Skip to comments.Fox News Fossil John Bolton: President Wages War While Congress Just Declares War
Posted on 09/01/2013 11:31:51 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
I was watching Fox News last night, and John Bolton (R-GOP-e) was asked to give a reply to a previously recorded clip from Rand Paul, and Bolton seemed to be acting as if the president (Obama) is the one who gets to wage war, while Congress just gets to merely declare and/or authorize it.
As if the president (be it Nixon, GHWB, or Clinton) sits on the throne and Congress' job is to merely place the crown on their heads and the scepter in their hands.
Once again, it seems as if another Republican goes to bat for Obama (like McCain and Grahamnesty do ad infinitum) when it comes to military matters. Like I have said, where have the Dems been? Why is it these two stooges (McCain, Graham) who keep traveling to the Middle East doing Obama's bidding?
And today on Fox-e News Sunday with Chris Wallace there -behold - was the all star lineup of Joe Lieberman, and the rest of the panel (Gen. Jack Keane, Jennifer Rubin and Charles Lane) with Lane being the only one who appeared to not be beating the war drums to the point where holes busted in them.
And on MSDNC-e, there he was, mega war hawk Bill Kristol, with pro-Obama Robert Gibby Gibbs in tow, and the rest doing the basic head nod.
In the end, if Congress says no, it's no. Period.
The Dems in the Senate are probably going to betray the majority of Democrat voters and just rubber stamp Obama's wishes, but it remains to be seen what Republicans do in the House of Reps...
What say you?
The fix is in, Obama is going to get his war.
If he wants to command them against a sovereign state recognized by the US as legitimate, then Congress has to declare a state of war.
Otherwise, the President is in charge of the armed forces as long as Congress decides to keep paying for them.
I disagree that Bolton is GOP-e - as the author says. He may be in agreement with the GOP e in this particular case, but that’ a bit of a gratuitious swipe at a guy not afraid to call it the way he sees it.
oh, and since the author is you...maybe explain the needless “fossil” comment too. Bolton may be wrong on this ,but he’s one of the good guys for the most part.
Only statists and liberty loving americans.
First of all John Bolton is hardly an establishment republican.
Second, what he said is precisely what the Constitution provides. Congress, and only Congress, can declare war. The Congress can put whatever limitations they want on their declaration. The POTUS, as the CIC, is responsible for the conduct of the war.
There is the War Powers act (of dubious Constitutionality), in which the Congress has given its right to declare war to the POTUS in certain cases and with some restrictions and reporting requirements. It does not apply to Syria.
If Congress refuses to declare war, and Obama proceeds with an attack on Syria, then Obama is exceeding the powers granted to him.
Are you under the belief that it is the role of Congress to both declare AND conduct war?
The American people voted to give Obama the keys to the kingdom,so stop the complaining,he obviously is so far above the rest of the world,according to Valerie Jarrett,that he can foresee the future,just have faith FOLKS,stop the obstructions and let the man rule.After all what could possibly go wrong,our country will be stronger,more respected,and most important of all FEARED.They will all understand there is a LUNATIC in the White House
I disagree with Bolton on this issue, but I would never call him derisive names such as “fossil” as I personally admire the man. Bolton is no fossil.
“What say you?”
I say you are wrong. Bolton was right - congress can “declare” war but they don’t direct the troops - the Commander in Chief “wages” the war.
I heard Bolton this morning and he thinks war with Syria is misplaced, Hussein shouldn’t do it and that the problem is Iran, not Syria, but Hussein won’t take on Iran. He is right.
Lotta people on this forum think he's a tuff guy but all I see is a blustering loudmouth, always spoiling for a fight in some irrelevant buttsore of a country, probably where one of his friends owns a ranch.
Only the Congress has the power to declare war. That was put in the Constitution by men who knew that Kings were always looking to use the citizenry as fodder for some fight that would benefit the King and his buddies. Those who don't want to be fodder are supposedly represented in the Congress. Thus the requirement.
The War Powers Act of 1973 codifies what the President can do without Congress. It is power they ceded to him to be practical - things happen that supposedly just can't wait. But this one can.
I agree. Bolton is someone I'd like to see in the government rather than out of it (there's not many people I can say that about).
SecState? Possibly. At least he tells it like it is; you know where he stands, unlike the current wiffle-waffles in the Oval Office and the State Dpt.
Tell me how he is in the mold of Palin, Rand Paul, Lee and Cruz - what this country needs.
War Powers Resolution 1973 gives presidents some lee way
Is Bolton in the mold of what this country needs - someone like Palin, Cruz, Lee and Rand Paul?
Bolton is a war hawk. He will always be in favor of demonstrating America’s status as a super-power. He, Cheney, and others do not believe the War Powers Act is constitutional. They believe the POTUS, whomever it is, as CIC, has the power to direct the use of force by the American military for a short period of time without authorization from Congress. (i.e. a stong Executive)
. for later...
What Bolton doesn’t seem to realize is that the Arabs as a race are still hundred of years behind the Europeans. Simply stated, what works in Europe will not work there.
I say that your vanity is worthless name-calling.
No kidding; with B. Hussein O.'s propensity to enact Executive Orders, why even consult Congress?
Why even have a Congress - just let them sit in their little chairs and Big Daddy (and Valerie Jarrett) will shoot a few EO's out there and his job is done.
Then, if it goes south, blame the Congress for not stopping him, as if they had any power/will to stop an EO.
Laissez-faire capitalist --->.
Love your name!
It is better for everyone when he IS on vacation. He doesn't have the ability to lead troops to success.
His background in COMMUNITY ORGANIZING is not enough for him to wage war.
He is a simpleton who just might get us in war in order to ease his EGO.
PRAYING FOR NO WAR.
B. Hussein O. doesn't know what he is doing. He is willing to go unilaterally. Maybe he thought it was so easy when GWB got a coalition going. Instead, every one seems to back off from him.
Where is his international support?
By the way this is not Obama's first military strike without Congress declaring war. He sent planes to bomb Libya.
There have been 11 Declarations of War by Congress, 2 were issued at the start and during WWI, and 6 were issued at the start of and during WWII, for a total of 5 wars.
Declaration of War with Great Britain, 1812
On June 17, 1812, Congress approved a resolution declaring war with Great Britain. The Senate approved the resolution by a vote of 19-13.
Declaration of War with Mexico, 1846
On May 12, 1846, Congress approved a resolution declaring war with Mexico. The Senate approved the resolution by a vote of 40-2.
Declaration of War with Spain, 1898
On April 25, 1898, Congress approved a resolution declaring war with Spain.
Declaration of War with Germany, 1917
On April 6, 1917, Congress approved a resolution declaring war with Germany. The Senate approved the resolution by a vote of 82-6 on April 4, 1917.
Declaration of War with Austria-Hungary, 1917
On December 7, 1917, Congress approved a resolution declaring war with Austria-Hungary. The Senate unanimously approved the resolution, 74-0.
Declaration of War with Japan, 1941
On December 8, 1941, Congress approved a resolution declaring war with Japan. The Senate unanimously approved the resolution, 82-0.
Declaration of War with Germany, 1941
On December 11, 1941, Congress approved a resolution declaring war with Germany. The Senate unanimously approved the resolution, 88-0.
Declaration of War with Italy, 1941
On December 11, 1941, Congress approved a resolution declaring war with Italy. The Senate unanimously approved the resolution, 90-0.
Declaration of War with Bulgaria, 1942
On June 4, 1942, Congress approved a resolution declaring war with Bulgaria. The Senate unanimously approved the resolution, 73-0.
Declaration of War with Hungary, 1942
On June 4, 1942, the Senate approved a resolution declaring war with Hungary. The Senate unanimously approved the resolution, 73-0.
Declaration of War with Rumania, 1942
On June 4, 1942, the Senate approved a resolution declaring war with Rumania. The Senate unanimously approved the resolution, 73-0.
Like tin soldiers.........
...and Obama's drumming....
You can trust John Bolton on this one, whatever he said. Let me see, your perception about what he said against whatever John Bolton said. Hmm.. You must not have heard right. There. Settled.
What is wrong with these people?
Bolton qas decent for a time.
That’s a straw argument....totally absurd...and refuses to intellectually back up the notion of calling Bolton a fossil of the GOP e......
“If he wants to command them against a sovereign state recognized by the US as legitimate, then Congress has to declare a state of war.”
Here’s my understanding. The president can engage any country for 90 days. By that time Congress must either declare war or back the president. If they don’t he has to stop.
Having said that, I don’t think there’s any mechanism to force the president to stop. Our system worked because all sides obeyed the law and the Constitution. If the president continues and the Senate will not convict on impeachment then I see no way to stop Obama.
The answer is this:
When you have any disagreement with someone, write them off completely and forever.
That way you will be pure.
This is the key to political power, being alone.
Oh, and I can’t be a RINO, I left the R party 6 years ago because it’s not a conservative party anymore. I’m pure and alone and considering my options.
D and R not on the list.
Thanks for link on War Powers Act.
The power to declare war is relevant only in cases of aggressive war. In the 18th century, defensive wars were not declared. Aggressive war is now illegal.
The Constitution is poorly worded. It should have specifically referred to the power to wage war, not merely to declare it.
The Second Amendment should be stripped of its first clause, incidentally.
I happen to think he's right on that point. Obama is no commander-in-chief.
You totally misrepresented the Bolton interview on FoxNews.
Obama already blinked with regard to the War Powers Act. Had he wished to push the limits, he could have gone ahead and attacked and explained later.
But he decided to go ask Congress for support instead. Smart, politically...consider the options:
1. Approval is given. He now can claim bi-partisan support, full compliance with the Constitution, and will still claim credit for a favorable outcome and try to spread the blame around for an unfavorable one.
2. Congress fails to authorize action. Obama’s off the hook and it’s on them. Early tee time?
3. The House and Senate split, and no joint authorization is issued. This too puts Obama off the hook and gives him a perfect platform to blame obstructionalist Republicans.
Add it up, it’s Advantage Obama. The most risky move for him would have been to attack quickly under War Powers authorization, and he’s already backed away from that.
The question now is just how much of a propaganda/PR victory he can achieve out of this.
I think what you mean is that Congress must either declare war or vote to stop funding or continue funding the war.
The Democrats certainly did not back Bush regarding Iraq, but they also did not vote to defund the Iraq operation.
June 10, 2013
He already jumped the shark.
Some people are not smart enough to know what they hear and are already predisposed to not like whomever no matter what they say. The poster of this thread is one of those.
I’ll fix Bolton a swell dinner any day:
Individual Cornish Game Hens with apricot glaze and apricot sauce on the side.
Seasoned Wild rice.
Cold asparagus with honey mustard dressing laced on top.
Bowl of Asian veggies with Bourbon sauce in.
Want to come?
Bolton was once US rep to the United Nations. You do not get in that position unless you are Internationalist and Globalist...which are quite Liberal ideas. You think GW Bush would put in an Americanist?
Unfortunately too many see R next to a name and automatically claim “conservative”
Actually he is right. Congress approves war. The President gives the order to fight.
Obama going to Congress is a gutless move. He wants to hide behind their skirts.
Probably should have replied to you first....
I have no problem with Bolton referred to as GOPe. You do not become US rep to United Nations unless by being a real conservative or Americanist. Not sure why folks think Bolton is conservative...other than he puts an “R” next to his name
Bolton will support Obama on all Internationalist and Globalist intervention
I need to proofread better
I meant “Bolton would not be US rep to UN if he was a real conservative or Americanist”
What an idiotic over generalized statement. We've had good UN Ambassadors before, and for the record, Bolton was attacked by all the liberals when Bush nominated him. Nice try....(actually, not very....)
Bolton’s right. That’s the law of the land, but there’s more ahead of us in the overall situation.
Its been obvious for a long time, that the majority of U.S. constituents with time and money for politics (the more vociferous of the 40 million or so receiving incomes from government) have no will fight foreign enemies. But they have been fantasizing much about exterminating their own neighbors at home. They dont realize that instead of any scenario of an end to the world, their own gluttonous lives are naturally very limited. Vanities...
The President is Commander-In-Chief therefore he wages any war. Only the Congress can declare war the President can’t.