• http://www.ContraControl.com/ Zenc

    Watching people explain why “that” kind of attack is different than “this” type of attack has been rather amusing.

  • http://www.ContraControl.com/ Zenc

    Watching people explain why “that” kind of attack is different than “this” type of attack has been rather amusing.

  • chinagreenelvis

    Laughable. A classic example of truncating information in order to appear as if you have a leg to stand on. The part you got:

    “The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548) was a United States Congress joint resolution providing that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or if the United States is already under attack or serious threat.”

    The part you didn’t get:

    “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.”

  • chinagreenelvis

    Laughable. A classic example of truncating information in order to appear as if you have a leg to stand on. The part you got:

    “The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548) was a United States Congress joint resolution providing that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or if the United States is already under attack or serious threat.”

    The part you didn’t get:

    “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.”

  • DeepCough

    If “the president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” then why did the military actions in Iraq authorized by Bush go thoroughly unimpeached?

  • DeepCough

    If “the president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” then why did the military actions in Iraq authorized by Bush go thoroughly unimpeached?

    • chinagreenelvis

      Bush had Congressional authorization. Also:

      “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.”

    • 003sim

      It shouldn’t have. Two wrong do not make a right though. It’s time for the America Citizens to step up to the plate and take our country back from the bankers. They are behind all of our children being sent off to fight in unjustified situations

  • chinagreenelvis

    Bush had Congressional authorization. Also:

    “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.”

  • http://twitter.com/Marklar_Prime Marklar Kronkite

    The War Powers Act is entirely irrelevant since nowhere does the constitution grant congress the power to override the constitution via legislation or amendment. Only a constitutional amendment could do that.

    One would have to presume we live under the rule of law though, which would be an entirely foolish presumption in this day and age. We are ruled by a criminal gang of undercover fascists, not a lawful government.

  • Marklar_Prime

    The War Powers Act is entirely irrelevant since nowhere does the constitution grant congress the power to override the constitution via legislation or resolution. Only a constitutional amendment could do that.

    One would have to presume we live under the rule of law though, which would be an entirely foolish presumption in this day and age. We are ruled by a criminal gang of undercover fascists, not a lawful government.

  • 003sim

    It shouldn’t have. Two wrong do not make a right though. It’s time for the America Citizens to step up to the plate and take our country back from the bankers. They are behind all of our children being sent off to fight in unjustified situations

21
More in Barack Obama, Impeachment, Joe Biden, Law, Libya, Military, No Fly Zone, Politics, Presidency, Video
Sales of Doomsday Bunkers Up 1,000%

Blake Ellis reports for CNN: A devastating earthquake strikes Japan. A massive tsunami kills thousands. Fears of a nuclear meltdown run rampant. Bloodshed and violence escalate in Libya. And U.S....

Close