DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Gaddafi's daughter sues over deadly Nato air strike

**Lhiistyssdds** · 08-06-2011, 08:12 PM

Only someone who is trying to be a shiesty lawyer and get around the law would say that carrying out acts of war as a country is not tantamount to declaring war. You're also confusing what being Commander in Chief means. It does not mean he has the right to declare war or carry out acts of war. It means that when we declare war he is the one that is responsible for how it is prosecuted.

OK. Is it fair to say, then, that you believe that the reservation to Congress of the power to declare war precludes the President from giving combat orders without a Congressional declaration of war?

There is the War Powers resolution and it is categorically unconstitutional. The Constitution specifically states that the ability to declare war is solely with the Congress. Congress cannot just make up a rule that lets the president prosecute a war on his own w/o actually making an amendment to the Constitution. Can you cite the language in the resolution that purportedly grants to the President the power to prosecute a war?

I did share it with you, it's called the Constitution. And this is something new you've discovered?

08-06-2011, 08:12 PM	#27
Lhiistyssdds Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 469 Senior Member	Only someone who is trying to be a shiesty lawyer and get around the law would say that carrying out acts of war as a country is not tantamount to declaring war. You're also confusing what being Commander in Chief means. It does not mean he has the right to declare war or carry out acts of war. It means that when we declare war he is the one that is responsible for how it is prosecuted. OK. Is it fair to say, then, that you believe that the reservation to Congress of the power to declare war precludes the President from giving combat orders without a Congressional declaration of war? There is the War Powers resolution and it is categorically unconstitutional. The Constitution specifically states that the ability to declare war is solely with the Congress. Congress cannot just make up a rule that lets the president prosecute a war on his own w/o actually making an amendment to the Constitution. Can you cite the language in the resolution that purportedly grants to the President the power to prosecute a war? I did share it with you, it's called the Constitution. And this is something new you've discovered?
	Quote