Page 31 of 51 FirstFirst ... 21293031323341 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 310 of 503

Thread: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorization

  1. #301
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorizati

    Quote Originally Posted by PzKfW IVe View Post
    Only to those with the aforementioned sub-third-grade understanding of the law - such as, obviously, yourself.

    Until you show THE defintion as per the Constitution or the law that surrounds it, your argument is unsound.
    Nothing can change that. Nothing.
    Not true. You're asking for something not needed. The fact is words eman what they mean.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  2. #302
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorizati

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Not true. You're asking for something not needed.
    Again, only to those with the aforementioned sub-third-grade understanding of the law - such as, obviously, yourself.

    Until you show THE defintion as per the Constitution or the law that surrounds it, your argument is unsound.
    Nothing can change that. Nothing.

  3. #303
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorizati

    Quote Originally Posted by PzKfW IVe View Post
    Again, only to those with the aforementioned sub-third-grade understanding of the law - such as, obviously, yourself.

    Until you show THE defintion as per the Constitution or the law that surrounds it, your argument is unsound.
    Nothing can change that. Nothing.
    Again, you're wrong. You're just seeking a way to ingore the actual defintion.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  4. #304
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorizati

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Again, you're wrong. You're just seeking a way to ingore the actual defintion.
    The "actual definition" - the legal defintion of a legal term - can only be found in the Constitution or the law that surrounds it.
    Please cite.

    Until you show THE defintion as per the Constitution or the law that surrounds it, your argument is unsound.
    Nothing can change that. Nothing.

  5. #305
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,301

    Re: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorizati

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    One, he's not doing the same thing. YOu can't comapre apples and tree frogs and pretend they are the exact same. This has been the UN and NATO and not the US going out on their own.

    Secondly, while not as illegal as Bush's actions, nor as costly, I would still have prefered Obama went to congress. Want to bet republicans would have treated this differently if he had?
    Obama, Cameron liken 'Arab spring' to Cold War - The Oval: Tracking the Obama presidency

    The UN and NATO, eh? Obama is washing his hands of this, is he? Not involved, is he? The US and UK are one, read on!
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  6. #306
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorizati

    Quote Originally Posted by PzKfW IVe View Post
    The "actual definition" - the legal defintion of a legal term - can only be found in the Constitution or the law that surrounds it.
    Please cite.

    Until you show THE defintion as per the Constitution or the law that surrounds it, your argument is unsound.
    Nothing can change that. Nothing.
    That's not true. The constitution isn't a dictionary and doesn't define words.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  7. #307
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorizati

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    That's not true. The constitution isn't a dictionary and doesn't define words.
    I cannot help you with your willfull ignorance.
    You -choose- to be wrong. Enjoy.

  8. #308
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorizati

    Quote Originally Posted by PzKfW IVe View Post
    I cannot help you with your willfull ignorance.
    You -choose- to be wrong. Enjoy.
    I was thinking the same about you. But words that come under dispute are argued, often using things like dictionaries. The Constitution doesn't define these words. You are simply wrong in what you're saying.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #309
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,402

    Re: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorizati

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    One, he's not doing the same thing. YOu can't comapre apples and tree frogs and pretend they are the exact same. This has been the UN and NATO and not the US going out on their own.

    Secondly, while not as illegal as Bush's actions, nor as costly, I would still have prefered Obama went to congress. Want to bet republicans would have treated this differently if he had?
    That doesn't matter, because the WAP still applies.

  10. #310
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: White House: Limited Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorizati

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    That doesn't matter, because the WAP still applies.
    I think this applies:

    United Nations Actions

    U.N. Security Council resolutions provide authority for U.S. action under international law. Whether congressional authorization is required under domestic law depends on the types of U.N. action and is governed by the Constitution, the U.N. Participation Act (P.L. 79-264, as amended), as well as by the War Powers Resolution. Section 8(b) of the War Powers Resolution exempts only participation in headquarters operations of joint military commands established prior to 1973.

    For armed actions under Articles 42 and 43 of the U.N. Charter, Section 6 of the U.N. Participation Act authorizes the President to negotiate special agreements with the Security Council, subject to the approval of Congress, providing for the numbers and types of armed forces and facilities to be made available to the Security Council. Once the agreements have been concluded, further congressional authorization is not necessary, but no such agreements have been concluded. Some Members have sought to encourage negotiation of military agreements under Article 43 of the U.N. Charter. Questions include whether congressional approval is required only for an initial agreement on providing peacekeeping forces in general, or for each agreement to provide forces in specific situations, and how such approvals would relate to the War Powers Resolution.

    Section 7 of the U.N. Participation Act authorizes the detail of up to 1,000 personnel to serve in any noncombatant capacity for certain U.N. peaceful settlement activities. The United States has provided personnel to several U.N. peacekeeping missions, such as observers to the U.N. Truce Supervision Organization in Palestine. In these instances, controversy over the need for congressional authorization has not occurred because the action appeared to fall within the authorization in Section 7 of the Participation Act. Controversy has arisen when forces have been deployed in larger numbers or as possible combatants.

    In the 103rd Congress, Members used several vehicles in seeking some control over future peacekeeping actions wherever they might occur. Both the Defense Appropriations Act for FY1994, P.L. 103-139 (Section 8153), and for FY1995, P.L. 103-335 (Section 8103), stated the sense of Congress that funds should not be used for U.N. peacekeeping or peace enforcement operations unless the President consulted with Congress at least 15 days in advance whenever possible. Section 1502 of the Defense Authorization for FY1994, P.L. 103-60, required the President to submit by April 1, 1994, a report on multinational peacekeeping including the requirement of congressional approval for participation and the applicability of the War Powers Resolution and the U.N. Participation Act.

    Along similar lines, the conference report on the Department of State Appropriations Act for FY1994, H.R. 2519 (P.L. 103-121, signed October 27, 1993), called for the Secretary of State to notify both Appropriations Committees 15 days in advance, where practicable, of a vote by the U.N. Security Council to establish any new or expanded peacekeeping mission. The Foreign Relations Authorization Act, P.L. 103-236, signed April 30, 1994, established new requirements for consultation with Congress on U.S. Participation in U.N. Peacekeeping Operations. Section 407 required monthly consultations on the status of peacekeeping operations and advance reports on resolutions that would authorize a new U.N. peacekeeping operation. It also required 15 days' advance notice of any U.S. assistance to support U.N. peacekeeping operations and a quarterly report on all assistance that had been provided to the U.N. for peacekeeping operations. To permit Presidential flexibility, conferees explained, the quarterly report need not include temporary duty assignments of U.S. personnel in support of peacekeeping operations of less than twenty personnel in any one case.

    The following discussion provides background on major cases of U.S. military involvement in overseas operations in recent years that have raised War Powers questions.

    War Powers Resolution: Presidential Compliance

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Page 31 of 51 FirstFirst ... 21293031323341 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •