National war powers commission report

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Intense, Mar 24, 2011.

  1. Intense
    Offline

    Intense Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    44,909
    Thanks Received:
    5,849
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +5,863
    Just wondering where we find ourselves here. ;)
     
  2. shintao
    Offline

    shintao Take Down ~ Tap Out

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,231
    Thanks Received:
    320
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +339
    Ummm, how about the President can go to war without Congress for X-Amount(??) of days. Surprise!!:eusa_angel:



    The War Powers Consultation Act of 2009:

    Provides that the president shall consult with Congress before deploying U.S. troops into "significant armed conflict" – i.e., combat operations lasting, or expected to last, more than a week.
    Defines the types of hostilities that would or would not be considered "significant armed conflicts."
    Creates a new Joint Congressional Consultation Committee, which includes leaders of both Houses as well as the chair and ranking members of key committees.
    Establishes a permanent bipartisan staff with access to the national security and intelligence information necessary to conduct its work.
    Calls on Congress to vote up or down on significant armed conflicts within 30 days.
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2011
  3. Intense
    Offline

    Intense Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    44,909
    Thanks Received:
    5,849
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +5,863
    How about taking the time to check out the report and give an honest assessment. ;) What do you agree with, what troubles you?
     
  4. Intense
    Offline

    Intense Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    44,909
    Thanks Received:
    5,849
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +5,863
    President Barack Obama has again flip-flopped on national security—and we can all be grateful. Having kept Guantanamo Bay open, resumed military commission trials for terrorists, and expanded the use of drones, the president has now ordered the U.S. military into action without Congress's blessing.

    Imagine the uproar if President Bush had unilaterally launched air attacks against Libya's Moammar Gadhafi. But since it's Mr. Obama's finger on the trigger, Democratic leaders in Congress have kept quiet—demonstrating that their opposition to presidential power during the Bush years was political, not principled.

    Mr. Obama's exercise of war powers in Libya is firmly in the tradition of American foreign policy. Throughout our history, neither presidents nor Congress have acted under the belief that the Constitution requires a declaration of war before the U.S. can conduct military hostilities abroad. We have used force abroad more than 100 times but declared war in only five cases: the War of 1812, the Mexican-American and Spanish-American Wars, and World Wars I and II.

    Without any approval from Congress, presidents have sent forces to battle Indians, Barbary Pirates and Russian revolutionaries, to fight North Korean and Chinese Communists in Korea, to engineer regime changes in South and Central America, and to prevent human rights disasters in the Balkans. Other conflicts, such as the 1991 Persian Gulf War and the 2003 Iraq War, received legislative "authorization" but not declarations of war.

    Since Vietnam, however, antiwar Democrats have sought to replace the Constitution's reliance on swift presidential action in war with a radically different system appropriate for peacetime: Congress makes policy, the president implements it. In 1973, they passed the War Powers Resolution to require congressional permission for any military intervention abroad, but no president has accepted the law's constitutionality.

    John Yoo: Antiwar Senator, War-Powers President - WSJ.com
     
  5. Intense
    Offline

    Intense Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    44,909
    Thanks Received:
    5,849
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +5,863
    Some George W. Bush-era Republicans are having another I-told-you-so moment over President Obama and Libya.


    Witness John Yoo.

    Yoo -- a former Justice Department officials much criticized for his advocacy of sweeping executive power during the Bush years -- writes in The Wall Street Journal that Obama "has again flip-flopped on national security -- and we can all be grateful."

    "Having kept Guantanamo Bay open, resumed military commission trials for terrorists and expanded the use of drones, the president has now ordered the U.S. military into action without Congress's blessing," Yoo says.

    Some lawmakers -- including Republicans, we should note -- have criticized Obama for not seeking congressional approval before launching the Libyan operation.



    Yoo, as he did while working for the Bush administration, said congressional approval is unnecessary for military action ordered by the commander in chief.

    "Congress is too fractured, slow and inflexible to manage war," Yoo writes. "Its loose, decentralized structure would paralyze American policy while foreign threats loom. The Framers understood that Congress's real power would lie in the purse. ... If Congress opposes action, it can reduce funding for the military, eliminate units or freeze supplies."

    Bush aide Yoo on Obama: 'Anti-war senator, war powers president' - The Oval: Tracking the Obama presidency
     
  6. LordBrownTrout
    Offline

    LordBrownTrout Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    15,490
    Thanks Received:
    2,962
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    South Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,352
    Plus, Syria is now mowing down citizens.....but Iran did the same thing and O did nothing and Libya did the same thing and O tomahawked em and...
     

Share This Page