ForCruxSake wrote:ForCruxSake wrote:vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
He might have got the congress vote, but he didn't need it.
That's utter nonsense.
Can you provide any instance where that has been true?
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Vietnam. Korea. You are such a moron. Was war ever declared on Iraq??
All were ratified by congress. Look up the Iraq Resolution: it was congress who authorised military action against Iraq, without which the president would not have been able to act, you moron.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:And assuming the rest of the world has heard of your dubious 'celebrities' lends itself to the distinct impression that you are not the intellectual giant you proclaim yourself to be. You call me an idiot, then copy something off a website that confirms what I wrote
Googling something is hardly a sign of high intelligence. It's also pretty pathetic to claim a lack of intelligence for the reason why someone might not be an expert on the fine details of American congressional laws and amendments. What a dickhead
You seem to be vomiting words. It's actually tiring and pointless wading through your personal rants, which you seem incapable of posting without.
Checking facts online is much more responsible than pulling facts out of your arse. I'm not sure where I am supposed to have agreed with you, I just see word vomit that says I did. BACK IT UP, YOU IDIOT,
I think we're done here unless you actually have a point you can make that you can prove, without you having to resort to a personal attack. I've already wasted enough of a day on your appalling ability to argue.
And where are YOU pulling your 'facts' out of? Honestly, the subject of American constitutional law is of less than nought interest to me, but you are such a smug know-it-all and you seem to be looking for a fight. Funny how you 'know' definitively exactly what powers the President does or doesn't have, yet lawyers, congress, and the even Presidents themselves don't know.
'After the Vietnam War, the War Powers Resolution of 1973 was passed as an effort to limit the President's power. However, the bill actually increased the President's ability to use the military in a variety of situations without asking for Congressional approval.
According to the War Powers Resolution, the President must notify Congress within 48 hours of sending military forces into action. Armed forces can stay engaged for no more than 60 days, with an additional 30 day withdrawal period unless there is a formal Congressional authorization of military force or a declaration of war.
Hmm, nothing there that forbids the President from sending military forces without congress approval. All I said was that Bush didn't need congress' approval to attack Iraq (note:he didn't declare war), and you jump up and down poohing your nappy shouting 'look at me. I'm clever. I'm a great debater.'
Declaring War
The United States has not formally declared war since World War II. Under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress has sole power "to declare war [and] grant letters of marque and reprisal." But Article II, Section 2 provides that "The president shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States." While it's clear that the Framers intended for Congress alone to declare war, presidents don't always check with Congress before acting. After President Harry Truman bypassed Congress to go to war in Korea, presidents have paid almost no attention to the constitutional requirements.
From NBC’s Ali Weinberg
President Harry Truman’s decision in 1950 to order U.S. air and naval forces into Korea has been cited as a precedent for a president initiating overseas military action without first seeking Congressional authorization.
But Congress didn’t exactly go along.
Some members did, in fact, accuse Truman of usurping the powers of the legislative branch, in very similar ways that President Obama’s decision to authorize air strikes against Libya has been met with Congressional criticism.
Truman’s administration justified the strike by saying the United Nations Security Council had recommended all members of the U.N. to “furnish such assistance to the Republic of Korea as may be necessary to repeal the armed attack and to restore international peace and security in the area.”
Truman cited the resolution in a statement to the public explaining his decision on June 27, 1950:
In Korea the Government forces, which were armed to prevent border raids and to preserve internal security, were attacked by invading forces from North Korea. The Security Council of the United Nations called upon the invading troops to cease hostilities and to withdraw to the Thirty-eighth Parallel. This they have not done, but on the contrary have pressed the attack. The Security Council called upon all members of the United Nations to render every assistance to the United Nations in the execution of this resolution.
In these circumstances I have ordered United States air and sea forces to give the Korean Government troops cover and support.
While Congress overall seemed to support the merits of the announcement (and, in fact, according to a New York Times article from June 27, 1950, many cheered it in the House of Representatives), some members said it was an example of overreach by the executive branch.
From the same Times article:
The most outspoken objection to the Chief Executive’s course was expressed by Representative Vito Marcantonio, American Labor party, of New York, who charged that Mr. Truman had usurped the powers of Congress by declaring war against North Korea.
He said the President’s action was “a disastrous course” – one that might bring “disastrous consequences on the people of the United States unless checked by the people themselves.”
“For all purposes, he declared, “we are at war with the Northern Government of Korea and we might as well face it.”
In fact, other objections pertained to the very role of the United Nations Security Council (which had been formed just five years before in 1945) in declaring military actions, and whether it alone should serve as sufficient authorization for the U.S. to become involved in fighting.
Senator Arthur V. Watkins, Republican of Utah, asked Mr. Lucas [who read the statement in the Senate] whether the President should not have consulted with Congress before ordering the Navy and the Air Force to support the South Koreans.
“It is a serious emergency, and I am taking that into consideration,” he told Mr. Lucas. “But does the Senator consider the action taken justified by the fact that we have ratified the United Nations pact and have become a member of it; and if a request is made by the United Nations through the Security Council, to send support, whether the President would be justified by that alone, in sending support which might result in a war?”