Al-Qaeda leaders admit: 'We are in crisis. There is panic and fear'

[Psycho4Bud]

Congress, not congress giving Bushy Jr. permission, but Congress itself must declare war.

The correct term is "police actions"

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002
GovTrack: H. J. Res. 114 [107th]: Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Vote On Passage)

If you want to consider this a Police Action....great.

Have a good one!:s4:

[melodious fellow]

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002
GovTrack: H. J. Res. 114 [107th]: Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Vote On Passage)

Yes, the president has command over the armed forces and can deploy them to Iraq is he chooses. So yes, he has the authorization for use of military force against Iraq or anyone else he chooses.

That however, is not a declaration of war. That is all I was asserting. Ron Paul discussed this and put the term "police actions" one some of his brochures.

[melodious fellow]

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the United States Constitution, sometimes referred to as the War Powers Clause, vests in the Congress the exclusive power to declare war, in the following wording:

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

Five wars have been declared in American history: the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, World War I and World War II.


American presidents often have not sought formal declarations of war, instead maintaining that they have the constitutional authority, as commander in chief (Article Two, Section Two) to use the military for "police actions".:admin1::chainsaw::rambo::s4::gunfighter2 ::gunfighter2:

In 1973, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution, which requires the president to obtain either a declaration of war or a resolution authorizing the use of force from Congress within 60 days of initiating hostilities. Its constitutionality has never settled, and presidents both Democratic and Republican have repeatedly either ignored or criticised it as an unconstitutional encroachment upon the President.

Since World War II, Congress has formally authorized all the major military engagements that the US has undertaken. (Vietnam, Lebanon, Panama, Persian Gulf War, Afghanistan, and Iraq.)

Some legal scholars maintain that all military action taken without a Congressional declaration of war (regardless of the War Powers Resolution) is unconstitutional; however, the Supreme Court has never ruled directly on the matter.

War Powers Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Because checks and balances do not exist. The Supreme Court will not rule on the matter because they are appointed by the same idiots who engage in these police actions.

[Psycho4Bud]

So Congress knew exactly what they were authorizing when they passed that bill. Ya have to remember, even before the Bush terms these same dems in congress were on record stating that Sadamm was a threat with intentions on getting WMD's.

Back to the thread.....it's good to hear that we have these assclowns on the path defeat.:thumbsup:

Have a good one!:s4:

[88888888]

why put this stuff on cannabis.com lets talk about weed not war!

[rascleattop]

psycho4bud as i read this entire thread you continuously took every word out of my mouth - i agree with everything you say! great find.

[ijustloveweed]

this is why im going to go start a new civilization on another planet soon, i need some women so sign up

[human8]

I was born in 'meriKa, land of cheesy GIF animation.

[Rusty Trichome]

why put this stuff on cannabis.com lets talk about weed not war!

Why not discuss current issues here? Would definatelly be inappropriate to be discussing ranching or sports in this forum.
(unless it was to highlight R. Pauls amorous encounters with small farm animals, or Billary's new hobby: Whitewater rafting in a blue dress) :jointsmile:

Simply put...this is where the big girls and boys meet, to stress about semantics.

[psteve]

Ya have to remember, even before the Bush terms these same dems in congress were on record stating that Sadamm was a threat with intentions on getting WMD's.

Yeah, based on good ol' Bush brand (tm) 'intelligence'.
Don't forget that the CIA was already in Bush's pocket BEFORE he was elected.