KDPPatsfan85

“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” --Barack Obama (Dec. 20, 2007)


Candidate Obama vs. President Obama On The Use Of Military Force

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

IcyPatriot

Yeah ... Barry talks out his butt ... it's how he got elected.

sold pot and yayo from a cart now he is authorizing military strikes ... amazing.

KDPPatsfan85

Yep authorizing strikes without congressional approval!! Why isnt this usurper taken out of office yet?

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

chicowalker

Congressional approval wasn't required. Think Grenada.

(By the way, you're a couple days behind...)

Real World

Why isn't it required? Everything I'm reading is stating otherwise. I'm actually curious what the real deal is. Can he do this, or is what he's doing unconstitutional?


I guess the second question would be how he could say that in 2007, and then not approach congress on this matter.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

chicowalker

Oh, it's completely hypocritical.

War Powers Act only requires "consultation" with Congress and notification within 48 hours.

Harry Boy

He's killing people just like Bush did.

NOBEL PEACE PRIZE---

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself

PatsFanInVa

1) Yes, hypocritical.

2) No, not illegal.

3) No, not Bush.

Home and Away: Iraq and Afghanistan War Casualties - CNN.com
U.S. service members dead in wars initiated by GW Bush

Study: War blamed for 655,000 Iraqi deaths - CNN
One estimate of civilian deaths in Iraq. They're all far higher than the miitary deaths, whichever estimate you choose. And please don't complain that they killed each other -- these are deaths that would not have happened without the war.

This is what it is -- air strikes, with international support, at the request of the Arab League.

That don't make it right. But it also ain't the same thing as Bush.

By the way, while we're comparing campaign speeches with military actions...


YouTube - The George Bush You Forgot
"If we're arrogant they'll resent us..."

"I don't want to be the world's policeman. I want to be the world's peace-maker."

"The force must be strong enough, and the exit strategy must be well-defined"

YouTube - Bush: "I'm Running to keep the Peace" - 2000 Election Speech - "Realistic view of the world"
"I'm running to keep the peace... I want the moms and dads and grandparents to hear this loud and clear... I will do everything in my power to make the world a more peaceful place."

(standard peace-through-war backflip, winding up with...)

"In order to keep the peace we must rebuild the military power of the United States of America..." how'd that work out?

Guess what boys and girls... candidates like peace. Presidents like war. Thus far, given the kinds of war available, I'm not giving Obama low marks. I would prefer a raving hippie sometimes, with little use for foreign wars... but even the hippie side of me says "okay -- in a humanitarian intervention where you get in and get out, there's at least a leg to stand on." 8 years for a manufactured package of lies, like Iraq? All those dead sons, daughters, buddies, for a cynical neoclown ideology? Not so much.

With a Pubbie in the white house, people seem to say "Aha! Finally America can have some more peace through war, screw this restraint stuff!" And the deaths come in the thousands, the tens of thousands, the hundreds of thousands.

With a Dem, it's "why didn't you intervene? Why didn't you intervene MORE? Why did you intervene? Why didn't you intervene LESS?"

Not a goddam one of you guys can say you wouldn't be b1tching and moaning if the U.S. sat out the Libya action and let it be handled entirely by the Brits and the French. It's automatic opposition, not considered policy disagreement. That goes for the big-name clowns too (the Boehners of the world.)

PFnV

Harry Boy

When George Bush did the exact same thing in Iraq, with similar international support to topple the brutal dictator Saddam Hussein - who had slaughtered hundreds of thousands of his own people, thrown human beings off rooftops, laughed as his demented sons (tootie and frootie) raped and sodimized women and children, over the years - the leftist lunatics of America were screaming in the streets.

Now all we hear is silence...

Barack Hussein Obama is nothing but a back alley chicago politician who talks pretty and was elected by a Racist Majority of slobbering fawning fools.

MICHAEL MOORE FINALLY SAID SOMETHING WORTH LISTENING TO THIS WEEK WHEN HE SAID,
"PRESIDENT OBAMA, RETURN YOUR NOBEL PEACE PRIZE"

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself

The Brandon Five

On the humanitarian angle, this also sends a message to the Saudi, Yemeni, Syrian and Bahraini governments: don't shoot protesters or we have to open a can of whoop-*****.