Posted on 11/26/2017 5:31:55 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Alarmed by President Donald Trump’s bellicose statements and impulsive governing style, two congressional Democrats introduced legislation that would prohibit the president — any president — from launching a nuclear first strike without a declaration of war by Congress explicitly endorsing such an attack.
In seeking to restrict the president’s authority to launch a first strike, the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act of 2017 proposed by Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Rep. Ted Lieu of Torrance cites Congress’ authority under the Constitution to declare war. The legislation says the Framers understood “the monumental decision to go to war … must be made by the representatives of the people and not by a single person.”
The problem is that Congress’ authority to declare war has always been in tension with the Constitution’s designation of the president as commander in chief, a role that sometimes requires the president to act swiftly to defend the nation. The nuclear age further complicated the relationship between the two branches because decisions about launching a nuclear attack might have to be made under severe time pressure.
A main concern about this bill is that it would make it harder for a president not just to use nuclear weapons but also deter aggression by leaving adversaries in doubt about whether and when such weapons might be used. This ambiguity is part of the paradoxical policy of nuclear deterrence that traces back to the Cold War era....
(Excerpt) Read more at hawaiitribune-herald.com ...
Now they’re “alarmed”. I don’t recall them ever being “alarmed” when the employee of the Muslim brotherhood was releasing 200 Jihadis from Gitmo over 8 years, or importing MS-13 gang members - the ISIS of South America - into the USA.
I better get to work on my bomb shelter right away.
Yes, and it would have been so much better with President Abedin having access to the nuclear code, eh?
Why even have a CINC then? Can you imagine a war that couldn’t be initiated until Congress decided it was OK? They would be rounded up by the conquering enemy even as they sat arguing about whether or not it was OK to fight and what restrictions could be put on us to insure the enemy was treated fairly and with respect....
Now they want to rewrite the constitution... again.
Hillary would sleep right through a nuke attack on the US if it happened after Tiddly time.
Or the pallets of cold cash delivered free of change to Iran.
“Hillary would sleep right through a nuke attack on the US if it happened after Tiddly time.”
Hopefully, Huma would have woke her up...
That’s be harder than waking a snoring bear : )
Can you imagine the chaos that would happen if such a restriction were to be placed on ANY POTUS while waiting for those “do nothings” to debate the next action?
They know that their ‘legislation’ will not go anywhere. That is not their intent. Their intent is to sow doubt among the people who need to carry out Trump’s orders...so maybe they don’t do as told.
Sounds a lot like TREASON, at least to me.
If it ever got to the point where any POTUS was considering a launch there is a good chance that the swamp had been or was about to be vaporized. Then who would authorize the launch?
I know what you are saying, but the Constitution reserves the right to declare war to the Congress. Congress chose to abdicate their authority through the War Powers Act.
No problem with the a##hat having this power yet trump comes in and they have a problem
What these a$$holes don’t get is that bellicose posturing is done to avoid war. Just observe male moose and how they try to intimidate the other, rather than actually fight.
His ability can’t be limited. The President is commander
.
A president developed and approved the current procedure The current president can abolish or modify but likely will not without the advise of his military
It’s not a good idea for anyone to be able to authorize a nuclear first strike. The reason the President always has ready access to the nuke codes is to be able to retaliate in case of a surprise attack or if missiles/bombers are inbound. Perhaps a majority vote of a panel of carefully selected advisors. Even so I certainly wouldn’t put that decision in the hands of Congress.
The military has enough problems with one commander in chief. Imagine what it would be like with 435.
- Mr. President! We have confirmeation that Iran has launched 24 nuclear armed ICBM's at the US.
- How much time do we have before they arrive?
- We have less than 30 minutes to retaliate sir.
- Better call congress into session and get a declaration of war.
- Congress is on break - everyone is away on vacation.
- Hmmm.....
- What do we do now sir?
- Okay - Bend over, stick your head between your legs and kiss your butt goodbye.
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.