Should the President Be Able 2 Go 2 War w/o Congressional Authority?
Options
DarcSkies
Members Posts: 13,791 ✭✭✭✭✭
Legally this has already been hashed out. I think Congress gave Bush War Powers that pretty made him a Country Ass Napoleon (correct if wrong please).
Whatever happened to the President being able to send troops into battle for 90 days and needing congressional approval for each additional 90 days?
Should the president have the power to send troops to war without a declaration of war by Congress?
Whatever happened to the President being able to send troops into battle for 90 days and needing congressional approval for each additional 90 days?
Should the president have the power to send troops to war without a declaration of war by Congress?
Comments
-
Mildly interesting quote:
“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” - Barack Obama -
This whole Libya issue has to do with the United Nation's not with Obama
-
its over: 2012! wrote: »No, he should not be able to declare war, without Congress consenting...
Power-hunger is too too much of a reality, with a President now, as we certainly just saw from 2000-'08...when Bush solidified why a President should always be handcuffed by Democracy's system of checks and balancesThis whole Libya issue has to do with the United Nation's not with Obama -
its over: 2012! wrote: »oh, somebody logged-in without their seeing-eye glasses, eh?
or else...you might want to re-read/see that I answered the question first, then...
went into elaborating on way it's a great idea for a President to be handcuffed by Democracy's checks and balances.
Chill out my mistake.
*edits first post*