Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 97

Thread: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution



    From The Washington Times:

    The Obama administration believes it is above the law. It now openly claims that President Obama can go to war without congressional authorization. This is a flagrant - and dangerous - violation of the Constitution. It is a naked abuse of power. It begs the question: Is this an impeachable offense? A congressional resolution has been introduced to warn that such high crimes and misdemeanors will trigger impeachment proceedings. It’s about time.

    Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta recently gave congressional testimony saying that the United States no longer needs the approval or consent of Congress before launching a major military offensive. In particular, Mr. Panetta - to the amazement of Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican - argued that the administration needs only “international permission” to engage in war. In other words, Mr. Panetta stressed that international approval from the United Nations or NATO trumps the sovereign authority of Congress. The administration is now contemplating whether to topple the brutal regime in Syria or wage devastating airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Mr. Obama seems to view Congress and our system of checks and balances as a nuisance. He is engaged in a massive power grab, behaving more like a Roman emperor unfettered by the will of the people and its duly elected representatives. His worldview is clear - and ominous: America is no longer a self-governing republic, but a supranational state.

    Continued:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    This brazen assault upon congressional constitutional prerogatives has inspired remarkably little resistance. Like ancient Rome, republican institutions are slowly being drained of authority, power flowing to an arrogant, ever-growing leviathan. One congressman, however, finally has drawn a line in the sand. Rep. Walter B. Jones, North Carolina Republican, has issued a resolution stating that should Mr. Obama - or any other president - use offensive military force without prior and clear authorization by Congress, this would constitute an impeachable offense.

    “The issue of presidents taking this country to war without congressional approval is one that I have long been concerned about,” Mr. Jones said. “Just last week, President Obama’s Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta told the United States Senate that he only needed to seek ‘international’ approval prior to initiating yet another war, this time in Syria. Congress would merely need to be ‘informed.’ This action would clearly be a violation of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.”

    He added: “Enough is enough. It is time this country upholds the Constitution and the principles upon which this country was founded.”

    Mr. Jones is a patriot. He is a rare breed in Congress: a conservative constitutionalist who believes in putting America first. He rightly seeks to reimpose constitutional and legal limits upon the president’s ability to make war. Mr. Jones has implemented a trigger mechanism to potentially rein in the lawless, scandal-ridden administration. His resolution enshrines one absolute principle: The Constitution applies to Mr. Obama - as it should to every president.

    Mr. Obama has already pushed the constitutional limits. Take his war in Libya. The decision to overthrow Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi was done without congressional authorization - something President Bush received for his military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Hence, the Libya adventure was arguably unconstitutional. It was a war undertaken without even the legal fig leaf of congressional consent. It violated the War Powers Act, which insists that any military action past 60 days must receive congressional approval. Mr. Obama simply circumvented Congress. His behavior was that of a creeping dictator.

    Moreover, he insisted that the Libya operation was legitimate because it had U.N. approval. Unaccountable international bureaucrats are to have more authority over U.S. armed forces than Congress. Mr. Obama also encoded the pernicious principle of “leading from behind.” In other words, the world’s superpower must engage in national self-abnegation for fear of upsetting Washington’s coalition partners. Instead of leading NATO, Mr. Obama wants America to be subsumed by it. The results of the Libya war were disastrous. Gadhafi’s murderous regime has been replaced by an Islamist Libya. Al Qaeda and the Taliban have infiltrated the country’s military, its large stockpiles of weapons plundered. Shariah law is being imposed. Libya is becoming a hotbed of jihadist radicalism. In other words, Mr. Obama waged an illegal war that ended up empowering America’s mortal enemies. If that is not a “high crime and misdemeanor,” then what is?

    The administration is hoping to entrench the Libya model. This was the purpose of Mr. Panetta’s comments. From now on, Mr. Obama will launch military interventions based on a new doctrine: globalism. He hopes to erect a new world order where international bodies supersede American national sovereignty. U.S. military power is to become a tool of transnational socialists. George Soros is in, George Washington is out.

    It is not just foreign policy. Mr. Obama has repeatedly behaved in an authoritarian, lawless fashion. He abused congressional procedures to ram through Obamacare. He has named numerous policy “czars” with Cabinet-like powers without the Senate’s advice and consent. He has made recess appointments while Congress was not in recess - a blatant transgression of constitutional authority. He has sued states, such as Arizona and Alabama, simply for trying to enforce federal immigration laws, which the president is legally obligated to uphold.

    This is why voters must conduct the ultimate impeachment: Remove him from office in the November election. Until then, should Mr. Obama attempt an October surprise by bombing Syria or Iran in order to cynically win re-election, Mr. Jones has given Republicans the firewall to stop him. We don’t serve the president. He must serve us.
    Obviously the Constitution has been skirted on this issue before, but now a Presidential administration has openly told Congress they'll seek "permission" for war from international institutions rather than Congress, representing the American public. What I find amazing is how both a) the administration has openly stated their intentions and b) impeachment resolution has been introduced, yet there is hardly a whimper in the mainstream media. I suppose a blowjob in the Oval Office is more important to national security...
    Last edited by YukonTrooper; March 18, 2012 at 12:37 AM.
    Once a political decision has been reached to proceed with internal disturbances in Syria, CIA is prepared, and SIS (MI6) will attempt to mount minor sabotage and coup de main [sic] incidents within Syria, working through contacts with individuals. Incidents should not be concentrated in Damascus. [A] necessary degree of fear, [...] frontier incidents and [staged] border clashes [will] provide a pretext for intervention. The CIA and SIS should use [...] capabilities in both psychological and action fields to augment tension. [Funding should be provided for a] Free Syria Committee [and arms should be supplied to] political factions with paramilitary or other actionist capabilities.
    ~ Joint US-UK leaked Intelligence Document, 1957

  2. #2

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment legislation

    The grey area here is that Congress has whole heatedly voted on and approved these "international institutions" (mainly the UN and Nato) so in effect it is the executive executing the provisions of treaties which, constitutionally, are supposed to be the law of the land.

    The constitutional question is whether the Treaty clause or the Declaration of War clause hold sway. It is not a clear cut situation. One side of the coin undercuts the whole of US international treaties, while the other side undercuts the power of congress to control the declaration of war.
    Last edited by Sphere; March 17, 2012 at 11:49 PM.

  3. #3
    MathiasOfAthens's Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Stockholm, Sverige
    Posts
    22,877

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment legislation

    Quote Originally Posted by Sphere View Post
    The grey area here is that Congress has whole heatedly voted on and approved these "international institutions" (mainly the UN and Nato) so in effect it is the executive executing the provisions of treaties which, constitutionally, are supposed to be the law of the land.

    The constitutional question is whether the Treaty clause or the Declaration of War clause hold sway. It is not a clear cut situation. One side of the coin undercuts the whole of US international treaties, while the other side undercuts the power of congress to control the declaration of war.
    Exactly, I was thinking the same thing. Its a bit ridiculous for these impeachment trials but of course if enough republicans vote to impeach then what can Obama do...

    Cant beat him in the elections, might as well arrest him for alleged crimes.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment legislation

    Quote Originally Posted by MathiasOfAthens View Post
    Exactly, I was thinking the same thing. Its a bit ridiculous for these impeachment trials but of course if enough republicans vote to impeach then what can Obama do...

    Cant beat him in the elections, might as well arrest him for alleged crimes.
    Yes! This is all just a game for the rich. Who really gives a crap that what he did what he did will tacit Congressional approval -- as many had done -- and that congress has been lax on enforcing this for past 30 years. Who cares. Who cares that if this were really an issue that the complaints are coming almost two ing years late. Who cares that the last president illegally was installed by an illegal power grab by the SCOTUS or that he violated too many laws nationally and internationally to count. Who really cares.

    It's all a game.

    In fact, it's less serious than a game. Most sports fans are far more rational.

    It's a joke. It's all just a big joke. American, the governance of it and it's future, in the eyes of the republican party is just a big ing joke. So keeping laughing everybody. Laugh it up.

    It's not like most Americans now have one of the lowest living standards of any industrialized country or that our infra structure hasn't been updated in 30 years -- well it is exactly like that -- but who cares as long as the wealthy get to play the pointless power grabbing games that make them happy, we will sit in stands and cheer and then blame each other when he mess that they have been making by treating this all like some kind of god damned game continues to destroy the country.

    U.S.A. U.S.A U.S.A. . . .
    Last edited by Oswald von Wolkenstein; March 18, 2012 at 09:25 AM.
    Under the Patronage of Belisarius
    ______________________

    Member of S.I.N.
    = Fidei defensor =

    Consider yourself conservative? Five Conservative Classics



  5. #5
    DimeBagHo's Avatar Praeses
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    7,943

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment legislation

    Quote Originally Posted by YukonTrooper View Post
    What I find amazing is how both a) the administration has openly stated their intentions and b) impeachment legislation has been introduced, yet there is hardly a whimper in the mainstream media.
    Impeachment legislation has not been introduced.

    A congressional resolution has been introduced to warn that such high crimes and misdemeanors will trigger impeachment proceedings.
    Resolutions are not law, nor do they have any other legal effect.

    @Sphere. Ratified treaties have the status of legislation and legislation cannot alter the constitutional distribution of powers between branches. Only a constitutional amendment can do that. So everything here turns on the meaning of the War Powers clause.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment legislation

    Quote Originally Posted by DimeBagHo View Post
    Impeachment legislation has not been introduced.
    Sorry, resolution. Thanks. Updated title.
    Last edited by YukonTrooper; March 18, 2012 at 12:39 AM.
    Once a political decision has been reached to proceed with internal disturbances in Syria, CIA is prepared, and SIS (MI6) will attempt to mount minor sabotage and coup de main [sic] incidents within Syria, working through contacts with individuals. Incidents should not be concentrated in Damascus. [A] necessary degree of fear, [...] frontier incidents and [staged] border clashes [will] provide a pretext for intervention. The CIA and SIS should use [...] capabilities in both psychological and action fields to augment tension. [Funding should be provided for a] Free Syria Committee [and arms should be supplied to] political factions with paramilitary or other actionist capabilities.
    ~ Joint US-UK leaked Intelligence Document, 1957

  7. #7

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment legislation

    There's an argument that Congress has the right to pull the plug by default, by refusing to fund specific military operations.
    Eats, shoots, and leaves.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment legislation

    argued that the administration needs only “international permission” to engage in war.
    I'm to lazy to really look anything up here, but if thats true, thats double plus retarded.
    "When I die, I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like Fidel Castro, not screaming in terror, like his victims."

    My shameful truth.

  9. #9
    DimeBagHo's Avatar Praeses
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    7,943

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment legislation

    Quote Originally Posted by Phier View Post
    I'm to lazy to really look anything up here, but if thats true, thats double plus retarded.
    There is a somewhat plausible argument to be made for the claim that the President also needs permission from the Security Council to wage this specific kind of war (where the justification for military action is the prevention of human rights abuses, rather than some variety of self-defence). But, yeah, the idea that congress can delegate one of its constitutionally prescribed powers to an international organisation is .

  10. #10
    mrmouth's Avatar flaxen haired argonaut
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    10,741

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    Is it really that much of a shock considering the kinds of wars, and military actions we are engaging in, along with the current tone in Washington? There have been many thousands of covert raids in various countries around the world. SOF (JSOC) are operating in more than 160 countries at any given time. Securing funding even in good times, is a .
    The fascists of the future will be called anti-fascists
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity

  11. #11

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by BarnabyJones View Post
    Is it really that much of a shock considering the kinds of wars, and military actions we are engaging in, along with the current tone in Washington? There have been many thousands of covert raids in various countries around the world. SOF (JSOC) are operating in more than 160 countries at any given time. Securing funding even in good times, is a .
    The key word is "major".
    "When I die, I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like Fidel Castro, not screaming in terror, like his victims."

    My shameful truth.

  12. #12
    Mr. Scott's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    3,312

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    The world is faster paced than it was in 1800. Congress, on the other hand, is as slow as ever. While I do dislike one man and branch having such massive power, I do feel that is partially necessary for the US in order to ensure an efficient and adaptive foreign policy.
    “When my information changes, I alter my conclusions.” ― John Maynard Keynes

  13. #13
    hellheaven1987's Avatar Comes Domesticorum
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    The Hell called Conscription
    Posts
    35,615

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Scott View Post
    I do feel that is partially necessary for the US in order to ensure an efficient and adaptive foreign policy.
    That is when PMC come into play, or you can call up Rough Riders again.
    Quote Originally Posted by Markas View Post
    Hellheaven, sometimes you remind me of King Canute trying to hold back the tide, except without the winning parable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Cameron is midway between Black Rage and .. European Union ..

  14. #14
    Aetius's Avatar Vae victis
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    9,782

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Scott View Post
    The world is faster paced than it was in 1800. Congress, on the other hand, is as slow as ever. While I do dislike one man and branch having such massive power, I do feel that is partially necessary for the US in order to ensure an efficient and adaptive foreign policy.
    Quote Originally Posted by saglam2000 View Post
    At this point i'd be completely fine if obama said that he didn't need congressional approval for anything. I got more trust in the president than i do in congress.

    Both these opinions are truly disturbing to me.

  15. #15
    saglam2000's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    New York State
    Posts
    1,515

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Aetius View Post
    Both these opinions are truly disturbing to me.
    How is this disturbing? Some people don't like democracy that much.
    "The Turks are never trapped. It's the people who surround them who are in trouble."Anthony Hebert

    ‎"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens

  16. #16
    alhoon's Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    24,223

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Scott View Post
    The world is faster paced than it was in 1800. Congress, on the other hand, is as slow as ever. While I do dislike one man and branch having such massive power, I do feel that is partially necessary for the US in order to ensure an efficient and adaptive foreign policy.

    Then change the constitution to reflect that.

    However, I find the article blatantly inflated and flamboyant. It reminds me of those adds some Republicans aired that Obamacare is slavery etc.
    A defence secretary said some crap; chances are he was just blowing hot air. they didn't go on to bomb Syria or Iran without approval and I don't think they would. That's why there are no impeachment proceedings; because the whole subject is blown way out of proportion.
    alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
    "Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  17. #17
    MathiasOfAthens's Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Stockholm, Sverige
    Posts
    22,877

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Then change the constitution to reflect that.

    However, I find the article blatantly inflated and flamboyant. It reminds me of those adds some Republicans aired that Obamacare is slavery etc.
    A defence secretary said some crap; chances are he was just blowing hot air. they didn't go on to bomb Syria or Iran without approval and I don't think they would. That's why there are no impeachment proceedings; because the whole subject is blown way out of proportion.
    Its almost impossible to do so. Both parties have different opinions on what the constitution should say. Without a doubt the more conservative members would prefer a less intrusive govt but also perhaps more christianity in their govt. Maybe a constitutional amendment against abortions and gay marriage.

    But lets just imagine that there are more moderate compromises... point is a lot of congressmen like the way things are now... they dont want to change it so govt runs more efficiently.

  18. #18

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    It's not like this hasn't happened in every administration since Truman.

  19. #19
    Farnan's Avatar Saviors of the Japanese
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Right behind you starring over your shoulder.
    Posts
    31,638

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Kitsunegari View Post
    It's not like this hasn't happened in every administration since Truman.
    John Adams started the trend.
    “The nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking by cowards.”

    —Sir William Francis Butler

  20. #20

    Default Re: Obama admin. to Congress: We don't need your permission for war; congressman introduces impeachment resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Farnan View Post
    John Adams started the trend.
    Jefferson. Adams didn't commit troops.



    I can't understand why anyone would support the President on this issue at all. Going to war only requires an international body's delegation and not the American peoples? There is not a lot of precedence for this in American history prior to Korea. That's not really the same either cause the UN didn't call on us to do so. We chose to do so via treaty. We've gone to war without a declaration of war, but we've never gone to war from foreign delegation.
    Last edited by Admiral Piett; March 18, 2012 at 04:17 PM.
    Heir to Noble Savage in the Imperial House of Wilpuri

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •