Cheney: A vote for Kerry is a vote for terrorism!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ned


Has this issue ever been litigated and decided in court? I recall, it was a major issue to many during Vietnam even though Congress passed the Tonkin Gulf resolution that used similar wording to two Gulf War resolutions. It seems to me that courts would decide that Congress can properly delegate to the president the decision of when to declare war thereby making Vietnam and the two Gulf Wars properly declared wars.

SCOTUS has punted on this issue several times, denying cert either and/or refusing to assert original jurisdiction over what they consider a "political" question.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by GePap
How could a court "decide" that, when it violates the simple premise that it is congress that must vote to declare war? I doubt the congress can vote away its own constitutional responsibilities without, say, changing the constitution.

I'm with you all the way on this point GePap. In section 8 of the US constituion it goes on and on delgating specifically to congress a wide range of responsibilities wrt to defense and making war including specifically the power to declare war.

The way in which all our wars have been started since ww2 appears to imply that this line in the constituion had no meaning whatsoever. I even begin to ask myself whether AH might be right that there is no value of a written constitution over an unwritten one.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Actually, I think the loose screw is on your reading glasses. Bush is happy to hide behind perpetual war to justify any program Bush wants to run through a Congress full of bobble-heads, and any inconveniences like a slow economy, job losses, deficits, national debt, casualties in the never-ending war, etc. will all be shuffled under the rug because "there's a war on and we all have to make sacrifices."

It's not quite a congress of bobbleheads. Bush has been stymied on tort reform for instance. Much to my dismay . It seems as if most of the things he really gets his way on are those issues in which I do not agree with him.

[chequita guevara]

tort reform

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
tort reform

I hope this is you just thinking it wouldn't be reformed properly and not you saying the curent system is the most perfect a human mind could devise?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
Cheney is evil!

Kerry is guilty as charged.

[Verto]

The statement does make sense.

[Ned]

Originally posted by GePap
How could a court "decide" that, when it violates the simple premise that it is congress that must vote to declare war? I doubt the congress can vote away its own constitutional responsibilities without, say, changing the constitution.

But that is the question, is it not? Congress has done exactly what you say they cannot do in several specific circumstances. I suspect that the Supreme Court would agree that these were effective grants of authority to the executive to declare war under the circumstances and that subsequent hostilities were in fact a legally declared war.

[Ned]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Actually, I think the loose screw is on your reading glasses. Bush is happy to hide behind perpetual war to justify any program Bush wants to run through a Congress full of bobble-heads, and any inconveniences like a slow economy, job losses, deficits, national debt, casualties in the never-ending war, etc. will all be shuffled under the rug because "there's a war on and we all have to make sacrifices."

So tell me, oh wise one, when do you define the end of a "war on terrorism" that is directed against any individual to be defined at convenience? (a la "a suspected member of a group with ties to Al Qaeda")

Paragraph 1: Think FDR in 1940. What was his campaign slogan?

Paragraph 2: When will the war on poverty end?

[Ned]

Geronimo, suppose the president asks congress for the authority to issue an ultimatum and for the authority to use force if the ultimatum is not successful. Is this not a perfect example of a declaration of war?

Would you have the president issue the ultimatum before he gets authority from Congress to use force and then later ask for a declaration of war if the ultimatum is unsuccessful?

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Ned
Geronimo, suppose the president asks congress for the authority to issue an ultimatum and for the authority to use force if the ultimatum is not successful. Is this not a perfect example of a declaration of war?

Would you have the president issue the ultimatum before he gets authority from Congress to use force and then later ask for a declaration of war if the ultimatum is unsuccessful?

Yes until the constitution gets altered to suggest otherwise. I don't like the idea of the government only paying heed to those parts of the constitution that are up to date while ignoring the parts that are impractical.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Otherwise, every would-be cowboy would be popping every brown person who might look like an arab.

This is the problem I have with Joe's position. I have a good friend who just so happens to be an Indian Sikh. Post 9/11 there were all sorts of red necks looking for brown skinned "Arab looking" people and unfortunately Sikhs fit that discription to an uneducated piece of white trash. Sikhs are not muslims nor Hindus but their religion does call on males to wear a turban on their head so, like Jews wearing Yamicas, the Sikhs stand out and make easy targets for bigots.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
You are ridiculous. The Afghan National Army is growing in size and is about 30,000. It is taking over more and more. A new high way was built connecting Kabul to Kandahar.

While the Afghan Army is growing the fact that almost three years after the the invasion the best they can come up with is 30,000 is a very worrying fact. Just on that number along it is clear that the Bush administration hasn't bothered to put in the needed money in order to make a success out of Afghanistan. The Afghan government has not tax revenues so all it can do is beg for hand outs which Bush, stupidly, has not be very forth coming with.

It's clear that the Iraqi invasion sucked up all the resources needed to build a large national Army in Afghanistan and now the government is left begging warlords for help because Bush never bothered to give them the money needed to build an effective Army.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The way in which all our wars have been started since ww2 appears to imply that this line in the constituion had no meaning whatsoever.

Congress voting for a bill giving the President the power to invade country X at his choosing is sufficient to satisfy the Constitutional mandate, IMO. After all the President IS the Commander-in-Chief and Congress authorizing war and then giving the President the authority to initiate war at his convenience is a declaration of war for all intents and purposes. They don't have to pass something that specifically says "Declaration of War" on it.

And GePap, Congress has in past authorized the executive branch to be able to make regulations stemming from laws which have been passed. That's the only way that executive agencies have been able to enforce some of the laws which have been passed. This is the same precept. Congress passes a law authorizing force and giving the President the right to decide when to initate that force.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Oerdin


While the Afghan Army is growing the fact that almost three years after the the invasion the best they can come up with is 30,000 is a very worrying fact. Just on that number along it is clear that the Bush administration hasn't bothered to put in the needed money in order to make a success out of Afghanistan. The Afghan government has not tax revenues so all it can do is beg for hand outs which Bush, stupidly, has not be very forth coming with.

It's clear that the Iraqi invasion sucked up all the resources needed to build a large national Army in Afghanistan and now the government is left begging warlords for help because Bush never bothered to give them the money needed to build an effective Army.

Bush?????

What about France and Germany? Afghanistan is the one place France and Germany agree was necessary. Why don't these relatively well off countries help more? I know both we and Karsai have asked, repeatedly, and to no avail.

Get off Bush's case. Our so-called allies have to help and should be scorned for not helping.