This Message Not Approved by the NSA
Posted on 08/27/2013 9:20:24 AM PDT by Para-Ord.45
obama:
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.
As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.
As for the specific question about bombing suspected nuclear sites, I recently introduced S.J. Res. 23, which states in part that “any offensive military action taken by the United States against Iran must be explicitly authorized by Congress.” The recent NIE tells us that Iran in 2003 halted its effort to design a nuclear weapon. While this does not mean that Iran is no longer a threat to the United States or its allies, it does give us time to conduct aggressive and principled personal diplomacy aimed at preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Don`t worry,Boehner and the leftist GOP are drawing up article of Impeachment right now if obama pearl harbours Syria/sarc off
Liberal hypocrites have to literally kill off conservatives because they can’t stand it when they’re reminded of their own inherent hypocrisy. After all the MSM never shows them their own double standards, they can’t abide by anyone showing their own words and actions condemn what they’re doing and saying now.
According to Liberal “Logic,” the military cannot go into an unfunded war, either. I would expect that any moment now, Obama will announce that taxes have to be raised, in order to support any such activity with Syria.
Waiting for condemnation from Hollywood in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1......hello? Hollywood? What about Bruce Springsteen? Surely you oppose this, dedicate a song in concert against Obama? Somebody????
Baba Obama won’t be going to war alone. China and Russia will go there with him.
I wonder who wrote that for him.
The debate over this issue began during the drafting and ratification process of the Constitution. The briefest explanation of Presidential plenary powers can be expressed as the President has the authority to engage in war, but not to declare war. This has very significant implications in the application of maritime law as regards seizing of merchant vessels, disposition of prizes, issuance of letters of marque, etc. It does not have much to say about the President’s authority as Commander in Chief.
See this (from the Bush Administration):
http://www.justice.gov/olc/warpowers925.htm
George Washington: “The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.”
Thomas Jefferson”Considering that Congress alone is constitutionally invested with the power of changing our condition from peace to war, I have thought it my duty to await their authority for using force IN ANY DEGREE which could be avoided.”
LA TIMES :
After Caroline Krass, acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, advised Obama that he should comply with the law, the president sought legal advice elsewhere, in an attempt to find some that was more to his liking.
White House counsel Robert Bauer came through, issuing an opinion that the missiles we had been raining on Libya did not constitute “hostilities” as envisioned under the act. The president chose Bauer’s opinion over Krass’.
Thomas Jefferson”Considering that Congress alone is constitutionally invested with the power of changing our condition from peace to war, I have thought it my duty to await their authority for using force IN ANY DEGREE which could be avoided.”
Washington caveated the restrictions on the executive: No offensive expedition of importance. Presumably, he reserved to himself the determination of what was important.
Jefferson engaged in a war on the Barbary Pirates without a declaration of war from Congress, apparently he thought that such action could not be avoided.
Most Presidents have behaved in a very similar fashion - they took action when they thought best to do so, either with or without the sanction of Congress according to the political circumstances that prevailed at the time.
Jefferson did not use a declaration of war because the Barbary Pirates were not a sovereign entity. He instead used a congressional declaration authorizing the use of force.
The declaration authoring the use of force after 9/11 against al-Quaida was closely based on Jefferson's and Congress' declaration of 1803.
The stature that Jefferson initially used was that of 3 March 1801 authorizing a peacetime naval establishment. Jefferson used that language to dispatch a squadron to the Mediterranean for defensive purposes. He then asked Congress for authority to conduct offensive operations which they granted. He held a view that the President was entitled to take defensive actions on his own authority.
The Barbary powers attacked American civilian and commercial merchant ships wherever they found them. In one single month Algiers seized 10 ships and made slaves of the sailors.
Your proof that American ships are being seized and prisoners taken by Assad of Syria ?
Obama/Soetoro is launching an illagal act of war, if not voted on by Congress, nearly identical in nature to Japan at Pearl Harbour.
That's not the question, is it. All Presidents, to one degree or another, and for one circumstance or another, have asserted their authority as Commander in Chief to employ the Armed Forces of the United States without Congressional approval. Many did like Jefferson did, deploy the Armed Forces, and then ask for Congressional action to authorize offensive operations.
Obama is no different from the others in that regard. But, very few, if any of our other Presidents have so brazenly ignored the laws of this country, ignored the will and authority of Congress, and ignored the will of the people. Since we have done nothing to stop his previous illegal acts, why should he think that anyone is going to stand in his way now?
You cite Pearl Harbor. That was the last time that the United States has declared war, 72 years and many wars ago.
No, it is the question since you tried to claim Jefferson was acting unilaterally in a manner identical to obama/soetoro.
Before there was any war Congress authorized American diplomats John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson to negotiate with the Barbary States. Treaties were signed.
Eventually Tripoli declared war on the USA.
So your deflection from the facts and that obama/soetoro is acting as a tyrant with no national interests at stake indicate a personal opinion and not an objective one.
Done.
Hardly, especially since Obama has yet to act. My point was that many Presidents have ordered military action without Congressional approval, but I do apologize to those readers who have problems comprehending English.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
