Obama needs Congressional Approval. Or Doesn't.

[Crackerjaxon]

The Commander in Chief is under no obligation to consult Congress on an air strike. It ties the hands of future presidents

Most of all.......why would anyone consult THIS Congress on anything?
They have shown themselves incapable of acting in the best interests of the American people

please explain how killing people in Syria is in the best interests of the american people.

explain how spending 500 million dollars on missles to blow up buildings in syria is in the best interests of america.

I didn't say it was

This thread is on whether the Presinent/Commander in chief has the authority

Plainly, he does not.

War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548)[1] is a federal law intended to check the president's power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

 

[R.C. Christian]

Obama is going to do whatever Obama wants. To be more specific, what the neocon's in his state department, national defense team headed by the warmongeing bitch Susan Rice, and the all powerful Jewish lobby tell him to do. He didn't get to play puppet because he believes in the constitution. This silly ask congress thing is just a dog an pony show and if it goes south, and it will, then he'll be insulated from the backlash a bit.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Apparently if Obama had any respect for Congress like he all of a sudden does now, you would think he would propose bills instead of issuing executive orders, correct?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

No one is even wondering about what would happen if he asks for approval and doesn't get it. He can't go back and say he never needed it to begin with so a no vote is meaningless. He will have a specific prohibition.

Ordering a strike would be a criminal act.

Why would it be criminal for Obama to do it?

Was it criminal when Reagan or Clinton did it?

it is crimunal for all of them. including lincoln. that tyrannical pos set the precedent. the legislative branch aint shit.
apparently all we need is the executive.. IE dictatorship

so?

You wanna change the Constitution?

 

[The Rabbi]

Apparently if Obama had any respect for Congress like he all of a sudden does now, you would think he would propose bills instead of issuing executive orders, correct?

Excellent point. Additionally, what happened to the "obstructionist Republicans" who blocked all of Obama's agenda? They are the ones supporting him here. It is the Democrats he has trouble with.
Further, why is he doing this at all?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The Commander in Chief is under no obligation to consult Congress on an air strike. It ties the hands of future presidents

Most of all.......why would anyone consult THIS Congress on anything?
They have shown themselves incapable of acting in the best interests of the American people

please explain how killing people in Syria is in the best interests of the american people.

explain how spending 500 million dollars on missles to blow up buildings in syria is in the best interests of america.

I didn't say it was

This thread is on whether the Presinent/Commander in chief has the authority

And -- he does not.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Apparently if Obama had any respect for Congress like he all of a sudden does now, you would think he would propose bills instead of issuing executive orders, correct?

Excellent point. Additionally, what happened to the "obstructionist Republicans" who blocked all of Obama's agenda? They are the ones supporting him here. It is the Democrats he has trouble with.
Further, why is he doing this at all?

He is doing this to save face from running his mouth last year. He has to do this because he drew a red line for himself. Frankly on this one issue, I wish everyone would play the obstructionist here. EVERYONE.

 

[The Rabbi]

Apparently if Obama had any respect for Congress like he all of a sudden does now, you would think he would propose bills instead of issuing executive orders, correct?

Excellent point. Additionally, what happened to the "obstructionist Republicans" who blocked all of Obama's agenda? They are the ones supporting him here. It is the Democrats he has trouble with.
Further, why is he doing this at all?

He is doing this to save face from running his mouth last year. He has to do this because he drew a red line for himself. Frankly on this one issue, I wish everyone would play the obstructionist here. EVERYONE.

No! I think they ought to approve whatever he wants them to approve. And when it falls flat, he owns it.
Today the line is, "I did not have political relations with that red line." He is a joke.

 

[rightwinger]

please explain how killing people in Syria is in the best interests of the american people.

explain how spending 500 million dollars on missles to blow up buildings in syria is in the best interests of america.

I didn't say it was

This thread is on whether the Presinent/Commander in chief has the authority

Plainly, he does not.

War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548)[1] is a federal law intended to check the president's power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

Why did you edit out the part that says he does?

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.

 

[TooTall]

Obama has all the power he needs to order a strike in Syria. Reagan ordered an invasion in Granada and notified Congress like 2 days prior. GHW Bush invaded Panama and notified Congress a few days earlier. Obama could certainly order strikes on Syria without Congressional approval.

So the question is, Why all this business about consulting Congress? He either can or he can't do it. If he can do it, why get a vote? If the vote is no and he does it anyway, what was the purpose of the vote?

The whole thing makes him look weak and incompetent and makes any action we actually take nugatory.

My rather faulty memory says that Reagan went into Granada to rescue some American college students and to stop the construction of a 12,000 foot runway that was being built by and was supposedly going to be used the Soviets to bomb Central American nations. And, eventually the US.

I don't recall why GHW Bush went into Panama, but the closure of the Panama Canal would be catastrophic to the US as well as most of the free world.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama has all the power he needs to order a strike in Syria. Reagan ordered an invasion in Granada and notified Congress like 2 days prior. GHW Bush invaded Panama and notified Congress a few days earlier. Obama could certainly order strikes on Syria without Congressional approval.

So the question is, Why all this business about consulting Congress? He either can or he can't do it. If he can do it, why get a vote? If the vote is no and he does it anyway, what was the purpose of the vote?

The whole thing makes him look weak and incompetent and makes any action we actually take nugatory.

My rather faulty memory says that Reagan went into Granada to rescue some American college students and to stop the construction of a 12,000 foot runway that was being built by and was supposedly going to be used the Soviets to bomb Central American nations. And, eventually the US.

I don't recall why GHW Bush went into Panama, but the closure of the Panama Canal would be catastrophic to the US as well as most of the free world.

Granada had a pro soviet gov't. The students were secondary. They were certainly not under any immediate threat, as they were paying tuition etc.
In Panama, Noriega was runnign drugs and was tried and convicted in absentia. Bush went to collect the prisoner (who was released a couple of months ago btw).
Clinton also ordered bombing in Serbia without authorization.
There is a long history of deferring to the president as CinC in short limited engagements.

I'll mention Sen Barack Obama opposed all of Bush's actions always and everywhere. Good thing Pres Barack Obama doesn't have a Senator Bush to contend with.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I didn't say it was

This thread is on whether the Presinent/Commander in chief has the authority

Plainly, he does not.

War Powers Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548)[1] is a federal law intended to check the president's power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

Why did you edit out the part that says he does?

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.

Why do YOU pretend that it purports to give him any such "authority" EXCEPT under the limited circumstances it sets forth?

Are any of the circumstances present?

Answer: obviously not. Thus, it gives the President no authority to do diddly dick. Not for 60 days nor for 60 nanoseconds.

Not at all.