E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSWith President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta not ruling out military action against Iran and Syria, Congress is once again trying to figure out its role in war making.
The House last June found itself in the paradoxical position of voting to defeat a resolution authorizing Obama to use force in Libya -- but also defeating a proposal to cut off funding for the operation. In effect, the House said it would keep paying for a war it did not authorize.
J. Scott Applewhite / AP
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday March 7, 2012, before the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the crisis in Syria and the risks for U.S. involvement.
Although Obama has warned Congress and the Republican presidential contenders against talk of a precipitous war against Iran, he hasn’t ruled out ordering military action to stop the Tehran regime from developing nuclear weapons.
Meanwhile Sen. John McCain, R- Ariz., called this week for air strikes on Syria. And Panetta said Wednesday “potential military options, if necessary” are being considered by the Obama administration against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Sometimes, as in the case of Libya, Congress votes too late on a resolution authorizing the president to use force. By the time the House voted on a resolution authorizing Obama to use force against Libya, he’d already ordered U.S. forces, as part of a NATO mission, to attack targets in that nation three months earlier.
Sometimes as in the case of invading Iraq in 2003, Congress votes to authorize an action the president made clear he was going to take anyway, no matter what Congress did.
Recommended: First Thoughts: 227,000 jobs created last month
This week Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell came up with a new approach to the congressional role in war making. In a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, McConnell said that if U.S. intelligence agencies presented Congress with an assessment that Iran had begun to enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels, “or has taken a decision to develop a nuclear weapon” he would consult with Obama and then introduce an authorization for the use of military force.
He said passage of an authorization would ensure that “we have a coherent, unified policy toward Iran and that we not take on another military action without bipartisan support.”
But even with the kind of vote McConnell envisions, no Congress can force a president to launch a military strike he does not choose to launch.
NBC News' Richard Engel and the Carnegie Endowment's Karim Sadjadpour join Morning Joe to discuss why the most important thing for the current Iranian regime is "to stay in power" and why the Ahmadinejad regime is not a suicidal regime.
Instead of being too late, as in Libya, would McConnell’s idea be a case of Congress moving too soon?
“I think the Israelis have avoided drawing lines so he probably should not draw red lines at this time either,” said Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D- Mich. Thursday. “I think it’s better to kind of keep them guessing. That’s what the Israelis are doing. The prime minster of Israel specifically said he’s not specifying what they may do under what conditions, so I think that McConnell would be wise not to specify at this time either” – other than reiterating that “all options are on the table.”
Sen. Susan Collins, R- Maine, a member of the Armed Services Committee, said, “I think he (McConnell) was trying to send a signal to the Iranians that there is a red line here and if the Iranians cross it, there would be support in Congress for strong action. I think he was trying to send a signal to the administration that it needs to be tougher in its approach with the Iranians.”
But, she added, “I think it’s a long way from actually authorizing the use of force.”
Collins thinks presidents should get authorization from Congress in order to launch military actions.
In Libya, she said, Obama “should have received congressional authorization and I felt the president violated the War Powers Act in not doing so.” Collins said it isn’t simply a matter of congressional authorization ensuring that a war will have public backing: “It’s a matter of following the law and respecting the Constitution.”
As for Syria, McCain said Thursday a congressional authorization to use force “would be useful, but I think right now you’d have to have the president ask for it” and there would need to be more public support. “But, believe me; momentum is building in our direction: look at the lead editorial in the Washington Post this morning.” That editorial called for Obama to build an international consensus to use force against Assad’s regime.
Related: Senate rejects GOP environment, energy proposals
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R- S.C., a believer in robust presidential war-making powers, said, “I think the president could deploy military force in this situation without an authorization from Congress.”
Graham said he wants Obama to lead an international coalition which would provide humanitarian aid to Syrians under attack from the Assad regime and which might impose a no-fly zone “to give breathing space to the people about to be slaughtered and create a sanctuary where they re-group, organize and be trained.” He emphasized that he did not want the United States to act unilaterally.
But even if there were a congressional resolution to use force in Syria, unintended consequences might follow.
Louis Fisher, a war powers scholar at the Constitution Project, a Washington think tank said that a congressional resolution is not in itself an insurance policy against misguided presidential action.
“My first thought is the disaster of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution” by which authorized use of force against North Vietnam in 1964, he said. “Yes, it featured Congress ‘authorizing’ a war but the resolution was carelessly drafted and permitted (President Lyndon) Johnson to escalate the war the next year. The Iraq Resolution of 2002 is another example of a misconceived effort to authorize war. Congress is supposed to make the decision. Instead the resolution left the question of military action to (President) Bush.”
As for McConnell’s idea, Fisher said “This legislation seems to give the intelligence community a trigger to authorize military action against Iran.” Based on how the intelligence agencies performed in the run-up to the Iraq war, he said, that might be a grave error.
Even though Graham doesn’t think Obama needs a vote by Congress to act against Syria, he did say that a congressional authorization “always bolsters your case, it’s always good to have the country behind military action.”
But in fast-moving situations the president cannot and should not wait: “When the president hits these guys in Somalia, go get ‘em. We’ve given the authorization to use force against al Qaida (in the 2001 congressional vote).”
Yet, 11 years after the congressional vote to give Bush the power to fight al Qaida and allied groups, Graham said there are murky post-9/11 cases in which it is not clear how far congressional authorization reaches: “What about these spin-off groups, al-Shabaab (in Somalia) and these other groups that are just beginning to spin off? AQIM (an Algerian-based jihadist group), what about them? So we need to think this thing through.”
He said, “These are really good questions; I don’t know the answers to them all.”
Leave a Comment:
It would be nice to actually avoid a military conflict until it's absolutely necessary.
With the economy improving expect that Republicans will want to get military action going in Syria. After all, we have to keep the lower revenues from tax cuts and keep the deficit spending if Republicans are going to axe Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security (Starve the Beast policies)........ (rolls eyes).
has Congress gone completely nuts; we could be at war in the middle-east for the next 100 years, it will change nothing; Congress grow a pair, say no to any military intervention in Syria or Iran, sanctions will work if done right .
if we are going to have a war:
1. have a draft- better to draft old people to fight since we are going to die sooner anyway, but if you have to have a war, take my kids to fight along side the rich kids
2. no contractors- they charge too much and dont have the same loyalty to the us
3. pay as we go- increase taxes now so the rest of the US suffers along with the soldiers
4. let the oil companies, here and abroad that profit from the oil they get from there pay an extra share- maybe 1/4 to 1/2 the total cost
5. if their enemies dont like what is happening, they can pay too- 1/4 to 1/2 the total cost
6. if there is going to be another war, let congress do one of their jobs enumerated in the constution and declare the wars instead of the president declaring war.
cant we go even a year without a war??? WTF!
Bill, we cannot since the UN wants our military supporting their war efforts and we Americans get to pay for it. They had better not declare war, We have an Obama/Panetta impeachment going on first.
Obama's impending impeachment for "Under the terms of Jones’ resolution, both Panetta and Obama would be subject to impeachment for abusing their power and violating the Constitution in disregarding the authority of Congress and placing a foreign power above its jurisdiction" should be being put on front pages everywhere?
All of the military and law enforcement who has been supporting this traitor in destroying our freedoms and our country going to start keeping your Oath to support and defend the US Constitution before anything else now? He sent our Military; our brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, friends to put their lives on the line for and at the United Nations orders.
Did you know that the UN "has supreme authority over OUR US military because the traitor Obama said so? Obama the traitor took an Oath to "Preserve, Protect, and Defend the US Constitution". He went against the USA and gave power over US Military to the UN. Still going to support the sob?
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s testimony asserting that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military. During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.
Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO ... The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission...
Obama (and his administration) itself has routinely cited the authority of the United Nations over our US military; and Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch, the US Constitution.
“I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”
Under the terms of Jones’ resolution, both Panetta and Obama would be subject to impeachment for abusing their power and violating the Constitution in disregarding the authority of Congress and placing a foreign power above its jurisdiction.
As I have been continually saying Obama, and his administration are domestic enemies of the USA working against and destroying our nation, our Constitution, our way of life from within our government. He put more domestic enemies within the judicial branch while he has been in office. Everyone who voted for the NDAA, assisted and did not protest the Patriot ACT extension, warrantless searches, warrantless and illegal spying on us, warrantless tracking of American citizens, the TSA's actions against Americans are all domestic enemies working for the interests of foreign entities.
It is past time for their arrests, time for us to replace them NOW. Then hold them until we replace the domestic enemies within the judicial branch and then prosecute them all!
Or are those who were following Obama going to let the United Nations step in and take over OUR nation? Enforce their laws here?
Knine--- WoW? I don't know how you can misunderstand so much? Assuming you're not crazy of course.
The constitution is clear congress declares war not the president. There is a reason for that congress represents the people. It is a check on executive power that has been ignored. For our fearless leader and all future leaders I'm sorry if you find the condtitution inconvient but you did swear to uphold it after all.
Anyone for rotten Tea, 17 Tea Retards in Congress and the GOPigs are beating the War Drums again. They are Warmongers, we have two unfunded wars from that jackass "W" to pay off.
I said it once, and I'll say it again. If they want war, the oil companies, and everyone who profits from them, can pay for it! Israel could pay a monthly "rental" fee for our military, as well. I am sick and tired of money going to wars, when it should be going to aiding those who NEED it, and for REAL education. No more kids in the ghetto getting the educational shaft for the mistakes their parents made.
I think the question too should be as to whether or not the republicans would have ideas for paying for any war ? They sure had none or wanted none while bush was in office.....and they all have fought Obama on everything he has tried to get done..meaning not much of anything was able to get done. And the republicans have complained about what did get done.
Knine,
Forget your Meds again? Probably time for you to crawl back under your rock, anyway.
SingBiker
Congress is the one off their MED'S . They should not be having that conversation period. Unless and of course they are in the pockets of the Military / Industrial complex that runs our government from afar. These fools will get us all killed. Lord knows they are working very hard on it now.
bob
Congress is full of a bunch of thieves! They have an 8% approval rating and an 81% re-election, WTF? I blame you idiot voters out there with your heads in the sand. Everyone knows the latest star on American Idol but they can't tell you who the vice president is. You all deserve the dictatorship/oligarchy/socialist state that you are so willing to vote for. Ha ha ha
Warning Knine is a troll, don't feed the trolls.
Amazing... Congress hasn't worked for 2 years but give them some bait such as a possible war and they are all over it. Thank you President Obama for having common sense.
The very last person and/or group on earth that I would take ANY advice from on war or otherwise... is Congress. They haven't represented our best interests or made an intelligent decision in years. Why would we trust them now. I'll go with whatever the Obama administration thinks is best before I would listen to these clowns.
We should be expending our resources on becoming energy independent, not on fighting wars in the middle east.
saxon Improving economy? 1 million more legal immigrants, 1 .3 million more highschool graduates looking for jobs in June. 700,000 high school drop outs looking for jobs. 1.3 million college graduates looking for jobs, 700,000 college drop outs looking for jobs, already 8.3% unemployment how many millions gave up looking for jobs?????? Wit 13.8 million unemployed actively looking for work, come June that number is going to skyrocket. Add the number who want to work and are discouraged and the number gets even worse, we are easily looking at 20,800,000 looking for jobs.
Take the 200,000 who found jobs times 12 months and you only get 2,400,000 new jobs! What about the other 17,600,000 who want jobs!
YEAH GREAT EMPLOYMENT NUMBERS!!! And with Obama throwing education reform under the wheels, paying the the unions for their votes and states taking four years to fire teachers, hey the U.S. is running on all two cylinders!
Great JOB NUMBERS! MY ASS. 13.8 million looking for work, 10 million college and highschool graduates and dropouts looking for work, 1 million new legal immigrants looking for work and less that 2.5 new jobs per year being created. What are the other 20+ million job seekers going to do???????
@singbiker knine makes perfect sense to me. Are you watching to much mainstream media???
100% AGREE bookworm. They add 100k (110k per month is to maintain and this new report has yet to be revised ) jobs when you need 15 million and they hurt themeselves patting themeselves on the back. What a bunch of nutjobs. Obama is gone in the fall cause we all know he cant peddle that swill. McCain is a warmongering liberal that needs to go retire. Leave syria alone. Leave Iran alone. When Iran gets close to a nuke using real spies, send in 300 tomahawks and whatever else is needed and don't worry about it after. They can't get a nuke or it will be in new york...at best we can hope for is DC.
We like WAR! that's what i think.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta: "Approval from the International (U.N.) community will be required prior to Congressional approval of any U.S. military action", or something to that effect.
Yep, with the Russian Federation and China in the U.N. Security Council....lots of luck on that one.
Just turn our military over to your International Community, Mr. Panetta, and forget about our Constitution.
Frigging Liberal puppet.
Another reason this Democrat will NOT VOTE for Mr. Obama's re-election.
ldo
Maybe in a perverted way the Russkies and the Chinese are the smart one in the U>N. security council.
Next I have always of the believe that whom ever delares war,. it is always the politicians who do that, that they and their offspring and families should be the first ones on the frontlines doing the fighting.
Volunteering isn't good enough bacause that leaves to many loop holes for them to stay at home in a nice warm cushy job.
JUST REMEMBER THE GREAT GWB. A great example of the quality of our leaders.
Eric Just how would the republicans start a war since YOUR fearless leader is the commander in chief. I think most republicans are saying we need to bring back the warmaking power to the congress. That would be more of a brake than a gas peddle as far as war making goes. It has gotten to where the executive branch is dragging us into one war after another that the people don't really support. We shouldn't be going to war because somebody in some other land decides to start a civil war and expects us to rescue them when they are losing. Unless OUR country has been attacked or is in danger we should stay home. The Japanese attacked and FDR had the congressional authority to go to war before the fires were out at Pearl Harbor. If the reason is good the president will get the authority if it is not then congress is responsible for stopping it before we commit troops.
You gotta love the GOP. Six months to a year ago when the people of Libya revolted against the tyrant Gaddafi the GOP screamed and cried "it's none of our business" and "we're broke and can't afford another war". They constantly used it as a opportunity to bash Obama. "He's a Muslim" and "he never served in the military so he doesn't know what he is doing". Well Gaddafi is gone. Not one US serviceman or woman died. It was a reasonable priced affair. Now every one of them has flip flopped like a asian carp out of water and is calling for our intervention in Syria. Ask yourself why? Could they be replenishing their own coffers with political donations from the military industrial complex? Are they trying to replenish the coffers of the military industrial complex? Is it to help Israel or to hurt it? They said that Obama's Libyan policy would mean a radical Islamic government in Libya how is Syria different? Could the sabre rattling have anything to do with their attempts to force the price of oil higher for their contributors? Are the higher gas prices meant to stall the economy and make voters vote against Obama?
Obama's impending impeachment for "Under the terms of Jones’ resolution, both Panetta and Obama would be subject to impeachment for abusing their power and violating the Constitution in disregarding the authority of Congress and placing a foreign power above its jurisdiction" should be being put on front pages everywhere?
I will be all for this when they take Bush and Cheney out and shoot them at dawn! Nobody has any more harm to this country than these two!
Bring back the "Draft" and watch how quickly those war drums go silent!
I do believe in the case of Iran, that voting on military force if needed in advance could be a good idea.
Is it my imagination or are Republicans trying to be more bipartisan in an attempt not to be branded as obstructionists at the time of the elections?
Eric,
I too feel that Republicans are a little, and I stress little, more bipartisan lately. They surely know they are getting tromped in Nov. They will wage war with anyone, including thier own citizens (women) as they do not think we can survive without war. Lets send all the current elected republicans to the next war to do the fighting, then maybe they won't be in such a hurry to create or jump into one.
It's definitely your imagination ;-)
"The Rotten tea and the GOPigs are going to Bankrupt this Nation with all the Wars they start"
Patriotic American U.S.A.....It is WAY past time for your meds.
Patriotic American U.S.A.....It is WAY past time for your meds.
Do you really think so? I think it is way past time for your meds. They have already bankrupted this country with their wars! We do not need nor can we afford another war!
I find it curious you folks ignored the important and glaringly stupid remarks Panetta made when he said Congress' role in declaring war takes a back seat to world concensus. http://www.infowars.com/pentagon-launches-desperate-damage-control-over-shocking-panetta-testimony/
His remarks were misinterpreted and the spin is on. The SECDEF was stressing the importance of international aproval if we're going to start another war in oil country.
Bill, you are a complete jacka$$ if you think there is a misinterpretation and spin!
Just like the other democrat shills that listen to what a person says and make it into something you want to believe. Heck, why don't you just say that Panetta was giving an explanation on how to bake cookies!
Amazing, you really must not have listened to what Sec. Panetta actually said. Boiling it down, he said that if the US was building an international coalition, it would need to get permission from NATO or another international body before taking the next step. The next step would be informing congress of the international bodies action and determining if action by congress is needed.
By the way, actions taken pursuent to treaties, according to the Supreme Court, are superior to actions by Congress. The hierarchy, for those who wonder: US Constitution, Treaties, Actions under Treaties, Acts of Congress.
So for all you Constitutional Law and International Law scholars, since President Obama in the actions against Libya was acting under treaty, while the War Powers Act is an unsigned and probably unconstitutional Act of Congress, which do you think prevails ?
LISTEN TO THE WORDS FOR YOURSELF (@2:43) There is NO misinterpretation or spin.
Democrat Sessions is "taken aback" at the statements. "Stunning and direct violation of the war powers act . . . " Panetta would inform the congress but NOT get permission from the congress.
Sessions - "Well, I'm almost breathless about that. Because what I heard you say is we're going to seek international approval and then we'll come and tell the congress what we might do. And we might seek congressional approval."
OPEN YOUR DAMN EYES AND EARS TO WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE! Get your effing heads out of the sand before it's too late!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5zNwOeyuG84
http://www.infowars.com/media-cover-up-of-obama-impeachment-exposed/
Impeachment of Obama & Panetta proceedings have begun - but NOT MAIN STREAM media covering it.
Government website for impeachment
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.con.res.00107:
When my kid or my friends kids are going to be the ones whose lives are on the line why not wait one damn day to get congressional approval. That is all it took for WW II, The attack was on sunday the president asks for a declaration of war on monday and got it. Why not accept the constitutional checks on the executive branch in this? Don't the men and women going to fight deserve a country in consensus behind them instead of like now. Why do we have to go to war in Libya because their people decided to revolt? Why do we have to go to war in Syria because their people decide to revolt? I don't care which side in someone elses civil war you prefer it is not our right to interfer.
Impeachment of Obama & Panetta proceedings have begun - but NOT MAIN STREAM media covering it.
And why? Because this is going to go... nowhere!
This is one more grand stand by GOP!
It is a tale. Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing. Macbeth Act 5, scene 5, 19–28
Yes! Let's get sucked into yet another war we can't afford, just as things are beginning to improve at home. Let's make war on the deficit instead.
Same old crap - different day! Here we have Republicans taking every possible position - none agreeing very much with their fellow GOP'ers.
Hello! The party of such august citizens as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and (can you believe it) Joe the plumber can't agree on the time of day.
Yes! The dullards in Ohio's 9th Congressional District are actually supporting Joe the dumb-a$$ in a run for the U.S. House of Representatives.
We should probably be concerned with paying for the wars that George W. Bush and his band of Republican nut-bags foisted on us, before we start another tow or three!
For God's sake! Are all Republicans really so stupid?
TOM yes they are.
"I second that"
It might be a good idea to pay off Ronald Reagan's debt while we're at it. Isn't 30 years of interest enough already? Talk about kicking the can down the road. No more foreign wars unless absolutely necessary!!!
Deflect
The next time you want to go riding in on your white horse to save revolutionaries in some other country first pick up the toddler in your family. Look that child in the eyes because he and his children will be paying for your adventures. Do you have the right to saddle him with the inflation and taxes for your dreams of glory? Is life tough for you now so you want the government to put in plans to make everything easier for you? Well that toddler and his children will be paying for it. Do you have the right to sell out his future for your comfort? It is time for us to be responsible or their future will make this recession look like good times.
GOP screams war and then wants to take grandmas SSN to pay for it!
Which party cut medicare? What party cut taxes going into SS?
The Constitution is quite clear when it comes to military action. The president is the commander-in-chief of the military but must get congressional approval BEFORE any action is taken. THIS president did not do that with Libya; it's NOT that Congress took too long like this article states. Panetta believes that the U.S. must get permission from either NATO or the U.N. and not the Congress.
Libya went with support of other nation not support with only Nations that use our military! If he broke laws they would be impeaching him correct?
President Obama can travel all over the world with no problems! Bush has an arrest warrant for him if he travels to certain countries for war crimes. Who did the right thing and who did the wrong thing?
Yes he cut medicare spending instead of gutting it and he lowered SSN to give americans more in their checks to move the economy and keep people spending and guess what its working lolololol.
You are wrong mhrjhn. The president cannot declare war but he CAN take military action. It's happened several times in the past. There are limits on the military action and there was no violation of US law in the Libya conflict.
I think the war powers act on which you base that is unconstitutional to begin with and would like to see it run before SCOTUS.
While I would prefer that we not get involved with either conflict, outside of offering moral support for Syria, I think it would be best if congress at least addressed the issue of giving tacit authorization for military action if deemed necessary. Instead of their usual Johnny Come Lately blathering about how the president didn't consult them before acting when things were building for months prior to anything being done. Apparently, congress needs a couple decades to figure out if something is serious enough to warrant their attention.
The point of the president being the commander-in-chief of the military is that when it comes to war you have to make snap decisions and we don't have time for congress to argue before deciding what to do. Congress was given the power to authorize the use of force as a measure to keep the president from running off to war every time he felt like it. That worked really well with Bush btw.
My advise to congress is to get off their rear ends and start taking action without someone having to come to them and ask what they think. Regardless of your position on this I think everyone here can agree that this is a serious issue that congress should already have thought very seriously about.
The president has no authority to act unless congress gives their permission. Read the Constitution!
Iowa - You are missing the main point. It is up to the President of the United States to ask Congress to declare war or for permission to use military forces against another country, UNLESS the President feels that there is an imminent action on the United States. President Bush did have the authorization of Congress to go to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. President Obama did not have authorization from congress, until about 3 months later, to use force on Libya.
The one thing that shocked me yesterday was when Secretary of Defense Panetta stated, at a congressional hearing, that "We (U.S.) would ask PERMISSION of the UN or others, and then MAYBE ask congress to approve the use of force.
And these days Congress is unable to make any decisions, let alone snap decisions.
The president does indeed have authority to activate a military response. He cannot declare war but the term war has been murky since WWII. You can't accuse Obama for overstepping without also accusing every president since Trueman of doing the exact same thing.
True Noah and I think every president since Truman acted unconstitutionally. So because something was done agaist the law of the land once you think we have no right to rein in these unconstitutional acts now? I think we had better rein in this overstepping of the executive branch before we have no rights at all.
Noah, Not entirely true. The President can order a military response only when the U.S. is attacked or faces an imminent attack. There was no "War Powers Act" when Truman, Kennedy or Johnson was President. The War Powers Act was to curb the Presidents use of the military as he deemed. Presidents Bush 1 and 2, had congressional approval prior to committing military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama did not for the military operation in Libya. BTW, every President, since the War Powers Act was passed, have said it infringed on their authority as Commander in Chief, however, it has never been challenged in federal court.
That is just the point SCOTUS only takes action in a case when it is challenged> Instead of waiting for leaders of any party to challenge it we the people should challenge the overstepping of the executive branch. Somebody should take it to court when they get called to serve in one of these wars. Because you have to have reason to be party to the suit in order to file the case.
Interesting.
Assad kidnaps, murders, and sends troops against his own people ....... who are begging for outside help. Those favoring US involvement call it "humanitarian".
Saddam invaded 2 neighbors, kidnapped, murdered, and used military forces against his own people. Paid "bounties" to the families of suicide bombers who killed Israeli civilians. It was all about "the oil".
Hmm. Biggest difference I see is which party occupies the White House.
I say both administrations are lying to the American people for oil. Maybe because I stopped listening to American news outlets which seems like propaganda when they don't say 80% of what goes on in this country or in all other countries. That's why I know about this gem on YouTube.
http://www.examiner.com/civil-rights-in-jersey-city/caught-staged-cnn-syria-interviews-faked-by-activist-danny
We have had a bunch of cowboys in office who will put our future on the line so they can play commander in chief. It seems everyone of either party that gets in office falls in love with the power. But they don't die and they don't pay for it we do and our grandchildren will. Let's start thinking about the bill we are leaving them. We are broke in order to go on the next adventure the white house wants us to we have to borrow money from china. Please wake up because this staggering debt is going to crash someday. I will probably not live to see it but you will.
Just how freakin' ignorant is our government going to be. We cannot fight another war. You will start to see more and more military going AWOL or just walking away.
We can't afford it, we are not replenshed from the last three wars, and the political balls do not exist to do this the right way, meaning send in the military, crush any and all people in the way, kill all the bastards who drew us into it, take their oil to pay for our expenses and make a profit, and not give back the country until these ignorant rag heads no how to run one.
Its not IRAN driving up oil, it the jerks who broker it. They are laughing all the way to their Swiss accounts.
Otherwise, they can all kill themselve to their hearts content.
Anyone that signs up to be in the military and go AWOL because of a war are cowards and should be put in jail. I dont care what your ethics are. Its the military, PEOPLE!
Raffi most of the people fighting your wars today are not regular army. They are National Guard. In 2009 the entire 34th infantry division was called up. That is the National Guard of both Iowa and Nebraska. We had around 300 men left in state to handle a disaster if we had one in either state. And that is what most guys join the National Guard for to help their people in an emergency. During Katrina they had to bring in the National Guard of the neighboring state because the Louisianna National Guard was off on one of these adventures. They aren't regular soldiers they are farmers, factory workers etc. who have to drop their lives for a year. If we are attacked they will gladly defend their country but we have a responsibilty to make sure that we the people are responsible in our actions.
There is no long term gain to be made in any of this
Iran and Syria. Nothing in a military sense. It will only create more terrorists and justify more American killing and terror in their minds.
These are cultures we really know nothing about (Congress and the Prez) much less the American people (myself included).
Why doesn't Congress do their job and create an Infrastructure jobs bill too fix OUR roads, bridges and Schools? With the Republicans it's fighting Abortion, Planned parenthood or Gay rights.PERIOD. Can't wait for November so the American middle class and less fortunate,Women,Minorities,Gays will vote the Party of NO OUT.
Watch this video. This is really how the democrat party feels about American jobs.
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/us-bridges-roads-built-chinese-firms-14594513
No, twisting this report isn't going to work. Check it out on fact check, snopes or what-ever. This is the sort of truth-twisting that qualifies as a lie. And it's old and worn-out. Find something real to criticize. I'm sure there's plenty there. The presidency is an impossible job even without trying to please everyone.
Amen, it is the usual GOP smoke screen. Make it about gays, gay marriage, birth control, etc. anything but the real issues that are facing this counry.
Jesse Helms is smiling (wherever it is he is at, Heaven, Hell or some where in between) it was one of his favorite campagin tactics, talk about everything except the issues.
The GOP has spent the last 3 years trying to unseat the Prez. The hell with the economy and jobs.
Neither party cares about the people. They care about playing politics and that is all. There is no reason that the Interstate system wasn't maintained from the beginning except that the funds that were paid in in road use taxes were diverted. The funding for maintenance of the interstate system is built into your gas price everytime you fill your tank and everytime a trucker fills his tank and into their cost of licensing their trucks. That is what that .9 cents of every gallon you put in is. So how many .9cents weren't spent on the I 35 bridge before it fell into the Mississippi.
Stop looking for more wars to fight. Wars are not free. If we need another war then let's have a LARGE tax increase to pay for it. I bet if we paid for the wars up front then we would have less wars.
good idea let's make those struggling to make ends meet pay a large amount of money for the rich banking cartels illegal wars, makes perfect sense while people like ben barnanke are drinking expensive champagne, the broke american people can pay up. you are a slave the the banks who run this country
I wish before all of you saber rattle this time you pick up the toddler in your family. Look that child in the eyes because that is the person who will be paying for your adventure. 20 years from now when that child is complaining about inflation and taxes will you be able to tell him what he is paying for. Or will you be to cowardly to say I just followed what my fearless leader wanted.
Here's a novel idea, tax the oil companies, this is all about their profits. Tax the munitions companies that are selling all the equipment to the military to keep the wars going.
Munition manufacturers are the ones that made the money in Viet Nam. We lost 56,000 soldiers to a war that didn't do a damn thing. Not to leave out all the injuried, physically and mentally that survived.
Just as Sir Winston Churchill said "If we forget the past, we are doomed to repeat it".
Illuminati that is the only way you will stop all the politicians who as soon as the become commander in chief they just have to fight a war. This isn't a video game real people die. Real people are disabled for life. The same people who are so poor that the tax burden will hurt them need to say NO MORE. Because Illuminati those are the people whose kids are fighting those wars. In really bad areas of the country kids join the military out of high sclool to get the benefits. We usually have 34 latino names in the list of people serving in the military in our church bulletin every week. This city would just about be a neighbohood in NYC.There are 3 other churches I wonder how many names are in their bulletins every week.
ROLE??? WHAT ROLE? THIS IS NONE OF OUR DAMN BUSSINESS NOR OUR PROBLEM. we need to quit being world police force and quit starting wars. Ron Paul is the only one who will get us out of war and keep us out of war, we are bankrupt where is this money going to come from??? those of you who plan on voting for obama or someone like mitt romney look who they are funded by. obama is in the pockets of the wall st bankers, as well as people like mittens. if you want more debt and war then by all means vote obama or one of the neo-cons running. but don't start complaining once more wars begin and the debt expands further.
I trust Ron Paul as far as I can see him through a brick Wall. The 1% are the ones that would benefit from him.
uncz if Ron Paul's plan had been in effect 20 years ago Rick Perry wouldn't need to offer in state tuition to illegals who have gone all the way through the Texas school system. Because we could have asked if they were legal before they started school and refused. But if you accept school lunch funds from the feds, then you are not allowed to ask if the student is legal, only if they live in the district. The people here who would have benefitted would have been the children of Texas. We would have had more per capita funds for each school. We wouldn't have had to try to shift funds from one school district to another and school districts with 5 miles of hotels and clubs paying taxes wouldn't have had to cut music and art classes.
JUST SAY NO! We're freeking TIRED people bone ass tired, cost is beside the point, I could give a crap how much money it is, the real cost is lives and and multiple deployments cost multiple lives, not to mention the injuries and PTSD that keep vets from getting jobs once they get out, screw that unless you plan to enlist yourselves, JUST SAY NO!
No more wars unless Obama"s kids are in the front lines. I'm tired of going to funerals for young hispanic kids who joined the service partly because the job market is so bad here.
lonereb,
Why just Obama's kids? How about all those Republican hawk's kids. And the rich, how about their kids? Democrats kids too! And not just as officers, but on the front lines where all the risk is.
Right with ya Fitz, No more Wars! You know its funny, Bush went to war after we lost 3,000 lives on U.S soil and we begged for revenge while still pulling and identifying body parts from the rubble, but it was all about oil, right? And it was a senseless war, right? And we had no right invading them, right?
So why is Obama right on this account,.. or will history say after his term is over that his war was also all about oil? And we started it BEFORE we lost 3,000 lives to it! WTH?
I say bring'em home and keep'em home. Protect our borders and let the U.N deal with other countries, we are so hated sometimes its a wonder we are still here! And a question of how long will we be able to keep this 'act' up before we are in a war on our soil?
P.S I hope your friends visit is short, I have an overfull pond and a few newly discovered rivers in my back yard!! I want SPRING already!!
She'll only be here a week TFG, we're supposed to have beautiful weather all this week 70s and 80s last I read *fingers crossed*
To hell with this war trap in the Middle East-sepecially Syria- Let the Arabs-defend their own-take the example-Egypt, and Libya-once we help-Then Jihad bull@!$%#-@!$%# em,
I blame republicans. Obama 2012! Hell continue to kick ass and take names.
Republicans - they don't care how we pay for wars, they just want em period. Go in right now to Syria and IRAN, screw the economy.
oh you mean obama who's funded by the wall st bankers, the one who's admin is full off wall st executives? obama is working for the ones who are making the slaves like you and me pay for their damn wars. open your eyes pal both parties are corrupt
The GOPigs and their nutty tea buddies are out to bankrupt this Country, sad we have losers like this in Congress.
how many times must i say it until you people get off this left vs right nonsense, it is the fed the bankers that HAVE bankrupt us.
Obama has bombed six countries already.
Which republican sent our forces to Libya. They have basically done nothing for the last three years.
Libya was fun and done in 6 months and we didnt lose american lives. Sounds like a SMART war.
Bush Sr, and Jr, cost almost 7 trillion dollars and almost 10k american lives. And IRAQ was completely pointless and could have been solved by CIA.
Obama is more ruthless then both bushes put together because he is smart, yes we are currently bombing 7 countries with drones and CIA spec ops. This costs a fraction of what full frontal wars cost, and is yeilding better results.
Shaun it is Republicans and independents like me that are the ones saying no more wars. It is Ron Paul who has said every war after WW II has been illegal. Get the peanut butter out of your ears.
LONEREB its the republicans that start wars. where do you get your information from.
Frank, please do some research as to the history of wars we have been in and what party led us into most of them.
I can see where Lonereb is coming from. Basically, Ron Paul wants to return the United States to the Isolationist country that we were before WWII. Where we didn't concern ourselves with the rest of the world and only focused on ourselves. This has some serious merits. The problem is that it also the policy that allowed Hitler to rise to power in Germany.
I agree that we need to stop being the world police, but we can't exactly bury our heads in the sand either.
The establishment loves wars be it Democrat or Republican, Ron Paul is the only non establishment presidential runner who would not take us to war without a declaration from congress and will not take us to war unless actually provoked. Cut military spending before all of our social programs at home become slashed.
Ron Paul 2012
Calling Ron Paul an isolationist is like calling your neighbor a hermit because he doesn't come on your property and break your windows.
No, Ron Paul is an isolationist no matter how you look at it. Unfortunately, Germany and Japan showed us you can't really ignore what's happening in the world around you. Now, being the world's police force is a compeletely different matter. One I do not agree with.
There is a world of difference between isolationism and non-interventionism. Ron Paul's foreign policy rhetoric is non-interventionist. I love it. It is really unfortunate that he is fixated on the false notion that because he is principled and honest then the rest of the moneyed class is principled and honest. It isn't so. Their notion of justice is "let 'em eat cake" - or so it seems from their primary candidates speeches and from the policies of their governors.
@indepndent you know who dragged us into ww2? FDR buy cutting off japan's oil and other resources which is a declaration of war. he knew they would attack us but said NOTHING. i don't understand you you're against ron paul but also against us being world police you make no sense.
LOL, the republicans have PROMISSED war on DAY 1 of their getting elected with IRAN. Bush Sr, Bush Jr, both republicans cost 10 trillion dollars in wars, what war did clinton start? What war did Obama start?
Actually I am for being smart about it, and that is definately Obama, who is WAY smarter then any GOP alive.
3 of them did one of them promises to END them on DAY 1!
GAS PRICES nobody talks about the oil companies closing 3 refineries on the east coast. they say they where not profitable. they are making plenty of profits now.
I hear all the green energy types crying about oil and that but when they wanted to put the last wind farm on the east coast everybody rose up crying because 1 the windmills might be noisy and 2 the kiddies who could see it from school might be distracted. From experience having lived in Iowa between 2 wind farms. My daughters friend who had a windmill prectically in his backyard I never heard it when we visited. And those blades go around so slow it is boring. Give the kids one day and they'll be bored stiff and quit watching them. Oh and the birds are smarter than the people they just avoid them.
The GOP loves their wars, never sure how they are going to pay for them, oh that is right, it is now the American people's that must bear the burden!
These politicans don't even have the guts to vote on issues because they are so afraid it will come back on them, so better to do nothing and if the President does something and it messes up, they can blame it on him. Libya is an excellent example. They were all critical, but when he succeeded nothing was said.
If the purpose in Libya was to get rid of it's leader, then it was a success. The same holds true with Iraq. The purpose was to get rid of it's leader. It then however became of building the country back up again that didn't go too well.
the purpose in Iraq was to get rid of the many WMDs that Bush & Cheney insisted were immediate threats. Of course none were ever found and Bush couldn't admit he invaded another country and started a war for nothing, so he decided hell we're here now might as well go for regime change.
11 years later we're still cleaning up that mistake. How many innocent Iraqis did we kill? How many innocent Iraqi families were torn apart and lives ruined because we decided to start a war under false pretenses? How many Americans killed in our war against Iraq? How many lives forever changed by injury or death of their loved one?
Iraq and its regime had nothing to do with 9/11. And no WMDs were found. The reasons Bush started this decade+ war was all a lie, we know that now as fact. I agree with you that *if* the purpose was to get rid of its leader it was a success, but one we had no humanitarian, legal, ethical or moral right to engage in.
The last time rebuilding a country worked was the Marshall Plan that rebuilt europe after WW II. It hasn't worked since.
Republicans want new wars to replace the old wars that have been or are being wound down by the President.
How do these "balance the budget" morons plan to pay for their new wars?
Whose kids are they going to send to fight their new wars?
The country is (as these folks continually remind us) flat-assed broke.
The military is dog-tired, and with good reason. They've been deployed and re-deployed to the point of utter exhaustion. Further, their equipment is so beat up as to be nearly useless.
Where do the Republican war-mongers get the idea that any warfare is good for this country? It's not!
You said it Tom, spot on.
obama is just as much of a warmonger as the neo-cons like mccain. ron paul is the only one who will get us out of these wars. FACT the military donated more money to ron paul than any other candidate. in 2008 and now in 2012.
Who's kids are going to pay for the failed 'green energy' companies and stimulus which, providing it even worked, only lowered unemployment 1 1/2%?
How do the democrats plan to pay for them because the Republicans aren't in office now? It is Obama and his defense secretary talking about charging into Syria and Iran. For which adventure my grandchildren will be paying for.
These conservatives... McCain, Graham, the Repub candidates, they seem to be unable to help themselves - they continually urge the United States to unwisely intervene in, and ESCALATE, the conflicts in the Middle East. Evidently they learned NOTHING from Iraq. They push the US toward war war war, time after time, with adolescent, chest-thumping rhetoric, and then don't understand why sovereign nations feel threatened by us. And they justify the whole thing by pointing to Ahmadinejad's stupid, equally adolescent threat to "wipe Israel off the face of the earth", as if that is a realistic possibility (it is NOT). After Iraq, I can't imagine why ANYONE in their right mind would listen to Republican advice about going to war, conducting foreign policy, or dealing with Islamic regimes. It was a losing play before and it's a losing play now. America needs to NOT BE BOGGED DOWN IN THE MIDDLE EAST IN A NEW CONFLICT.
exactly, just look at the picture of the usual suspects considering this issue. Scary.
lets have a war tax and mandatory draft before we do another thing. if we cannot agree on this then there should be no war.
peace brother.
I think from what I have heard talking to real people in America. Neither the republicans,democrats or independents want war. So how do we rein in these people who keep dragging us into these things. Of course none of the people in my circle own plants making airplanes or other military vehicules (GM) so they just 1 do not want their families in one 2 they do not want their grandchildren paying for one.
Why is this decision left to politicians? It should be done by people who are professionals at this, the Armed Services. They have the intel, the equipment, and have a much better understanding of the gravity of the situation.
Would you let your mayor fix your car, or would you take it to a mechanic? Politicians don't have any place in a war except at the beginning and end. When you fight by committee you will surely lose.
I have never met an officer that really would recommend a war against a country that has not attacked our soil first.
No! The military is trained to execute war, not initiate it. Careers in the officer's corps open up with war. In peacetime officers stagnate in rank and they hate it. Leaving war up to the military leaders is to ensure perpetual war! No. No. No.
The decision to go to war is left with the politicians because the Constitution of the US requires it.
The alternative is a military dictatorship.
Panetta is a good man. Thank goodness. He is not going to recommend a war with Syria or Iran. These are large countries with sophisticated weapons systems. Yes we could probably win a war in 10 years or so. If you are interested in going to war please send in your check and enlist your children and grandchildren.
Otherwise, mind your own business!
Gee that's not what he said on the Sunday ABC news program this morning.He was already talking about Iran and not asking Congress
President Obama is doing the right thing by allowing diplomacy to work. No more wars. Allow diplomacy and sanctions time to work. NO MORE WARS!
The thing in Egypt didn't work out so well, neither did the one in Libya. Let's help Syrian people by staying the hell out of it and letting Assad put down the insurrection.
Nobody is fighting for peace, freedom and the American way....it is just one set of bad apples trying to replace another set of bad apples. For the sake of the people, let it end quickly.