Obomination: Panetta: 'International Permission' Trumps Congressional Permission...

[paulitician]

Under question from Sen. Sessions at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing today, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey indicated that "international permission," rather than Congressional approval, provided a 'legal basis' for military action by the United States.

What do you think?


Obama Admin Cites 'Int'l Permission,' Not Congress, As 'Legal Basis' For Action In Syria - YouTube!

 

[Full-Auto]

Under question from Sen. Sessions at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing today, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey indicated that "international permission," rather than Congressional approval, provided a 'legal basis' for military action by the United States.


Obama Admin Cites 'Int'l Permission,' Not Congress, As 'Legal Basis' For Action In Syria - YouTube!

D-Rose step-back jumper for the win! - YouTube

Democrats can not give away liberty or sovereignty fast enough.

 

[paulitician]

Under question from Sen. Sessions at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing today, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey indicated that "international permission," rather than Congressional approval, provided a 'legal basis' for military action by the United States.


Obama Admin Cites 'Int'l Permission,' Not Congress, As 'Legal Basis' For Action In Syria - YouTube!

D-Rose step-back jumper for the win! - YouTube

Democrats can not give away liberty or sovereignty fast enough.

Sure looks like it.

 

[Conservative]

welcome to 6:21 this AM
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/212096-def-sec-paneta-un-authorization-trumps-congressional-approval-lol.html#post4928089

 

[occupied]

You may not like it but he is correct. The way our president may use our military is dependent more on international agreement than the consent of congress. Sessions knows it too and he is being an ass acting like this is something new or the fault of democrats.

 

[paulitician]

You may not like it but he is correct. The way our president may use our military is dependent more on international agreement than the consent of congress. Sessions knows it too and he is being an ass acting like this is something new or the fault of democrats.

I don't like it, and it's not correct.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I tell ya, people who say shit like Occupy are living in fucking lalaland.

That isn't how it works in the US.

 

[California Girl]

You may not like it but he is correct. The way our president may use our military is dependent more on international agreement than the consent of congress. Sessions knows it too and he is being an ass acting like this is something new or the fault of democrats.

Where is that in the Constitution?

 

[WillowTree]

When the fucking Internationals pay for the US military then they can dictate law.. til then they work for us.. The American Federal Income Tax Payer.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

You may not like it but he is correct. The way our president may use our military is dependent more on international agreement than the consent of congress. Sessions knows it too and he is being an ass acting like this is something new or the fault of democrats.

No, he's incorrect. Congress makes that determination.

 

[Immanuel]

You may not like it but he is correct. The way our president may use our military is dependent more on international agreement than the consent of congress. Sessions knows it too and he is being an ass acting like this is something new or the fault of democrats.

The next thing you know, you will be handing over the command of our military to Ban Ki-Moon.

I wonder if we will get some kind of guarantee that our own military won't be used against us.

Immie

 

[paulitician]

I tell ya, people who say shit like Occupy are living in fucking lalaland.

That isn't how it works in the US.

Big Government Globalism is all most know these days. It's just sad ignorance. Unfortunately, both Parties are controlled by these people.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

this is the setup for Obama's excuse to not take action on Iran........afterall if he goes to the United Nations for "international permission" do you think he'd get it....?

 

[occupied]

Until the war powers resolution of 1973 is overturned the president has the power to send the military anywhere he wants. Republicans have had many opportunities to pass a new resolution but they have not. This is nothing new, neither is having to get various permissions to use bases and airspace in other countries to mount any kind of offensive. Fake manufactured outrage over a situation that has existed for almost 40 years. Tell these republicans with their faux outrage to change the law if they are that pissed about it and I will support them fully in their efforts, they will do nothing because they like the way it is when they are in office same as democrats.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548)[1] is a federal law intended to check the power of the President in committing the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

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. The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto.

The War Powers Resolution was disregarded by President Clinton in 1999, during the bombing campaign in Kosovo, and again by President Obama in 2011, when he did not seek congressional approval for attack on Libya, arguing that the Resolution did not apply to that action.[2] All presidents since 1973 have declared their belief that the act is unconstitutional. [

 

[paulitician]

Until the war powers resolution of 1973 is overturned the president has the power to send the military anywhere he wants. Republicans have had many opportunities to pass a new resolution but they have not. This is nothing new, neither is having to get various permissions to use bases and airspace in other countries to mount any kind of offensive. Fake manufactured outrage over a situation that has existed for almost 40 years. Tell these republicans with their faux outrage to change the law if they are that pissed about it and I will support them fully in their efforts, they will do nothing because they like the way it is when they are in office same as democrats.

Spoken like a true Big Government Globalist dupe. So i guess your 'Occupier' outrage is faux outrage too huh? I mean why get so outraged over something that has existed in this country for so many years? Yeah, you're just a poser like i thought.

 

[BlindBoo]

The president is the commander in chief. All Congress can do is pout about it it (and the conz) and try to enforce the War Powers Act of 1973 if the President keeps forces deployed in a combat zone for more than x amount of days.

He need not wait for any international body (nor Congress) approval before he acts to defend this nation.

 

[occupied]

War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548)[1] is a federal law intended to check the power of the President in committing the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

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. The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto.

The War Powers Resolution was disregarded by President Clinton in 1999, during the bombing campaign in Kosovo, and again by President Obama in 2011, when he did not seek congressional approval for attack on Libya, arguing that the Resolution did not apply to that action.[2] All presidents since 1973 have declared their belief that the act is unconstitutional. [

So what are republicans going to do about it other than just bitch?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I don't think you have the brain power to actually understand the act of 1973, why it was put in place and what you're blaming this supposed "international permission" nonsense on.

It has not a fucking thing to do with partisanship. Although, it is funny that the two big heros from the democrats in the last 40 years have broken the law. Then again, they are all about consolidating power into one messiah in chief...

Congrats.

 

[occupied]

I don't think you have the brain power to actually understand the act of 1973, why it was put in place and what you're blaming this supposed "international permission" nonsense on.

It has not a fucking thing to do with partisanship. Although, it is funny that the two big heros from the democrats in the last 40 years have broken the law. Then again, they are all about consolidating power into one messiah in chief...

Congrats.

So what are the republicans going to do about it that does not tie their hands in the future? Nothing whatsoever. Press them to make this kind of thing expressly illegal rather than just legally ambiguous and see how fast they shut their mouths.