Corvette Forum : DigitalCorvettes.com Corvette Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,607 Posts
I assume he is talking about Libya, I cant watch the vid from work.

There is plenty of presidence when it comes to executive use of the military.

The Power of Congress to Control the President’s Discretion.—Over the President’s veto, Congress enacted the War Powers Resolution,173 designed to redistribute the war powers between the President and Congress. Although ambiguous in some respects, the Resolution appears to define restrictively the President’s powers, to require him to report fully to Congress upon the introduction of troops into foreign areas, to specify a maximum time limitation on the engagement of hostilities absent affirmative congressional action, and to provide a means for Congress to require cessation of hostilities in advance of the time set. The Resolution states that the President’s power to commit United States troops into hostilities, or into situations of imminent involvement in hostilities, is limited to instances of (1) a declaration of war, (2) a specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by an attack on the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.174 In the absence of a declaration of war, a President must within 48 hours report to Congress whenever he introduces troops (1) into hostilities or situations of imminent hostilities, (2) into a foreign nation while equipped for combat, except in certain nonhostile situations, or (3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States troops equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation.175 The President is required to terminate the use of troops in the reported situation within 60 days of reporting, unless Congress (1) has declared war, (2) has extended the period, or (3) is unable to meet as a result of an attack on the United States, but the period can be extended another 30 days by the President’s certification to Congress of unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of the troops.176 Congress may through the passage of a concurrent resolution require the President to remove the troops sooner.177 The Resolution further states that no legislation, whether enacted prior to or subsequent to passage of the Resolution will be taken to empower the President to use troops abroad unless the legislation specifically does so and that no treaty may so empower the President unless it is supplemented by implementing legislation specifically addressed to the issue.178
Link. I suggest reading the whole thing

All the texts reference putting troops in harms way. Does that apply to a war ship shooting missiles or a few pilots flying missions?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
110 Tomahawk missiles, if that isn't war, there has never been a war on this planet.

I'll let sheriff Joe straighten you out..

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
The Administration is using our Charter membership in the UN and the rules we must abide by within our membership... to circumvent the Constitution. Where he is running in to problems, is with the stated goals of the UN, -nations and their stated goals being different then the US goals. He stated this morning while on vacation... "We will be there as long as it takes to remove Gaddafi".

This is in stark contrast to his past voting record and stated reason for voting as he did against the case for war with Iraq.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
This is in stark contrast to his past voting record and stated reason for voting as he did against the case for war with Iraq.
That's because he don't call the shots.. Bush didn't call the shots.. Clinton didn't call the shots.. etc. etc. etc. Rep/Dem don't matter.. personal beliefs/convictions/principles don't matter.. they do as their told.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
This entire action serves one single purpose... 2012. It is calculated and of his volition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,516 Posts
162 Tomahawk missiles +1) F15e Strike eagle Jet

This going to cost 100's of billions

All spent on a nation that hates America,

My question is: When is the US government going to begin to focus on America !

It's incredible How the Taxpayer in this country is Being Ripped-Off !

By being expected to pay for Libya
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Brother... those concerns and complaints are valid -without doubt. But, step back and take a look at what is happening across the entire region. Democratically held elections, for the first time in some countries. Demonstrations across the entire region !! The benefits from these civilian uprisings will not be felt for years if not decades, to come. Rest assured, they will. Once an oppressed people become free, even in the smallest and most corrupt form... their appetite for more becomes insatiable.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Brother... those concerns and complaints are valid -without doubt. But, step back and take a look at what is happening across the entire region. Democratically held elections, for the first time in some countries. Demonstrations across the entire region !! The benefits from these civilian uprisings will not be felt for years if not decades, to come. Rest assured, they will. Once an oppressed people become free, even in the smallest and most corrupt form... their appetite for more becomes insatiable.

Holy Neocon Unicorn Batman! :laughing: Those people have been fighting and infighting since time began being recorded. No amount of nation building will ever change that...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
The people will change on their own. It is the governments that we can directly apply ideological change to. Democratically held elections for the first time, my friend. Do not minimize the importance of that point. We can't kill them all... so we set them all free. What better way to change an entire nation... but from within ? ;)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
The people will change on their own. It is the governments that we can directly apply ideological change to. Democratically held elections for the first time, my friend. Do not minimize the importance of that point. We can't kill them all... so we set them all free. What better way to change an entire nation... but from within ? ;)
:laughing: We will run out of empire and money long before they run out of reasons to fight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,476 Posts
How come there is no discussion of who is likely to take over power if/when Quackdoffi is removed? :lookinup:

Anybody ever heard of a little group called the Muslim Brotherhood???? Are we removing a leader to allow the Muslim Brotherhood to install their leaders? What is happening in Egypt? Same story. Muslim Brotherhood (terrorists) are taking over under our nose and our leader is promoting it.

I tell you again....Obama is a Muslim in disguise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
:laughing: We will run out of money long before they run out of reasons to fight.

I can not deny that. That does not mean, though, that the ideology is not sound. In fact... it worked pretty damn well in this country's founding.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
I can not deny that. That does not mean, though, that the ideology is not sound. In fact... it worked pretty damn well in this country's founding.
Sorry VFP, but this ideology of yours, would make the founding fathers roll over in their graves faster than you can say Obamacare.. :laughing:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
You think so, do you...

The First Barbary War (1801–1805), also known as the Barbary Coast War or the Tripolitan War, was the first of two wars fought between the United States and the North African Muslim states known collectively as the Barbary States. These were the independent Sultanate of Morocco and Tripoli, which were quasi-independent entities nominally belonging to the Ottoman

The U.S. Minister to France, Thomas Jefferson, decided to send envoys to Morocco and Algeria to try to purchase treaties and the freedoms of the captured sailors held by Algeria.[3] Morocco was the first Barbary Coast state to sign a treaty with the U.S. on June 23, 1786. This treaty formally ended all Moroccan piracy against American shipping interests.

In March 1785, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with Tripoli's envoy, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). Upon inquiring "concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury", the ambassador replied:

It was written in their Qu'ran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every Muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once. [12]

Jefferson reported the conversation to Secretary of Foreign Affairs John Jay, who submitted the Ambassador's comments and offer to Congress. Jefferson argued that paying tribute would encourage more attacks. Although John Adams agreed with Jefferson, he believed that circumstances forced the U.S. to pay tribute until an adequate navy could be built. The U.S. had just fought an exhausting war, which put the nation deep in debt. Federalist and Anti-Federalist forces argued over the needs of the country and the burden of taxation. Jefferson's own Democratic-Republicans and anti-navalists believed that the future of the country lay in westward expansion, with Atlantic trade threatening to siphon money and energy away from the new nation on useless wars in the Old World.[13] The U.S. paid Algiers the ransom, and continued to pay up to $1 million per year over the next 15 years for the safe passage of American ships or the return of American hostages. Payments in ransom and tribute to the privateering states amounted to 20% of the U.S. government's annual revenues in 1800.[citation needed]

Jefferson continued to argue for cessation of the tribute, with rising support from George Washington and others. With the recommissioning of the American navy in 1794 and the resulting increased firepower on the seas, it became increasingly possible for America to refuse paying tribute, although by now the long-standing habit was hard to overturn.


Our forefathers were the original neocolonialists. Welcome to the fight, brother. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,516 Posts
Brother... those concerns and complaints are valid -without doubt. But, step back and take a look at what is happening across the entire region. Democratically held elections, for the first time in some countries. Demonstrations across the entire region !! The benefits from these civilian uprisings will not be felt for years if not decades, to come. Rest assured, they will. Once an oppressed people become free, even in the smallest and most corrupt form... their appetite for more becomes insatiable.

Thats fine Brother

But not my Tax dollars $$$$$

And not my kids

Just asking too much *

Especially with the very Bad track record you have,

" American No Longer Trusts You " :nuts:
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top