Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jwalsh07

I don’t understand how you can say that. OF course it is...not head chopping here, just stating facts. He did not follow the war resolutions. There has to be an attack on the U.S., Statute passed by congress, or a War Declaration.....none of those apply. UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Am I missing something?


629 posted on 03/28/2011 9:16:23 PM PDT by DrewsMum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 422 | View Replies ]


To: DrewsMum; DBeers
I say it because it is the law of the land. This is what Congress said in the War Powers Act of 1973:

Sec. 5 (c) Notwithstanding subsection (b), at any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.

This section is a tacit admission that the POTUS has the power to use military force without a congressional resolution or declaration of war.

Now that says nothing about Odipsticks wisdom or hypocrisy but it is the law of the land.

Congress has the power to pass a law tomorrow and shut him down and they should.

Hopefully though after we kill Ghadaffi since we owe him some 5.56 in the head for past deeds.

635 posted on 03/28/2011 10:29:00 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 629 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson