If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Chron)   Iran works with Russia to stop the US from attacking Syria by threatening to attack Israel. I guess it's pretty serious   (chron.com) divider line 187
    More: Followup, Iran, Russia, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Syrian President Bashar Assad, U.S. Naval, Hassan Rowhani, Heads of state of Syria, President of Iran  
•       •       •

5601 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Aug 2013 at 9:48 AM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



187 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-29 11:25:58 AM
      07/31/2013 01:31:23 PM MDT

UN experts to probe alleged Syria chemical attacks

In a letter to the secretary-general the following day, then-U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said the United States had determined that the nerve agent sarin was used in the March 19 attack on Khan al-Assal and also in an April 13 attack on the Aleppo neighborhood of Shaykh Maqsud. She said unspecified chemicals, possibly including chemical warfare agents, were used May 14 in an attack on Qasr Abu Samrah and in a May 23 attack on Adra.


Make of it what you will.
 
2013-08-29 11:28:28 AM

sno man: Weaver95: I just don't understand why we seem to be gearing up to attack syria. If I were anyone living in the middle east I'd think the us is nuts. Well armed and very hypocritical too...but mostly insane. This makes no sense to me.

It's your habit of drawing lines in the sand.  Eventually when those lines keep getting crossed you have to do something, or no one will take you seriously.  Not that many do in that region anyway...


Should it matter that the intended target didn't cross "the line"?
 
2013-08-29 11:29:08 AM

J. Frank Parnell: TheShavingofOccam123: The battle for mainland Japan would have lasted 68 years, killed 76,000,000 people with 3600 destroyers sunk and 231,936 aircraft destroyed.* That's why the little bomb we dropped on Hiroshima was invented.

Yeah, i know that's what they teach in US schools now.

Lets see what everyone directly involved at the time had to say.


How about FDR before we even entered the war:

On September 1, 1939 - the first day of World War II in Europe - President Franklin D. Roosevelt appealed to the warring nations to "under no circumstances undertake the bombardment from the air of civilian populations."

Curtis LeMay humanely incinerated millions of Japanese civilians long before the atomic bombs were dropped.

Harry Truman served in the trenches in World War I. He understood what protracted long wars of attrition can cost everyone involved.
 
2013-08-29 11:29:49 AM

bluorangefyre: I've come to the conclusion that Republicans unnecessarily beat the drum on action in Syria to lure the President in so that one of three things would happen:

1)  They'd embarass him in front of the entire world
2)  They'd finally have an impeachable offense
3)  WWIII could be put on him


You're right, Obama is the victim in all of this.
 
2013-08-29 11:31:07 AM

TheShavingofOccam123: On September 1, 1939 - the first day of World War II in Europe - President Franklin D. Roosevelt appealed to the warring nations to "under no circumstances undertake the bombardment from the air of civilian populations."


Well that went well (Dresden)...
upload.wikimedia.org
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-08-29 11:31:56 AM

basemetal: We help, the people will still hate us.

We don't help, the people will still hate us.......


I vote for we don't help. Costs less money and lives.
 
2013-08-29 11:34:35 AM

Nadie_AZ: Wasn't this the premise for WWI?

Lots of allies all set up and then someone went and did something stupid?


That has nothing to do with the current situation.

1. There are two sets of allies involved: NATO and Iran-Syria. Iran and Syria are pathetically weak militarily, compared to NATO.
2. Russia and Iran aren't allies. Neither are Syria and Russia. Russia has an interest in Syria, but no mutual defense pact.

Just as when Israel hit Russian missiles in Syria recently, or when the U.shiat Iraq a zillion times with missiles in the '90s, or when the U.shiat Afghanistan with missiles in the '90s, there will be no geopolitical consequences to the U.shiatting Syria with missiles. Zip, nada, nil. I'm not sure how much good it might do, but there's no real potential for blowback, especially if the whole of NATO and the EU is behind it.
 
2013-08-29 11:35:07 AM

Dr Dreidel: The reason for the US to strike Syria is so that Israel doesn't.

1) If the US bombs Syria, what can they do? Conventional warfare from 6000 miles away? A suicide bomb at an embassy (resulting in MORE drones a-flyin')? If Israel bombs Syria, it'd make the Second Intifada look like a lame frat party.
2) If Israel attacks, they'll be far less restrained than the US. We'd send some cruise missiles and a few drones; Israel would roll tanks and flatten enough area for a DMZ (if not worse).
3) If Israel is the aggressor, the response would definitely come from Syria, Iran, Hezbollah-controlled areas of Lebanon... If the US is the aggressor, Syria's probably on their own, with maybe some equipment from China/Russia and rhetoric from Iran (possibly some light insurgency sourced to them, like Pakistanis in Afghanistan).



So in other words...

i47.tinypic.com

Business as usual, then?
 
2013-08-29 11:38:57 AM

mbillips: Nadie_AZ: Wasn't this the premise for WWI?

Lots of allies all set up and then someone went and did something stupid?

That has nothing to do with the current situation.

1. There are two sets of allies involved: NATO and Iran-Syria. Iran and Syria are pathetically weak militarily, compared to NATO.
2. Russia and Iran aren't allies. Neither are Syria and Russia. Russia has an interest in Syria, but no mutual defense pact.

Just as when Israel hit Russian missiles in Syria recently, or when the U.shiat Iraq a zillion times with missiles in the '90s, or when the U.shiat Afghanistan with missiles in the '90s, there will be no geopolitical consequences to the U.shiatting Syria with missiles. Zip, nada, nil. I'm not sure how much good it might do, but there's no real potential for blowback, especially if the whole of NATO and the EU is behind it.


Awesome
 
2013-08-29 11:44:56 AM

Spare Me: TheShavingofOccam123: Spare Me: If you're tired of the wars, go for Rand Paul in 2016.

A race war is a war. It's not a NASCAR event.

That's a dumb comment. I guess you like all the wars then. I prefer someone who actually values and follows the Constitution, but that's just me I guess.


Yeah, values the Constitution. Except for the Interstate Commerce clause, the 4th Amendment, the 14th Amendment and the 16th Amendment. When I'm looking for a constitutional scholar, I always go to the shakily credentialed ophthalmologist first.
 
2013-08-29 11:46:11 AM
There was some asshat on the news today saying that american can't be an isolationist nation in this because the last time we did that WW1 and WW2 happend. I wanted to choke him. Let the Syrians kill themselves if it expands outside of their boarders, then we should probably step in.
 
2013-08-29 11:47:06 AM

mbillips: Spare Me: TheShavingofOccam123: Spare Me: If you're tired of the wars, go for Rand Paul in 2016.

A race war is a war. It's not a NASCAR event.

That's a dumb comment. I guess you like all the wars then. I prefer someone who actually values and follows the Constitution, but that's just me I guess.

Yeah, values the Constitution. Except for the Interstate Commerce clause, the 4th Amendment, the 14th Amendment and the 16th Amendment. When I'm looking for a constitutional scholar, I always go to the shakily credentialed ophthalmologist first.


Yes, let's focus on an early statement about something that will never be changed rather than worrying about real live people getting killed today.
 
2013-08-29 11:50:59 AM
Thank you, Simone.
img.geocaching.com
 
2013-08-29 11:59:43 AM

nekom: Can't we work out a deal with Russia?  How about YOU guys go in there, install a puppet of your choosing and call it a day?


I like that plan. Lets go with it.
 
2013-08-29 12:00:11 PM

groppet: There was some asshat on the news today saying that american can't be an isolationist nation in this because the last time we did that WW1 and WW2 happend. I wanted to choke him. Let the Syrians kill themselves if it expands outside of their boarders, then we should probably step in.


Christ.  So not wanting to intervene in a nation's internal affairs is isolationist now?  What retard said that?
 
2013-08-29 12:02:57 PM
I found this to be strangely fitting for the news.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSX5Kh40AjM
 
2013-08-29 12:03:27 PM

stuffy: nekom: Can't we work out a deal with Russia?  How about YOU guys go in there, install a puppet of your choosing and call it a day?

I like that plan. Lets go with it.


Wasn't the last time we let Russia get away with setting up their own puppet in North Korea?
 
2013-08-29 12:06:07 PM

J. Frank Parnell: TheShavingofOccam123: The battle for mainland Japan would have lasted 68 years, killed 76,000,000 people with 3600 destroyers sunk and 231,936 aircraft destroyed.* That's why the little bomb we dropped on Hiroshima was invented.

Yeah, i know that's what they teach in US schools now.

Lets see what everyone directly involved at the time had to say.


Out of your list only two of those people had privy to the ultra intercepts regarding Japan's tactical situation and the communication between Foreign Minister Togo and the Japanese Ambassador in Moscow Sato. Leahy and MacArthur.

Leahy was still pissed the USN was not allowed to blockade Japan into submission. He was further pissed that the USN did not have sole control over nuclear weapons along with the post war air force getting a ton of funding.

MacArthur was borderline paranoid. The Ultra intercepts showed the Japanese had twice the strength on Kyushu than expected for the November invasion. Post war records show three times as many opposition expected for operation Olympic. Mac chose to ignore the intelligence since he wanted his invasion. (also see Chinese entrance to Korean War).

If you read the actual transcripts between Togo and Sato it is clear that Japan was not ready to surrender. As to the claims they wanted to surrender, yes they did, on their terms. They wanted to keep Korea, Manchuria, no American occupation, no war crimes, and keep the emperor not just as a figure head, but as an imperial leader along with the current regime. No democratic elections.

The thumbnail sketch above is based on classified intercepts that were not released until the late 1970's and ongoing until the 1990's. That's why it was never mentioned in Truman's autobiography or mentioned by Admiral King or General Marshal.

There was a conference slated where Admiral King was going to withdraw the Navy's approval for Operation Olympic based on Ultra and radio intercept intelligence. Marshall was probably going to agree with him and sort of leave MacArthur out to hang himself. But the Japanese surrendered so it all came to naught.

Last note....on some of the quotes thrown around the web. If you see any sourced by an author Gar Alperovitz just disregard them. His work have been discredited by modern historians. He was caught twisting and altering facts as well as truncating quotes. But he is still a left over star for the left.
 
2013-08-29 12:07:28 PM

YixilTesiphon: chasd00: the US managed to convince Israel to not retaliate ( buy whoever made that sale a coke btw ).

[upload.wikimedia.org image 180x240]


DAMNIT!  Can we at least lace the Coke with nitro glycerin?
 
2013-08-29 12:09:03 PM

BigNumber12: bluorangefyre: I've come to the conclusion that Republicans unnecessarily beat the drum on action in Syria to lure the President in so that one of three things would happen:

1)  They'd embarass him in front of the entire world
2)  They'd finally have an impeachable offense
3)  WWIII could be put on him

You're right, Obama is the victim in all of this.


Well I find it funny that they were the most vocal ones calling for action, and then all of a sudden, Bonehead... I mean, Boehner says Obama needs to run this through Congress first.
 
2013-08-29 12:13:30 PM

Publikwerks: TheShavingofOccam123: I hope all the people who have a dog in this oil fight remember this picture:

[edgecast.metatube-files.buscafs.com image 377x237]

It is the Tsar Bomba hydrogen bomb detonation. The largest hydrogen bomb ever detonated.

Now let's compare the Tsar Bomba with other nuclear weapon detonations.

[phobos.ramapo.edu image 438x267]

Hiroshima is the second little nubbin on the lower left.

Hiroshima has killed over 200,000 people so far--it keeps killing people to this day.

I hope people enjoy their oil profits. You're going to end up destroying the world. Literally. Please take your greed and have the hired help shove it up your asses.

Tsar Bomba was dumb.
It wasn't ICBM deployable
It almost killed the bomber crew.
It was insanely expensive.
Most of it's energy was directed into space.

It was a bad idea.


Tsar Bomba was never intended to be a practical weapon. It as a Show of Strength.
 
2013-08-29 12:14:26 PM
Oh, boy! Another pointless war in the Middle East! WHOOO!
 
2013-08-29 12:17:56 PM

FormlessOne: Oh, boy! Another pointless war in the Middle East! WHOOO!


Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize to defend
 
2013-08-29 12:19:10 PM
Iran ALWAYS threatens to attack Israel. They threaten to attack Israel if their tea is too cold in the morning.
 
2013-08-29 12:19:49 PM

machoprogrammer: FormlessOne: Oh, boy! Another pointless war in the Middle East! WHOOO!

Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize to defend


Wouldn't you call the destruction of a government that uses WMDs on its own people a humanitarian effort?
 
2013-08-29 12:20:04 PM
Against.  As much as I hate to see people dying in war, chemical attacks included, this is not our fight.
 
2013-08-29 12:21:32 PM

Weaver95: I just don't understand why we seem to be gearing up to attack syria. If I were anyone living in the middle east I'd think the us is nuts. Well armed and very hypocritical too...but mostly insane. This makes no sense to me.


Maybe it's because Fartbongo knows the chemical weapons came from Iraq.
 
2013-08-29 12:25:04 PM

cameroncrazy1984: machoprogrammer: FormlessOne: Oh, boy! Another pointless war in the Middle East! WHOOO!

Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize to defend

Wouldn't you call the destruction of a government that uses WMDs on its own people a humanitarian effort?


You're gonna need:

- way better proof the orders to do this came from the Syrian regime
- an excellent end game
- to actually be defending what it sounds like the President is planning on doing, which is blowing some people up as a token gesture rather than implementing regime change
 
2013-08-29 12:26:59 PM
So here we are talking about the what-ifs, who will become involved, the likely strategies and the potential outcomes...

Did you forget that this whole farking charade is based on a farking false premise?

AssadCo is NOT the party that deployed CW's in Syria. It's a farking lie.

Let that sink in for a moment...

Okay. Got it? Good.

Here's an oldie but a goody:


Independent UK - May 6, 2013

UN's Carla Del Ponte says there is evidence rebels 'may have used sarin' in Syria

"A United Nations inquiry into human rights abuses in Syria has found evidence that rebel forces may have used chemical weapons, its lead investigator has revealed.

"Carla Del Ponte, a member of the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on Syria, said that testimony gathered from casualties and medical staff indicated that the nerve agent sarin was used by rebel fighters.

"Our investigators have been in neighbouring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated," Ms Del Ponte said in an interview broadcast on Swiss-Italian television on Sunday.

"This was used on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities," she added."

END QUOTE

2.bp.blogspot.com

If that DOG shiats on the carpet ONE MORE TIME...!!!

i.qkme.me

cdn.stripersonline.com

Justice is served.
 
2013-08-29 12:33:16 PM

YixilTesiphon: cameroncrazy1984: machoprogrammer: FormlessOne: Oh, boy! Another pointless war in the Middle East! WHOOO!

Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize to defend

Wouldn't you call the destruction of a government that uses WMDs on its own people a humanitarian effort?

You're gonna need:

- way better proof the orders to do this came from the Syrian regime
- an excellent end game
- to actually be defending what it sounds like the President is planning on doing, which is blowing some people up as a token gesture rather than implementing regime change


Worked in Libya to implement regime change, didn't it? Didn't require 100,000 troops on the ground like Bush's stupidity.

Also it does appear that the US Government is working to prove that as we speak.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-08-29 12:43:53 PM

cameroncrazy1984: machoprogrammer: FormlessOne: Oh, boy! Another pointless war in the Middle East! WHOOO!

Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize to defend

Wouldn't you call the destruction of a government that uses WMDs on its own people a humanitarian effort?


The word 'meddling' comes to mind, young man.
We need to stay out of this one.
 
2013-08-29 12:51:32 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Worked in Libya to implement regime change, didn't it? Didn't require 100,000 troops on the ground like Bush's stupidity.


You realize the White House has explicitly said they're not aiming for regime change, right?

And let's not pretend Libya has been a great success.
 
2013-08-29 01:09:53 PM

J. Frank Parnell: Man, that cold war era nuke hysteria still hasn't worn off.

Even the biggest nuke ever would only do heavy damage to a couple square miles at most. They aren't the world enders they are in hollywood.



Oh dear god, is this the next message being filtered into the crowd-sourced propaganda mill? Let's all kiss our asses goodbye.
 
2013-08-29 01:14:07 PM

gja: cameroncrazy1984: machoprogrammer: FormlessOne: Oh, boy! Another pointless war in the Middle East! WHOOO!

Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize to defend

Wouldn't you call the destruction of a government that uses WMDs on its own people a humanitarian effort?

The word 'meddling' comes to mind, young man.
We need to stay out of this one.


Why? Why are those gassed Syrians not worth our time and effort?
 
2013-08-29 01:14:57 PM

YixilTesiphon: cameroncrazy1984: Worked in Libya to implement regime change, didn't it? Didn't require 100,000 troops on the ground like Bush's stupidity.

You realize the White House has explicitly said they're not aiming for regime change, right?

And let's not pretend Libya has been a great success.


How many civilians are being killed right now by Ghadaffi? Oh right, the answer is 0. Which is the same number of Americans that were casualties in the incident. Sounds successful to me.
 
2013-08-29 01:15:20 PM

RoomFullOfMonkeys: J. Frank Parnell: Man, that cold war era nuke hysteria still hasn't worn off.

Even the biggest nuke ever would only do heavy damage to a couple square miles at most. They aren't the world enders they are in hollywood.


Oh dear god, is this the next message being filtered into the crowd-sourced propaganda mill? Let's all kiss our asses goodbye.


And this is what he said on
His way to armageddon:

So long, mom,
I'm off to drop the bomb,
So don't wait up for me.
But though I may roam,
I'll come back to my home,
Although it may be
A pile of debris.

Remember, mommy,
I'm off to get a commie,
So send me a salami,
And try to smile somehow.
I'll look for you when the war is over,
An hour and a half from now!
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-08-29 01:20:04 PM

cameroncrazy1984: gja: cameroncrazy1984: machoprogrammer: FormlessOne: Oh, boy! Another pointless war in the Middle East! WHOOO!

Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize to defend

Wouldn't you call the destruction of a government that uses WMDs on its own people a humanitarian effort?

The word 'meddling' comes to mind, young man.
We need to stay out of this one.

Why? Why are those gassed Syrians not worth our time and effort?


Because it is NONE OF OUR GODDAMNED BUSINESS.
Why do you feel we need to be the conscience of the planet?
You do realize we have not been asked to render assistance from anyone that has a right to do so, correct?
We need to learn to mind our own business. Besides, we have work enough to do getting our shiat cleaned up before we go pointing fingers at other countries backyards.
 
2013-08-29 01:29:48 PM
Chant with me libtards RACIST, UNJUST, ILLEGAL WARS!

Or is it ok when fartbama does it?
 
2013-08-29 01:41:42 PM

Gentoolive: Chant with me libtards RACIST, UNJUST, ILLEGAL WARS!

Or is it ok when fartbama does it?


How dare you!  Those anti-war protests will start any second now!

...any second now....

...hmmm...
 
2013-08-29 01:45:07 PM

Gentoolive: Chant with me libtards RACIST, UNJUST, ILLEGAL WARS!

Or is it ok when fartbama does it?


I'll chant with you.

/libtard
//Isn't married to any given president, if they do something illegal, they've done something illegal.
///voted for obama
////slashies for president
 
2013-08-29 01:47:40 PM

shifty lookin bleeder: Agarista: BAD!

All you naughty monkeys go re-read your Huntington.

[claudiolandi.files.wordpress.com image 314x475]

Yes, neoconservatism is clearly the answer. It's worked so well for us.


I don't think  he was suggesting that was the correct answer, rather pointing out that that is the plan being followed by the US government including, disappointingly, Obama's administrationi.
 
2013-08-29 01:50:09 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Why? Why are those gassed Syrians not worth our time and effort?


Something must be done! This is something! Therefore, it must be done!

Missiles aren't magic wands.
 
2013-08-29 01:57:57 PM

AngryDragon: Gentoolive: Chant with me libtards RACIST, UNJUST, ILLEGAL WARS!

Or is it ok when fartbama does it?

How dare you!  Those anti-war protests will start any second now!

...any second now....

...hmmm...


The article concludes, based on interviews with leaders of groups like Code Pink and Peace Action, that Iraq-era anti-war groups are struggling with funding and membership and that enthusiasm for the cause has dissipated among lefty types with Barack Obama in office.

Looks like it's up to you contards. Cons holding an anti-war protest? LOL
 
2013-08-29 02:06:03 PM

Sliding Carp: shifty lookin bleeder: Agarista: BAD!

All you naughty monkeys go re-read your Huntington.

[claudiolandi.files.wordpress.com image 314x475]

Yes, neoconservatism is clearly the answer. It's worked so well for us.

I don't think  he was suggesting that was the correct answer, rather pointing out that that is the plan being followed by the US government including, disappointingly, Obama's administrationi.


Now we're blaming this on the Italians??
 
2013-08-29 02:42:48 PM

sno man: Weaver95: I just don't understand why we seem to be gearing up to attack syria. If I were anyone living in the middle east I'd think the us is nuts. Well armed and very hypocritical too...but mostly insane. This makes no sense to me.

It's your habit of drawing lines in the sand.  Eventually when those lines keep getting crossed you have to do something, or no one will take you seriously.  Not that many do in that region anyway...


Seems to me a brilliant bit of parenting.  Draw a line in the sand that says "you will not attack XYZ".  When they cross it, saber rattle some and then draw a new line that says "you will not use chemical weapons" and when they cross it, saber rattle some more.  Then draw a new line in the sand that says "you won't go to all out war with each other" and when they cross it, sit back and laugh hysterically.
 
2013-08-29 03:08:52 PM
images4.wikia.nocookie.net
Why so Syrian?
 
2013-08-29 03:20:16 PM

mbillips: Nadie_AZ: Wasn't this the premise for WWI?

Lots of allies all set up and then someone went and did something stupid?

That has nothing to do with the current situation.

1. There are two sets of allies involved: NATO and Iran-Syria. Iran and Syria are pathetically weak militarily, compared to NATO.
2. Russia and Iran aren't allies. Neither are Syria and Russia. Russia has an interest in Syria, but no mutual defense pact.

Just as when Israel hit Russian missiles in Syria recently, or when the U.shiat Iraq a zillion times with missiles in the '90s, or when the U.shiat Afghanistan with missiles in the '90s, there will be no geopolitical consequences to the U.shiatting Syria with missiles. Zip, nada, nil. I'm not sure how much good it might do, but there's no real potential for blowback, especially if the whole of NATO and the EU is behind it.


Shanghai Cooperation Organization

Iran-Russia relations

As confrontation between the United States and Iran escalates, the country is finding itself further pushed into an alliance with China and Russia. And Iran, like Russia, "views Turkey's regional ambitions and the possible spread of some form of pan-Turkic ideology with suspicion"
 
2013-08-29 03:43:22 PM

bluorangefyre: I've come to the conclusion that Republicans unnecessarily beat the drum on action in Syria to lure the President in so that one of three things would happen:

1)  They'd embarass him in front of the entire world
2)  They'd finally have an impeachable offense
3)  WWIII could be put on him


If the pres does bomb it is NOT an impeachable offense.
Here is the proof,from the War Powers Act.

The Vietnam-era law requires the president to seek approval from Congress after 60 days of military engagement. The law was passed in 1973 after the United States fought the Korean and Vietnam wars without actual declarations of war. But it's always been controversial. (President Nixon actually vetoed the law, but Congress overrode him.)
 
2013-08-29 03:53:17 PM

wolfjc: The Vietnam-era law requires the president to seek approval from Congress after 60 days of military engagement.


Ummm... No.

Here's the text of the War Powers Resolution.


PURPOSE AND POLICY

SEC. 2. (a) It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the collective judgement of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.

(b) Under article I, section 8, of the Constitution, it is specifically provided that the Congress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution, not only its own powers but also all other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

(c) The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
CONSULTATION

SEC. 3. The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.


What you're talking about is the authorty of the President to react for 60 days without consulting Congress if we are attacked first.
 
2013-08-29 03:55:34 PM

Sliding Carp: shifty lookin bleeder: Agarista: BAD!

All you naughty monkeys go re-read your Huntington.

[claudiolandi.files.wordpress.com image 314x475]

Yes, neoconservatism is clearly the answer. It's worked so well for us.

I don't think  he was suggesting that was the correct answer, rather pointing out that that is the plan being followed by the US government including, disappointingly, Obama's administrationi.


Well my sarcasm detector is notoriously unreliable, so you may be right.  Perhaps what came across to me as condescension was actually sarcasm.
 
Displayed 50 of 187 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report