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

**Chubrehege** · 09-06-2011, 02:15 PM

The way your worded this statement gives an ambiguous connotation. I'm saying that the President cannot, initially, give "combat orders" (orders where we actually attack or strike another country) w/o the Congress declaring war. Once war is declared the President runs the show as he sees fit. He does not have to go to Congress and ask permission for each and every operation or mission that is carried out.

All right. So, then you also believe that it was illegal when Thomas Jefferson sent men into combat in the region of Libya? And the numerous times it's been done since without a declaration of war?

Would you refuse to obey an order to deploy to the Libyan theater to assist in the Nato operation there because (in your view) it's illegal?

"Resolution"? I assume you are then talking about the War Powers Resolution. I've already quoted it. If you want, you can scroll up and read it again. You didn't quote any language from the resolution, much less any language purporting to give the President authority to go to war at his own behest. I've asked you several times to cite the specific language that supposedly does this; I'm going to assume at this point that you cannot because it doesn't exist and/or you have not read it.

The truth of the matter is this -- if one reads the law -- It assumes the President has authority on his own behalf to initiate combat actions but purports to require him to report to Congress on the state of the engagement.

Why have we not gone into the Sudan yet?

Why are we not going into Yemen?

Why are we trade partners with China?

Why have we not gone into the Congo? None of these questions have anything to do with the topic we're discussing -- Presidential authority to initiate armed hostilities without a Congressional declaration of war. As such, they're off topic diversions. Keep in mind: I opposed the Libyan intervention and am unimpressed by the stated needs for the action. Do you have any questions pertaining to the actual subject we're discussing?

09-06-2011, 02:15 PM	#31
Chubrehege Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 485 Senior Member	The way your worded this statement gives an ambiguous connotation. I'm saying that the President cannot, initially, give "combat orders" (orders where we actually attack or strike another country) w/o the Congress declaring war. Once war is declared the President runs the show as he sees fit. He does not have to go to Congress and ask permission for each and every operation or mission that is carried out. All right. So, then you also believe that it was illegal when Thomas Jefferson sent men into combat in the region of Libya? And the numerous times it's been done since without a declaration of war? Would you refuse to obey an order to deploy to the Libyan theater to assist in the Nato operation there because (in your view) it's illegal? "Resolution"? I assume you are then talking about the War Powers Resolution. I've already quoted it. If you want, you can scroll up and read it again. You didn't quote any language from the resolution, much less any language purporting to give the President authority to go to war at his own behest. I've asked you several times to cite the specific language that supposedly does this; I'm going to assume at this point that you cannot because it doesn't exist and/or you have not read it. The truth of the matter is this -- if one reads the law -- It assumes the President has authority on his own behalf to initiate combat actions but purports to require him to report to Congress on the state of the engagement. Why have we not gone into the Sudan yet? Why are we not going into Yemen? Why are we trade partners with China? Why have we not gone into the Congo? None of these questions have anything to do with the topic we're discussing -- Presidential authority to initiate armed hostilities without a Congressional declaration of war. As such, they're off topic diversions. Keep in mind: I opposed the Libyan intervention and am unimpressed by the stated needs for the action. Do you have any questions pertaining to the actual subject we're discussing?
	Quote