Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 61 to 64 of 64
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,771
    Thanks (Given)
    24063
    Thanks (Received)
    17551
    Likes (Given)
    9786
    Likes (Received)
    6224
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475525

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ConHog View Post
    Oops I forgot about the Mexican-American War actually being a declared war.

    I understand the thought that the POTUS should not have the power to unilaterally send our military into action; but the COTUS in fact does make him the commander in chief, and does not limit military engagements to declared wars only.

    I would concur however that perhaps the Congress should vote on war or not when the POTUS feels military action is justified, but what if just as a political statement they vote no ? Then you have a POTUS who is either cut off at the knees OR you see a POTUS engaging in military action with a public "we do not agree" from Congress.

    I just think it's better the way it is.
    I'll go along with the CIC having the right to call up military response, but that if the response is going to last more than say 90, Congress must approve of that by a declaration. There shouldn't be any increase in funding for military after the 90 days, without said approval.


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kathianne View Post
    I'll go along with the CIC having the right to call up military response, but that if the response is going to last more than say 90, Congress must approve of that by a declaration. There shouldn't be any increase in funding for military after the 90 days, without said approval.
    Agreed 100%. That is the law and it should be followed.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Alwasys pretty close to my mental limit. Or as I also call it, close to South Bend, IN.
    Posts
    891
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    18071

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ConHog View Post
    Oops I forgot about the Mexican-American War actually being a declared war.

    I understand the thought that the POTUS should not have the power to unilaterally send our military into action; but the COTUS in fact does make him the commander in chief, and does not limit military engagements to declared wars only.

    I would concur however that perhaps the Congress should vote on war or not when the POTUS feels military action is justified, but what if just as a political statement they vote no ? Then you have a POTUS who is either cut off at the knees OR you see a POTUS engaging in military action with a public "we do not agree" from Congress.

    I just think it's better the way it is.

    ConHog, you should read "Bomb Power," a book I listed in my Non-Fiction thread. It's entertaining on this issue.
    The specific set of foolish ideas that has laid claim to the name 'supply side economics' is a crank doctrine that would have little influence if it did not appeal to the prejudices of editors and wealthy men" -- Paul Krugman

    You will respect my atoritay!- ConHog aka Cartman

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KartRacerBoy View Post
    ConHog, you should read "Bomb Power," a book I listed in my Non-Fiction thread. It's entertaining on this issue.
    I'll check it out.


    I know my stance here seems to be in conflict with my beliefs in a small federal government , but damn if the US doesn't stand for protecting those who need protection. What does she stand for?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums