that terrorism is not an act of war.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Thinking anyone in any political office...
Jan 9, 2020, 9:01 AM
|
|
My suggestion is that the house appeal to the SCOTUS if it's going to try and regain the power congress bestowed upon the POTUS. You might want to hurry, RBG is getting pretty frail.
I'm all for that. Why do you think RBG would be the only one to want to curb the powers of the executive branch? Are you trying to tell me that the GOP/conservatives now want--wait for it--a strong, central federal government?
I do not believe Trump is anyone's fool. At no time in history has any president been attacked more by the opposing party yet support for him is as strong as ever. I also do not believe killing the world's most notorious terrorist leader is an act of war unless one claims that terrorism is not an act of war.
You embarrass yourself by making statements that fly in the face of history and that you know to already be false. First, no president has been attacked more by an opposing party?
Ever heard of a man named Lincoln? They hated him so much that, well, they formed a new country. For a while.
Trump has the worst approval ratings of any president in history since they started doing approval ratings (Truman). He has never had strong support in America.
Blowing up a nation's main general and one of their key figures is an act of war. Period. Y'all embarrass yourselves trying to call it something else. Sure, he's a terrorist, but still a major official of another country.
If Iran killed one of our cabinet members and declared he was a terrorist so therefore it's not an act of war, how do you think that would go over?
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [119769]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 54508
Joined: 6/24/09
|
Now you are being ridiculous, Cata....
Jan 9, 2020, 9:28 AM
|
|
"If Iran killed one of our cabinet members and declared he was a terrorist so therefore it's not an act of war, how do you think that would go over?"
That is not even a valid comparison.....
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Now you are being ridiculous, Cata....
Jan 9, 2020, 9:37 AM
|
|
You still get hung up on this hypothetical. This isn't saying one of our cabinet members is the same type of person as Soleimaini. This is, likely, an intentional straw man on your part.
The point is that if another nation did to us what we did to Iran, you #### well would call it an act of war.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93703]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95436
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Re: Thinking anyone in any political office...
Jan 9, 2020, 10:57 AM
[ in reply to Re: Thinking anyone in any political office... ] |
|
I'm all for that. Why do you think RBG would be the only one to want to curb the powers of the executive branch? Are you trying to tell me that the GOP/conservatives now want--wait for it--a strong, central federal government?
That's one less liberal on the bench and one more constitutional conservative. Since what you're trying to do is pass or repeal a law you can't get a pub dominated senate or Trump to work with you so the only possible option is to seek the SCOTUS to claim the law was unconstitutional.
You embarrass yourself by making statements that fly in the face of history and that you know to already be false. First, no president has been attacked more by an opposing party?
Ever heard of a man named Lincoln? They hated him so much that, well, they formed a new country. For a while.
Trump has the worst approval ratings of any president in history since they started doing approval ratings (Truman). He has never had strong support in America.
Who knew the war was about hate for Honest Abe...and I thought the civil war was about slavery all this time.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5508]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 3806
Joined: 8/23/13
|
Re: Thinking anyone in any political office...
Jan 9, 2020, 4:16 PM
[ in reply to Re: Thinking anyone in any political office... ] |
|
It depends...was the cabinet member sneaking into Iran and running terrorist missions when they killed him?
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15492]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18413
Joined: 12/10/14
|
Re: So the wrong guy is pulling the trigger?
Jan 9, 2020, 10:08 PM
[ in reply to So the wrong guy is pulling the trigger? ] |
|
It amazes me that all of a sudden which hand holds the gun has gained a topic of such importance.
BTW, those six B52s are capable of carrying 20 warheads each which can strike anywhere in Iran without invading Iranian airspace. While you guys spent 3 yrs hunting witches Trump got locked and loaded. Maybe the left should have been more focused on the other hand.
The one thing Iranian leaders do not want is to be removed from power.
I think your missing the point. Why in hell do we even care what Iran does? Trump can be locked and loaded all he wants, but he campaigned on ending this sort of bullchit.
No one on earth is willing to allow Iran nuclear weapons so that's not going to happen. Other than that, why are we still in Iraq, Afghanistan and now we're all caught up in what Iran does.
We don't need to be in the middle east. We learned that lesson under Reagan when he decided to send Marines into Lebanon to oversee the withdrawal of the Palestinians. 241 of those Marines were killed when their barracks were attacked.
It's crazy over there and we don't need to be in it. Trump could have withdrawn ALL of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan one, but didn't. Instead, the stable genius invited the Taliban for a sit down at Camp David. That invitation was withdrawn when it got out, forced mostly by Republican Senators who were appalled.
Some thinks Trump plays chess while everyone else is playing checkers. This, in spite of absolutely no evidence that he's accomplished anything beyond fracturing this country. Yes, the economy is good, but that can in no way be tied to any actual action Trump has taken.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6101]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 10117
Joined: 11/1/11
|
Re: The war powers bill is crucial, and Rand Paul mapped out why
Jan 9, 2020, 8:24 AM
|
|
It’s not crucial It’s not a bill Any attempt to restrict the Presidents ability to protect American soldiers or citizens will fail. Imagine the blowback if a US President has to consult with Congress when a US Consulate or ex-pats are in imminent danger. When minutes or hours count, and it’s YOUR a$$ on the line, do you want Congress posturing over whether your worth saving?
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: The war powers bill is crucial, and Rand Paul mapped out why
Jan 9, 2020, 8:35 AM
|
|
You don't understand what this measure is attempting to do. It doesn't limit the president from making a decision if it calls for immediate self defense. It calls for a limited on committing acts of war without approval, which is what happened with the Iranian missile strike.
This is the Constitution. Wanting one person to have this much power is foolish. I dunno, maybe move to a country that allows it? That's what y'all like to say.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6101]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 10117
Joined: 11/1/11
|
Re: The war powers bill is crucial, and Rand Paul mapped out why
Jan 9, 2020, 8:43 AM
|
|
It’s a meaningless resolution bro, it does not have the force of law. It’s essentially the liberal congress issuing a formal statement of congressional record saying, “We don’t like Trump”. This is the third resolution from them on stupid ####.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: The war powers bill is crucial, and Rand Paul mapped out why
Jan 9, 2020, 8:45 AM
|
|
I understand that you would prefer a Trump dictator who can wage war whenever he wants, but sorry, not gonna happen.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [119769]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 54508
Joined: 6/24/09
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Explain why it isn't.***
Jan 9, 2020, 9:35 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [119769]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 54508
Joined: 6/24/09
|
MULTIPLE PEOPLE IN THIS THREAD ARE TELLING YOU WHY
Jan 9, 2020, 9:40 AM
|
|
It was retaliation for the 12 attacks on our soldiers and the impending attacks the general had planned. If you would listen to anything other than Rachel Maddow types......
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: MULTIPLE PEOPLE IN THIS THREAD ARE TELLING YOU WHY
Jan 9, 2020, 9:54 AM
|
|
You can take the "impending attacks" and shove em. Until they can give us proof of what those were and how imminent, I'm not trusting this president.
Retaliation by killing the top general of a foreign nation is still an act of war.
Y'all look ridiculous with your semantics.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34614]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 41428
Joined: 4/20/01
|
He is NOT the Iranian Army's top general. Matter
Jan 9, 2020, 10:22 AM
|
|
Of fact, he is not even a member of the Iranian Army.
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65845
Joined: 5/6/13
|
so I agree with Rand
Jan 9, 2020, 8:25 AM
|
|
But are you still slipping Cheney conspiracy theory jabs into posts in 2020?
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: so I agree with Rand
Jan 9, 2020, 8:36 AM
|
|
Please. It's well established by now that Bush gave Cheney more power than any VP in history and that he was the architect of Iraq.
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65845
Joined: 5/6/13
|
it was all a Halliburton play too, right?***
Jan 9, 2020, 8:47 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Why would you think that's NOT part of it?
Jan 9, 2020, 8:54 AM
|
|
Cheney was CEO of Halliburton. He had stock options in the company. They were awarded a $7 billion contract for Iraq and ONLY they were allowed to bid for it. Cheney was given massive power as VP and orchestrated the war, an area where he had far more expertise than Bush.
Please explain to me how this "conspiracy theory" is so outrageous?
Corruption isn't really much of a conspiracy.
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65845
Joined: 5/6/13
|
It’s incredibly simplistic and ignores basic facts
Jan 9, 2020, 9:37 AM
|
|
A) Halliburton had been entrenched as the primary contractor of choice since the mid-80’s. The contract was a no-bid because if you believe there’s one vendor capable of answering an RFP, you don’t put out an RFP.
B) Cheney didn’t make a nickel (other than deferred comp) off of Halliburton after taking office and he assigned all post-election profits from stock options to charity. They could have tripled in size or gone bankrupt and his net income from Halliburton would have been the same. Don’t take my word for it... https://www.factcheck.org/2004/09/kerry-ad-falsely-accuses-cheney-on-halliburton/
I absolutely believe in the military industrial complex, and I believe that a company like Halliburton is probably bigger and has more influence in governmental workings than they should, but this old Cheney-as-Emperor-Palpatine” thing is just tired.
We went to war because generally good people put too much weight on (unbeknownst to them) bad intel, and not enough on good intel.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [119769]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 54508
Joined: 6/24/09
|
BOOM, CHAKALACKA!***
Jan 9, 2020, 9:41 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: It’s incredibly simplistic and ignores basic facts
Jan 9, 2020, 10:05 AM
[ in reply to It’s incredibly simplistic and ignores basic facts ] |
|
That's a simplistic and surface-level examination of the case.
A. The no-bid issue with Halliburton, or more specifically, KBR, was and still is contested on whether or not they were the only ones capable of handling the job. But I guess we could debate that all day.
B. Ehhhhh... not really. Cheney was paid at least $35 million by Halliburton as soon as he became VP, and that was not all donated to charity.
The bad intel was a fabricated excuse to invade. Bush, Cheney,and Rumsfeld could have given two ##### about WMD in Iraq.
But that's fine if we can't agree on it. Iraq has proven to be a disaster regardless of how we got there.
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65845
Joined: 5/6/13
|
nope
Jan 9, 2020, 10:12 AM
|
|
He was not “paid” 35M by Halliburton when he became VP. He exercised stock options, which he already owned, and he did it prior to the election. Any and all post election proceeds have gone to charity.
Facts matter, especially when you’re driving a James Bond supervillain narrative.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65845
Joined: 5/6/13
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65845
Joined: 5/6/13
|
Re: Good Lord, it’s a 100% true. The SEC filings are there
Jan 9, 2020, 10:04 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Calm your ####, son.
Jan 9, 2020, 10:39 PM
|
|
I've been busy. I don't rotate my day around my response time to you. I misread what I linked before, and yes, he sold those stocks for $35 million.
It doesn't change my stance. Cheney orchestrated the Iraq war and Halliburton benefited from it. The WMD argument was a scam and a lie, and Bush and Cheney knew it. They played up select portions of intelligence to make their case and hid others all the while Cheney tried to link 9/11 to Saddam to stir up public support. He claimed Iraqi intelligence met with a hijacker. The CIA dispelled all claims that Saddam and Al Qaeda had connections.
Remember the yellow cake debacle? George Tenet told the Bush admin not to run with that narrative. They did anyway to drum up public support. It was proven false.
Iraq had abandoned all of its WMD research in the early to mid 90s.
An intelligence report was conducted in 2002--prior to the Iraq war--that cast serious doubt the White House and Congressional claims (including Dems) who beat the war drum.
The White House cherrypicked a few items from the report and ignored or hid the rest, hoping that Congress wouldn't pay attention to it. They gambled correctly. After all, we were still fired up after 9/11 and wanted blood.
The White House pushed for this invasion from the beginning and cooked the info to the public to garner support from the public, U.N., and Congress.
You can call it a "conspiracy theory," but here we are, 17 years later, still paying for this disaster. And not a single WMD discovered in Iraq.
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65845
Joined: 5/6/13
|
Ok
Jan 10, 2020, 8:29 AM
|
|
So we now agree that there is zero evidence of Cheney profiting from the war. Cool.
Forgive my impatience on a 12 hour response time on a topic we had been actively discussing prior and during a period when you were busy yet still replying to other posts. Won’t happen again.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Ok
Jan 10, 2020, 10:36 AM
|
|
I didn't use the words "Cheney profited from the war," did I?
Um, dude, you posted your post at 10:04 a.m. I posted my last one yesterday morning at 10:06 and didn't have time to respond to anything until last night.
Geez. This thread took a turn for the juvenile.
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65845
Joined: 5/6/13
|
we agree on the last part at least. cheers.***
Jan 10, 2020, 11:01 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97764]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64898
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Congress has the authority because they fund it.
Jan 9, 2020, 8:25 AM
|
|
Trump launched a strike. We launch them every day in numerous countries across the globe. We shoot missiles at terrorists frequently. We ambush terrorists, frequently. We didn't do anything different with this guy other than he was super important to Iran. And there is no war with Iran, and won't be. If there was, Congress has every right not to fund it.
On the other hand, if we require Congressional approval every time we use our military, for a single air strike (NOT a war), we're doomed. That's why the President is in charge of the military.
This isn't a war with Iran, this wasn't going to start a war with Iran. We didn't attack Iran territory. We blew up their proxy terrorist general. If Iran wants to declare war on us, they can do it for the 50th time since 1979.
Every year Congress gives what, $700 billion dollars in funding to the military? That's more than enough for most countries to fund a war. With that money we can do a lot of "warfare" without "going to war". Congress has their purse, they can feel free to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4616]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2260
Joined: 1/12/01
|
Agree. It's not like you can sit around and wait for
Jan 9, 2020, 8:38 AM
|
|
Congressional approval when you've got a terrorist target at a particular location - not like they're going to wait around for the missile strike.
Also, there is no doubt in my mind that some current members of our Congress cannot be trusted with this information and would likely try to warn some of our enemies of impending military actions...
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Y'all aren't getting what this war powers intiative does.
Jan 9, 2020, 8:44 AM
|
|
It doesn't prevent the president from acting in self defense of our nation at a moment's notice if he must.
It prevents him from waging acts of war without Congress. Which is what the missile strike was. They haven't been able to show that it was truly an imminent threat, and there are reports it wouldn't come for days or weeks.
We're talking about Iraq invasions. Drone strikes over and over. And flirting with war with Iran. Let's get Congress involved.
I mean, it's only our Constitution, folks.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6155]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9520
Joined: 10/15/01
|
Do you consider an attack on an American Embassy an attack
Jan 9, 2020, 8:56 AM
|
|
on American itself? Just curious you thoughts. To me, an attack on an Embassy is no different than an attack on the mainland.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Yes, I do.***
Jan 9, 2020, 9:01 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [138011]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63830
Joined: 10/22/00
|
If the attack comes from a sovereign government, of course
Jan 9, 2020, 9:12 AM
[ in reply to Do you consider an attack on an American Embassy an attack ] |
|
it is. Do you consider an executive order to kill a high ranking military official of another sovereign government an act of war? Is your argument "they started it!"? Like, we were already at war so Trump didn't have to declare it?
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6155]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9520
Joined: 10/15/01
|
I think killing terrorists is great. Being a government
Jan 9, 2020, 9:42 AM
|
|
figure shouldn't give them any protection whatsoever. It's not like Trump bombed an American citizen without due process. This was a #### Iranian terrorist.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [138011]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63830
Joined: 10/22/00
|
I don't believe you're thinking this through.
Jan 9, 2020, 9:59 AM
|
|
You're essentially saying that if you apply the label "terrorist", which has a very broad definition and is tied to the opinion of the beholder, the laws regarding acts of war no longer apply. To be clear, Soleimani was engaged in terrorist acts via proxy. I'm just saying that you should consider the magnitude of the can of worms you're opening by changing definitions and making exceptions.
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65845
Joined: 5/6/13
|
sidebar question for you.
Jan 9, 2020, 10:02 AM
|
|
Dudes like this perish on the reg at the hands of the CIA. Would you have been ok with that methodology?
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [138011]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63830
Joined: 10/22/00
|
Sure. We likely wouldn't have heard much about it besides
Jan 9, 2020, 10:13 AM
|
|
a few headlines for a day since nobody would "own" the killing. Otherwise, I'd be perfectly fine with it since the guy is/was a POS.
It gets WAY hairier when it becomes an official act.
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65845
Joined: 5/6/13
|
We agree. (Surprise)***
Jan 9, 2020, 10:19 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6155]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9520
Joined: 10/15/01
|
No, i've thoroughly thought this through.
Jan 9, 2020, 10:16 AM
[ in reply to I don't believe you're thinking this through. ] |
|
If some law was broken, have Nancy add another article of impeachment. No one cares. It's all a waste of time. If the Congress wasn't a security risk due to their illegal leaking of information, I'm sure Trump would include them in these decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6155]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9520
Joined: 10/15/01
|
He doesn't have the authority to do this whenever he wants.
Jan 9, 2020, 10:18 AM
|
|
He DOES have the authority to do this in response to an attack on America, which is exactly what happened.
If Trump were a warmonger as the left really wants to label him, we would be escalating this right now. Trump is doing the opposite. We got what we wanted, and we are done.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97764]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64898
Joined: 7/13/02
|
The President's job is Commander in Chief.
Jan 9, 2020, 9:08 AM
[ in reply to Y'all aren't getting what this war powers intiative does. ] |
|
His job is to make decisions on acts of war. If we need Congressional approval for every "act" of war, every terrorist strike, we're neutered. We can not DECLARE WAR without Congressional approval because Congress has to fund it. See, way back when our Constitution mattered, we didn't spend much on our military. We were never intended to in times of peace. Our founders never envisioned a $4 trillion federal budget, because they never imagined a federal income tax. They never figured we'd have a defense budget of $700 billion a year.
Back then the thinking was if we declare war on another nation, and fight a war, Congress needs to be briefed and to approve the EXTRA spending needed to fight a war. But for $700 billion a year we can wage a war better than most countries on Earth, without even declaring one.
The powers are clear. Congress needs to use it's power of the purse to CUT SPENDING. Instead, they use it to force states to enact laws, like 21yo smoking age, with MORE spending. But in giving the military funding to fight a war, every single year, they are abdicating their power to control warfare with the purse. This strike killing the Iranian terrorist cost maybe a few hundred thousand dollars. Let's say the missiles, manpower, etc. in total costs $500K. That's .0000007% of the defense budget.
Our founders did envision a government like the one we have today. They tried mightily to avoid it.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97764]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64898
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Exactly.
Jan 9, 2020, 8:49 AM
[ in reply to Agree. It's not like you can sit around and wait for ] |
|
There is no time to seek congressional approval for every single hit on a terrorist we take. Or every move we make in a war. The President is the Commander in Chief for a reason. Congress has the pocketbook for the military, they can defund whatever they want to.
For some perspective....
Our defense budget is greater than the TOTAL gross domestic product of 190 of the 211 countries on the planet. Only 19 countries have a total GDP greater than our defense budget. Congress is already funding a war, every year.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [138011]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63830
Joined: 10/22/00
|
So, just to clarify: Congress doesn't determine whether the
Jan 9, 2020, 8:44 AM
[ in reply to Congress has the authority because they fund it. ] |
|
US engages in war, they merely decide whether to fund it. The executive branch has all directive power over the military, and can escalate the US into war at his discretion via use of "harmless single strikes".
This is your take?
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [78892]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 26424
Joined: 12/6/98
|
wasn't exactly harmless
Jan 9, 2020, 4:02 PM
|
|
to the guy that died
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [46834]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30738
Joined: 8/11/15
|
This has been an overall issue since the 30's
Jan 9, 2020, 8:26 AM
|
|
Congress has been perfectly fine letting the executive branch make the hard decisions. Completely opposite of the decades before (with the exception of Lincoln) which saw a much stronger legislative branch.
Frankly, in almost all aspects, the executive branch has too much power. Time to start balancing power again.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6155]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9520
Joined: 10/15/01
|
Congress has impeachment and removal powers. This
Jan 9, 2020, 8:53 AM
|
|
is a sufficient check against any power of the Executive Branch.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Seems to be working well now...
Jan 9, 2020, 8:55 AM
|
|
With a Senate that says they won't impeach Trump no matter what.
No one man should have the power to wage war with our military.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6155]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9520
Joined: 10/15/01
|
Then the problem is the impeachment and removal process,
Jan 9, 2020, 8:58 AM
|
|
not the war powers granted to the executive. Regardless of what war powers are granted, nothing can stop the executive from using the military at their whim. Like it or not, the impeachment process is all Congress has. It might not get the result one party wants, but it is all they have and will ever have in this country.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42204]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38284
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Then the problem is the impeachment and removal process,
Jan 9, 2020, 9:02 AM
|
|
Then maybe it's time for Congress to impeach a president who overreaches with the military. But that should have been done long before Trump.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83625]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63724
Joined: 12/31/06
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16877]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9377
Joined: 11/1/14
|
I remember a few years back when an
Jan 9, 2020, 11:04 AM
|
|
Administration sat around while lives were lost in Libya...while cries for help were ignored. Of course, everyone makes mistakes, so...yeah, let's just chalk it up as an unfortunate 'Oops!'
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6709
Joined: 8/3/09
|
I like the other Paul brother better
Jan 9, 2020, 8:27 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
I’m sure Russia, Iran, and North Korea are excited to see this
Jan 9, 2020, 12:52 PM
|
|
Bombs away fellas
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [73569]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 78044
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Trump won yet again. Stop your crying***
Jan 9, 2020, 1:22 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93703]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95436
Joined: 12/25/09
|
All in all congress has screwed America worse than any POTUS
Jan 9, 2020, 5:57 PM
|
|
Congress expanded POTUS powers and Johnson got us eyeballs deep in Nam. Then congress voted to wage war with Iraq. They wouldn't know a justification to go to war if it jumped up and kicked Pelosi in the nads.
We need to end term limits and get a decent bunch of reps and senators in there who won't be making politics a career.
|
|
|
|
Replies: 65
| visibility 1
|
|
|
|
|