Unregistered
Moderator
Bhutto's body isnt cold yet, and the Ron Paul opposition already uses it as an excuse to bash Paul.
stage2 said:Google Ron Paul and Bhutto.
That was the first thing i did prior to posting actually. If you would have actually read my post, i said that i found a video clip on CNN.
As far as I'm concerned the use of our military anywhere without a formal declaration of war being made by Congress is unconstitutional and those who allowed it and act upon it are violating the law.
But I would like you to show me where the constitution talks about a "formal" declaration of war.
Section 8: The Congress shall have power
...
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
And a statement that the 2 years in Iraq are up. You realize that EVERY session of Congress has been faced with appropriation of money for Operation Iraqi Freedom. No where near 2 years has passed between such appropriations.To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
It is fully within their power to force surrender by passing legislation that forbids any funds be used in that or any activity. They have absolute 'power of the purse'. In fact, if this was genuinely their conviction it would have already happened. So far the House hasn't gotten that mandate from their constituents, the people of their districts, nor have the member of the Senate from THEIR constituents, the States. Until that changes I don't see the Executive authority Congress has granted being undermined and in the face of success it wouldn't be good to legislate the defeat of your own military after you have sent them to war.So if Congress authorized the President to use force (i.e. DECLARED WAR) then they have the power to say stop and come home, right?
Bruxleys right. The FF obviously intended a standing army to be deployed to the other side of the globe for an indefinite amount of time and with no clear and obtainable objective.
Well, its a good thing that you aren't the one interpreting the constitution. But I would like you to show me where the constitution talks about a "formal" declaration of war.
Congressman Paul proposed a "Declaration of War" bill to the House, it was rejected. Therefore, there was no legitimate declaration of war.I concede that Congress agreed to this fiasco and gave the administration a "blank check" at the time. Certainly this is a hindsight is 20/20 issue and hopefully we have learned a thing or two from it.
I also agree that the gutless Democrats have not forced the financing issue as they were clearly put into office to do so. Hey, I even voted republican (not like I was going to vote for Hillary) but do admit the Dems won because the majority of people want to see us leaving Iraq.
The "Formal" declaration of war is simply that it is up to Congress to declare it. War is not clearly defined though since we are parsing phrases here. "Formal" is simply the act of Congress doing so with an official vote.
Congressman Paul proposed a "Declaration of War" bill to the House, it was rejected. Therefore, there was no legitimate declaration of war.
There it is again, if Paul's method is rejected then any other is invalid. Unimpressive. His ability to get his bills passed goes more to lack of leadership ability with the House of Representatives then it does toward the legitimacy of other legislation or Congressional acts.Congressman Paul proposed a "Declaration of War" bill to the House, it was rejected. Therefore, there was no legitimate declaration of war.