What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Another Look at the Boland Amendment?

Programmer

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
918
Reaction score
119
Points
45
In brief, the executive branch can't fund proxy wars because of the Boland Act. We put this in place in the 1980s notoriously giving rise to the Iran Contra scandal.

Programmer says we should take another look at this in our age of pointing out how political correctness compromises our interests. We're never going to declare another war, we can't put boots on the ground.

Until the first Terminator T-800s come off the line, should we reverse the Boland, and allow our State Department to start up militias wherever needed?

Boland Amendment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Pete7469

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
26,485
Reaction score
12,429
Points
1,090
Location
The Real World
I don't think so. While I did like the funding and support for the Contras because I hate commies, we don't need our government doing so much covert shit with no transparency.


 
OP
P

Programmer

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
918
Reaction score
119
Points
45
I don't think so. While I did like the funding and support for the Contras because I hate commies, we don't need our government doing so much covert shit with no transparency.

I think all of this is covert in our current situation. We could make it more above the board if it were legalized. Do you think the legislature is responsive enough to deal with rebel states and pockets of terrorists moving across national borders?
 

bendog

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
44,051
Reaction score
8,647
Points
2,040
Location
Dog House in back yard
I really doubt the Boland Amendment is hindering our ability to arm people who killed the Ambassador or the Kurds. We've armed the shiaa for years, but all they seem able to do is run away and leave the weapons for ISIS
 

jwoodie

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
16,534
Reaction score
5,167
Points
350
In brief, the executive branch can't fund proxy wars because of the Boland Act. We put this in place in the 1980s notoriously giving rise to the Iran Contra scandal.

This was a case of Congress interfering in the conduct of foreign policy. It should also be noted that this "scandal" did not involve any personal or political gain for those involved, unlike the almost daily scandals we see today.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
81,795
Reaction score
35,518
Points
2,290
I really doubt the Boland Amendment is hindering our ability to arm people who killed the Ambassador or the Kurds. We've armed the shiaa for years, but all they seem able to do is run away and leave the weapons for ISIS
That's what we were told anyways.. IDK if you have noticed but ALOT of what we have been told lately is bullshit.
 
OP
P

Programmer

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
918
Reaction score
119
Points
45
I really doubt the Boland Amendment is hindering our ability to arm people who killed the Ambassador or the Kurds. We've armed the shiaa for years, but all they seem able to do is run away and leave the weapons for ISIS
I think this footprint of slow and bellicose response comes from the post-Boland status quo.

Rather than presuming that an act of congress and formal support for a group is rational, we could get materiel/arms and contractors in minor operation-level moves. We would have owned the militia in Benghazi. It would be the DOS that would run stuff like this.

We can take the assets back with the contractors.
 
OP
P

Programmer

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
918
Reaction score
119
Points
45
In brief, the executive branch can't fund proxy wars because of the Boland Act. We put this in place in the 1980s notoriously giving rise to the Iran Contra scandal.

This was a case of Congress interfering in the conduct of foreign policy. It should also be noted that this "scandal" did not involve any personal or political gain for those involved, unlike the almost daily scandals we see today.
It involved the freeing of those hostages, moreover.
 

Pete7469

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
26,485
Reaction score
12,429
Points
1,090
Location
The Real World
I don't think so. While I did like the funding and support for the Contras because I hate commies, we don't need our government doing so much covert shit with no transparency.

I think all of this is covert in our current situation. We could make it more above the board if it were legalized. Do you think the legislature is responsive enough to deal with rebel states and pockets of terrorists moving across national borders?


No.

Our political whores would politicize it and take forever to make a decision.


 

bendog

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
44,051
Reaction score
8,647
Points
2,040
Location
Dog House in back yard
I really doubt the Boland Amendment is hindering our ability to arm people who killed the Ambassador or the Kurds. We've armed the shiaa for years, but all they seem able to do is run away and leave the weapons for ISIS
I think this footprint of slow and bellicose response comes from the post-Boland status quo.

Rather than presuming that an act of congress and formal support for a group is rational, we could get materiel/arms and contractors in minor operation-level moves. We would have owned the militia in Benghazi. It would be the DOS that would run stuff like this.

We can take the assets back with the contractors.
If the Boland Amend were any hinderance, the congress would pass authorization to arm people fighting ISIS by super maj. I don't know where you got a hard on for the Boland Amend. I don't really care. But if anything was wearing cobwebs, it's the Boland Amend.
 
OP
P

Programmer

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
918
Reaction score
119
Points
45
I don't think so. While I did like the funding and support for the Contras because I hate commies, we don't need our government doing so much covert shit with no transparency.

I think all of this is covert in our current situation. We could make it more above the board if it were legalized. Do you think the legislature is responsive enough to deal with rebel states and pockets of terrorists moving across national borders?


No.

Our political whores would politicize it and take forever to make a decision.

They should be able to define the statehouse budget or something they can wait for a cliff for.

We can't even use our conventional troops for a lot of this stuff.
 
OP
P

Programmer

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
918
Reaction score
119
Points
45
I really doubt the Boland Amendment is hindering our ability to arm people who killed the Ambassador or the Kurds. We've armed the shiaa for years, but all they seem able to do is run away and leave the weapons for ISIS
I think this footprint of slow and bellicose response comes from the post-Boland status quo.

Rather than presuming that an act of congress and formal support for a group is rational, we could get materiel/arms and contractors in minor operation-level moves. We would have owned the militia in Benghazi. It would be the DOS that would run stuff like this.

We can take the assets back with the contractors.
If the Boland Amend were any hinderance, the congress would pass authorization to arm people fighting ISIS by super maj. I don't know where you got a hard on for the Boland Amend. I don't really care. But if anything was wearing cobwebs, it's the Boland Amend.
My boner comes from thinking congress is not responsive enough for the speed of modern geopolitics.

Before congress can act on ISIS as you say, we have to do a whole PR campaign just so you and I know what ISIS is and who Kurds are. Then it can be used as a political tool. Then, after some porkbarrel work and in-deals with your rep's favorite military contractor, and they come back from a recess, they can authorize the funds.

The rebels are dead by then.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$20.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top