Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder Why?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder Why? Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 1:17:48 PM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

And nothing has changed in that since the war powers act.  There is no case of protracted whatever that didnt get approval.  So you are telling us what we already said the war powers act was and doing it repeatedly.  I miss the point, if any.


No, you're purposely not seeing the point. Since the War Powers Act, there are guidelines established for what the president must do if he initiates military action of his own volition.

President Obama has failed to do that.

You can't argue that someone broke a law that wasn't in existence. The law is there and the Obama administration dropped the ball.

You've got Lucky Leo out there, dodging questions about the president seeking congressional approval which the president is required to do. he's claiming that all the president needs is the approval of NATO or the UN. Huh? Another vote for globalism bullshit.

The point is that president Obama sent our troops somewhere (which he absolutely has the power to do) and didn't follow the law, after he did so. He's claiming the right to do something (which he absolutely has) without meeting his responsibilities.

When you're wrong, you're wrong and the president dropped the ball, in this case. There's not even a disagreement that he didn't do what he was required to do (except from the Obama apologists that insist the man walks on water and farts rose petals).



Peace and comfort,



Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 161
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 1:36:33 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		You miss the point entirely.  Perhaps if you read the war powers act, and understood it, you would have some insight into this conversation.

The point is that president Obama sent our troops somewhere (which he absolutely has the power to do) and didn't follow the law, after he did so. He's claiming the right to do something (which he absolutely has) without meeting his responsibilities.

I am unaware of where this happened.   It has never been publicized.  Did we hit trinidad an tobago some years ago and have been ensconsed there, and you got that on the shortwave or what?

Delineate how and where this happened with the proper law for the proper case (or perhaps cases) that he has violated.

Remeber that the law goes in order and is interpreted in order, that is:

Article in the constitution (and what branch it is set forth under).
Amendment
USC
and so on.

Because you started this (or whoever the op was) regarding Uganda and congress got their report.


< Message edited by mnottertail -- 3/21/2012 1:39:22 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 162
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 1:37:09 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
I won't look all of those up but I'm pretty certain that the president(s) sought and recieved congressional approval under the War Powers Act. This, of course, was the case with Vietnam, Somalia, Serbia, and Bosnia, at least.

The War Powers act was passed in 1973 in response to the end of Vietnam. So clearly the President didn't follow it in 1965.


Yes. I know that. Did the presidents seek and get congressional approval or did they start their own dictatorship?

Whether the WPA was in effect or not, if the president initiated a military action that wound up being protracted, congressional approval would have to be given, even in a passive way, by congress passing bills to allocate funds for such an action.


Then what's your beef. Congress did not cut off funding for Libya or Uganda.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 163
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 1:44:57 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

And nothing has changed in that since the war powers act.  There is no case of protracted whatever that didnt get approval.  So you are telling us what we already said the war powers act was and doing it repeatedly.  I miss the point, if any.


No, you're purposely not seeing the point. Since the War Powers Act, there are guidelines established for what the president must do if he initiates military action of his own volition.

President Obama has failed to do that.

You can't argue that someone broke a law that wasn't in existence. The law is there and the Obama administration dropped the ball.

You've got Lucky Leo out there, dodging questions about the president seeking congressional approval which the president is required to do. he's claiming that all the president needs is the approval of NATO or the UN. Huh? Another vote for globalism bullshit.

The point is that president Obama sent our troops somewhere (which he absolutely has the power to do) and didn't follow the law, after he did so. He's claiming the right to do something (which he absolutely has) without meeting his responsibilities.

When you're wrong, you're wrong and the president dropped the ball, in this case. There's not even a disagreement that he didn't do what he was required to do (except from the Obama apologists that insist the man walks on water and farts rose petals).



Peace and comfort,



Michael

No you misunderstand. The War Powers Act is widely held to be unconstitutional and has never been enforced or challenged because both sides don't want the fight.
Here is a 2004 report on the law and it makes clear no President has accepted it as Constitutional since it was passed over Nixon's veto.
http://www.fas.org/man/crs/RL32267.html

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 164
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 6:10:03 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LoreBook
quote:

According to the charter, NATO can only authorize military action itself when a member is under attack or in danger of being attacked.
Where? Which article limits NATO's ability to authorize or engage in military action? You quoted 3 articles.
Article 1 says they have to try find a peaceful resolution first if possible. Nothing about what they can or can't do after that has been tried.
Article 3 says that they'll consult with each other when one member feels they have been threatened. Nothing about what they can or can't do in the way of military action.
And Article 7 says that the members' rights obligations as UN members isn't altered by being NATO members. Nothing about what they can or can't do in the way of military action.
So which of the Articles you quoted backs up your claim?


Article 1.
quote:

The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.


They weren't involved in the matter at all. Thus, no authority to exercise military actions on their own. They needed some other plausible reason, and that was given by the UN.

quote:

Your premise is invalid, because you are claiming the entire Libyan action is unconstitutional, and it clearly wasn't. The question of whether or not any individual act or bombing was justified within the scope of the UN resolution isn't relevant to that question. The action in Libya was 100% legal and constitutional.


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Thus, when the NATO started bombing tanks that were not actively fighting, it was not truly in accordance with the UN resolution. The asset freeze was really a non-military action. The No-Fly Zone was completed within hours of the onset of actions. Enforcement of the Arms embargo would not include attacking military installations and command structures. The only way that it can be construed that the UN Resolution was supported by the continued actions of NATO is in Protection of Civilians. What is one to do when the "civilians" are rebels against the sovereign government? Are they not "enemy combatants?" Are they still "civilians" needing to be defended?


Notice how my only comment on the No Fly Zone was that it was in place within hours? Does that sound like I was arguing against it?

Shall we also add into it that Obama felt he did need to follow the War Powers Resolution by delivering to Congress notification that sent some of our military into combat? He followed that part of the Resolution and got the notification in within 48 hours.

Regardless of what NATO or the UN says, for the US, their treaties and resolutions are secondary to the US Constitution and US laws.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to LoreBook)
Profile   Post #: 165
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 6:30:07 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		IMHO....the thing that`s shifting is the precedent.

The President isn`t breaking any laws, using the methods in place now.But President Obama is doing things that were not done in the past,ei.,the use of drone spies and killer-drones to go after al-queda types.

We face threats that the folks who wrote the Constitution never dreamed of or didn`t even exist.

Saying we must now use a strict reading today is ridiculous and not even possible,really.


_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 166
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 6:32:11 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LoreBook

Well, you see, since war wasn't declared, it doesn't really matter who has the authority to declare war.




So what's the story here, Lorebook? You were just skimming my posts with no retention until you found an error in a citation? Our actions in Libya were the declaration. Without any Congressional authority, President Obama waged a military campaign to bring down a foreign government, including a series of targeted attacks on their head of state.


(in reply to LoreBook)
Profile   Post #: 167
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 7:36:47 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Noreiga.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 168
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 7:49:35 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Noreiga.




You mean the guy who went on TV and declared that a state of war existed between his country and ours?

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 169
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 8:17:45 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Oh. So a foreign leader declares war for us. Got it.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 170
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 8:20:22 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		Granada.....

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 171
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 8:28:38 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Oh. So a foreign leader declares war for us. Got it.


Do you wanna shift out of Obamabot mode, and think that one through, Muse?

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 172
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 8:33:21 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		You want to?

Korea ring a bell?

You've become nothing but a bot. And you used to be smart.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 173
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 8:40:38 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		No go, Muse, and it saddens me to see you sinking to that level.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 174
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 8:45:36 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Back at ya.


(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 175
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 9:01:44 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		Okely-dokely then.

Precendents are being set by this administration. A "remote control" exception to the War Powers Act should be a troubling development. I'm sure it will be troubling to some of those now fully supportive, or unwilling to be seen out of step, when the political winds shift, and the Obama Doctrine is in the hands of a President with the wrong letter by his or her name.


(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 176
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 9:12:18 PM   
DaNewAgeViking


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

I certainly see it, Michael, and I hope he catches some hell over it. Panetta sitting there in front of the committee though, claiming that the legal authority for the US to go to war comes from NATO or the UN, and they just need to advise Congress about what they are up to... As the Congressman said, breathtaking.

As I have noted in the past, a treaty of mutual defense is a declaration of war addressed ' to whom it may concern', We have current in force treaties of mutual defense, duly ratified by the Senate, with Nato and the United Nations, and those treaties do not say that we would 'consider' whether to respond. So, yes, war has been declared.

Then there is the War Powers act which allows the President to make short term emergency deployments prior to gaining Congressional approval. Again, war was declared.

But this means nothing to the Radicals, of course since all they care about is seizing power.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 177
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 9:20:22 PM   
DaNewAgeViking


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

IMHO....the thing that`s shifting is the precedent.

The President isn`t breaking any laws, using the methods in place now.But President Obama is doing things that were not done in the past,ei.,the use of drone spies and killer-drones to go after al-queda types.

We face threats that the folks who wrote the Constitution never dreamed of or didn`t even exist.

Saying we must now use a strict reading today is ridiculous and not even possible,really.


Oh? And how is the employment of a tactical weapon in a foreign war a threat to Constitution? Is Washington coming under 'friendly fire'? That's happening here is you hate Obama, so anything he does is a monstrous act, treasonous on its face. That doesn't make it so.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 178
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 9:42:57 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Noreiga.




You mean the guy who went on TV and declared that a state of war existed between his country and ours?

But the guy who actually attacked us and recruited our own citizens to engage in a campaign of terror against us was off limits?

WHAT THE HOLY FLAMING FUCK?

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 179
RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder ... - 3/21/2012 9:59:36 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		Yeah, it was an incredibly stupid thing for Noriega to do. I caught it on CNN in the dayroom, and thought it was funnier than hell. I should have checked the alert roster, before laughing, and heading back to the room to wrap presents for my much anticipated first Christmas with family in a few years.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A War That The Press Isn't Talking About. I Wonder Why? Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109