Rep. Massie Debates Iran War Powers Resolution

[TNHarley]

The constitution says that only Congress can formally declare war. Trump never formally declared war, did he?

Thats what I figured.

 

[Godboy]

Thats what I figured.

Am i wrong. Does it say something different? Im not sure what youre even arguing at this point.

 

[d0gbreath]

There must be constant killing. It's the definition of man's inhumanity towards man.

 

[protectionist]

Nope, that does not say the constitution says a president can attack countries over imminent threats.

It says the president can attack a country for 60 days with or without imminent threat, with or without congressional approval. Read it. It also says the president can have troops there for an additional 30 days (90 all together).

 

[protectionist]

The constitution says that only Congress can formally declare war. Trump never formally declared war, did he?

This isn't declaring war. This is doing it. Not the same.

 

[dblack]

Its says that only Congress can formally declare war. Please point me to a video of Trump "formally declaring war", and even if Trump said the words "i formally declare war", it wouldnt mean anything anyway, since only Congress can do that, right?

Thats why they had to clarify when a president can use the military. The wording was VERY unclear. The 1973 war powers resolution clarifies that part of the constitution and it is a federal law.

LOL - Lewis Carroll would be proud.

 

[dblack]

This isn't declaring war. This is doing it. Not the same.

LOL - you guys just get funnier and funnier.

 

[protectionist]

LOL - you guys just get funnier and funnier.

So you don't understand. Not surprised.

 

[TNHarley]

Am i wrong. Does it say something different? Im not sure what youre even arguing at this point.

Umm apparently. You said the constitution says the president can attack a country if he feels like there is an imminent threat. You lied about it.

 

[TNHarley]

It says the president can attack a country for 60 days with or without imminent threat, with or without congressional approval. Read it. It also says the president can have troops there for an additional 30 days (90 all together).

The constitution does not say that.

 

[protectionist]

Umm apparently. You said the constitution says the president can attack a country if he feels like there is an imminent threat. You lied about it.

The USA has been having imminent threats and ATTACKS, by Iran for 47 years. You think that ended in February 2026 ? Every day, Iran is an imminent threat , if not a full-blown attack.

 

[protectionist]

The constitution does not say that.

The War Powers Act of 1973 says it.

 

[dblack]

The War Powers Act of 1973 says it.

Yes. Which we've been pointing out - is unconstitutional.

Next excuse?

 

[TNHarley]

Yes. Which we've been pointing out - is unconstitutional.

Next excuse?

The good news is, they will finally understand what we have been saying when the next president is a democrat.

 

[dblack]

The good news is, they will finally understand what we have been saying when the next president is a democrat.

Well, you'd think. But I've watched debates on similar issues, over and over throughout the years, and the lack of foresight is stunning.

I think part of the problem is the way the two-party goons look at politics and elections. For them, it's not a deliberative procedure to elect government leaders. It's a proxy for civil war. And no one imagines a war that never ends. They imagine themselves winning, vanquishing their foes and finally getting their way.

But this is politics, not war. And politics doesn't work like that.

 

[protectionist]

The constitution does not say that.

Here's some good reading for you. Takes 3 minutes to read. Could be a valuable 3 minutes.

How the War Powers Resolution Works—And Why It Rarely Stops Presidents

On January 15, 2026, the Senate killed a bipartisan resolution that would have constrained military operations in Venezuela. The vote was 50-50, with Vice President JD Vance breaking the tie. Five Republican senators had initially voted to advance the measure—Republicans almost never break with...

govfacts.org

 

[Godboy]

Umm apparently. You said the constitution says the president can attack a country if he feels like there is an imminent threat. You lied about it.

It says that in the war powers resolution, doesnt it? We are both NOW in 100% agreement that Trump has every right to wage this war and he has done everything by the book, right?

 

[Godboy]

Yes. Which we've been pointing out - is unconstitutional.

Next excuse?

You claimed that its unconstitutional, but you have not explained why you think that is, nor will you. You have NEVER been able to support your loony claims, and you certainly wont start now.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The president has to fight back when the U.S. is attacked. Interpretting the Constitution to mean that no president can act militarily unless the Senate allows it would make the Constitution into a suicide pact.

 

[dblack]

You claimed that its unconstitutional, but you have not explained why you think that is, nor will you.

Yeah. Probably not here. Very little opportunity to engage in sober debate in the midst of all the poo-flinging.

You have NEVER been able to support your loony claims, and you certainly wont start now.

Mkay.