General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe president does not
The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Damn, more wars. I hate this shit....
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)to all war
some are necessary like ww2 was but I like to have actual evidence from believable sources
I like it when the people we are killing in one country are not the same ones we are arming in another
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)knows about the rules for presidents
progressoid
(49,978 posts)That whole constitution thingy isn't really paid attention to anymore.
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)what they said about the constitution before they swore to defend and protect it
bobduca
(1,763 posts)progressoid
(49,978 posts)Somehow I don't think either will be applicable in this case.
bobduca
(1,763 posts)a constitutional scholar to ignore the fourth ammendment,
and a nobel peace prize winner to start a new Middle Eastern war of choice!
NOTE: Up is down.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)It was used by Carter to attempt to rescue the hostags, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama. It is a matter of law and Constitutional until the SCOTUS decides differently. The President in abasence of a declaration of war can comit U.S. forces to a conflict as long as he follows the rules for conslutling with Congress.
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)been consulted about Syria?
guess I missed that
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)President Pro tempore of the Senate. Those are name individuals.
(It should be noted that President Nixon vetoed this bill as an unconstitutional grab of the power of the Commander and Chief. It was passed over his Veto by Democrats in the House and Senate as a way to limit Executive power.)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1544
As its says below, "In the Absece of a decleaation of war."
or the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1544
In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced
(1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;
(2) into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or
(3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation;
the President shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth
(A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces;
(B) the constitutional and legislative authority under which such introduction took place; and
(C) the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.
(b) Other information reported
The President shall provide such other information as the Congress may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United States Armed Forces abroad.
(c) Periodic reports; semiannual requirement
Whenever United States Armed Forces are introduced into hostilities or into any situation described in subsection (a) of this section, the President shall, so long as such armed forces continue to be engaged in such hostilities or situation, report to the Congress periodically on the status of such hostilities or situation as well as on the scope and duration of such hostilities or situation, but in no event shall he report to the Congress less often than once every six months.
LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)and Bob Corker, a ranking Republican, says so:
http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2013/08/27/bob-corker-syria
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)pkdu
(3,977 posts)Apparently no one watch the vid or did but didn't have the balls to rebutt.
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)officials would agree with my OP
or not
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)threat to the US.
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)waiting for since 2009
kenny blankenship
(15,689 posts)That statement is on par with Rumsfeld's location for Iraq's WMDs : "We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat. ...."
and maybe they're up your ass somewhat, Donald. Just poke around to the east, west, south and north and you can't miss.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)And I sure wish the vicissitudes of time had not removed Helen Thomas from her position in the WH Press room.
I betcha she would have made Jay Carney squirm.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)just like they pretend that corporations are people and cutting the top 1%s taxes creates jobs.
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)know they are pretending is it still pretending?
daleanime
(17,796 posts)no one has to believe it.
dawg
(10,624 posts)war powers. It's unfortunate, but it has been their policy for quite a long time now.
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)followed then how is the result constitutional?
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)I wonder who used to talk this way?
He was a tall fellow, good looking.