View Poll Results: Do you support the growing bipartisan movement to end war in Afghanistan?

Voters
23. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    17 73.91%
  • No

    5 21.74%
  • Other

    1 4.35%
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 58

Thread: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

  1. #31
    Guru

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,469

    Re: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Are you saying they authorized a war that could never be ended?
    Nope, the President, any President, can end it anytime he likes.

    The only way the Congress can end it is either pass a bill that the President signs so it becomes law or withhold funding. Neither of which is going to happen.

    BTW, the President could also close Gitmo anytime he likes. All he would have to do is order the military to pack up and leave. Why do you think he hasn't do that?

    .

  2. #32
    Professor
    Alfons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    10-31-17 @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,460

    Re: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

    I vote NO, because if America leave Afganistan its place will be taken by Al Qaeda, other Islamists or soembody else.
    Rom 6:23:For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

  3. #33
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by TOJ View Post
    Nope, the President, any President, can end it anytime he likes.

    The only way the Congress can end it is either pass a bill that the President signs so it becomes law or withhold funding. Neither of which is going to happen.

    "Congress is not merely a “coequal” branch of government. The framers vested the decisive and ultimate powers of war and spending in the legislative branch. We start with that basic understanding. American democracy places the sovereign power in the people and entrusts to them the temporary delegation of their power to elected Senators and Representatives. Members of Congress take an oath of office to defend the Constitution, not the President. Their primary allegiance is to the people and the constitutional principles of checks and balances and separation of power.1 Any interpretation of presidential power that fails to take account of those basic concepts is contrary to the democratic system established in the United States.

    The legislative judgment to take the country to war carries with it a duty throughout the conflict to decide that military force remains in the national interest. As with any other statute, Congress is responsible for monitoring what it has set in motion. In the midst of war, there are no grounds for believing that the President’s judgment for continuing the war is superior to the collective judgment of elected representatives. Congress has both the constitutional authority and the responsibility to retain control and recalibrate national policy whenever necessary.

    The breadth of congressional power is evident simply by looking at the text of the Constitution and comparing Article I to Article II. The powers expressly stated give Congress the predominant role in matters of war. However, this purely textual reading misses what the American framers did, why they did it, and how they broke with the reigning British models of executive power. Their study of history led them to place in Congress the sole power to take the country from a state of peace to a state or war. They left with the President in his capacity as Commander in Chief, certain defensive powers to “repel sudden attacks.”

    Exercising Congress’s Constitutional Power to End a War by Louis Fisher

    BTW, the President could also close Gitmo anytime he likes. All he would have to do is order the military to pack up and leave. Why do you think he hasn't do that?
    My understanding is that aome people got skeered when he proposed trying them in US courts as we have successively with many other terrorists.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  4. #34
    Guru

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,469

    Re: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post

    "Congress is not merely a “coequal” branch of government. The framers vested the decisive and ultimate powers of war and spending in the legislative branch. We start with that basic understanding. American democracy places the sovereign power in the people and entrusts to them the temporary delegation of their power to elected Senators and Representatives. Members of Congress take an oath of office to defend the Constitution, not the President. Their primary allegiance is to the people and the constitutional principles of checks and balances and separation of power.1 Any interpretation of presidential power that fails to take account of those basic concepts is contrary to the democratic system established in the United States.

    The legislative judgment to take the country to war carries with it a duty throughout the conflict to decide that military force remains in the national interest. As with any other statute, Congress is responsible for monitoring what it has set in motion. In the midst of war, there are no grounds for believing that the President’s judgment for continuing the war is superior to the collective judgment of elected representatives. Congress has both the constitutional authority and the responsibility to retain control and recalibrate national policy whenever necessary.

    The breadth of congressional power is evident simply by looking at the text of the Constitution and comparing Article I to Article II. The powers expressly stated give Congress the predominant role in matters of war. However, this purely textual reading misses what the American framers did, why they did it, and how they broke with the reigning British models of executive power. Their study of history led them to place in Congress the sole power to take the country from a state of peace to a state or war. They left with the President in his capacity as Commander in Chief, certain defensive powers to “repel sudden attacks.”

    Exercising Congress’s Constitutional Power to End a War by Louis Fisher
    Some dude's opinion that means nothing.

    As I said, the Congress can withhold funding. Why do you think they have not done that?

    So what else do you think the USA Congress can do to force withdrawal? Maybe they could send the Sergeant-at-Arms to the WH to arrest Obama.

    Another thing; didn't the Obama administration say the Libya excursion is not war but a kinetic military action and has claimed they do not need Congressional approval and that the War Powers Act is irrelevant? Using that definition, couldn't a USA President use the military for anything he chooses?

    The irony is that a liberal President has established a precident for using military force that looks to be rather expansive. It is going to be funny as hell when the next Republican President uses that precident.


    My understanding is that aome people got skeered when he proposed trying them in US courts as we have successively with many other terrorists.
    So what? He promised to close it by early 2009, did he not? Was he one of those that got skeered?

    BTW, although English is not my first language (or even second), I think the correct spelling for skeered is scared.

    .

  5. #35
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by TOJ View Post
    Some dude's opinion that means nothing.
    I'll take a "Statement before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary" by Dr. Louis Fisher, the Congressional Research Service's expert on presidential powers, before I would unsubstantiated opinion of a political forum dude, any day!
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  6. #36
    Guru

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,469

    Re: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I'll take a "Statement before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary" by Dr. Louis Fisher, the Congressional Research Service's expert on presidential powers, before I would unsubstantiated opinion of a political forum dude, any day!
    You can take whatever you wish but you appear rather dense on this issue. Mr. Fisher's opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it.

    You seem to be having trouble responding to more than one point in my previous posts, so this time I will try to type real slow so maybe you can keep up.

    I did not mean he is incorrect in his assessment. I mean it makes no difference. Let's assume he is correct that the Congress has the power. So what? He has no power to force them to act.

    What do you think the Congress should do to force the USA President to withdraw and why have they not done it? Either they do not think they have the power or do not wish to exercise it.

    You seem to think Congress has the power to force withdrawal. Maybe a smart dude like you can come up with some way to force them to force the President to withdraw.

    .

  7. #37
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by TOJ View Post
    I did not mean he is incorrect in his assessment. I mean it makes no difference. Let's assume he is correct that the Congress has the power. So what? He has no power to force them to act.
    It is we the people that have the power to force them to act.

    What do you think the Congress should do to force the USA President to withdraw
    Contemporary Statutory Restrictions

    "Congress has often enacted legislation to restrict and limit military operations by the President, selecting both appropriations bills and authorizing legislation to impose conditions and constraints. The Congressional Research Service recently prepared a lengthy study that lists these statutory provisions.27 A major cutoff of funds occurred in 1973, when Congress passed legislation to deny funds for the war in Southeast Asia. After President Nixon vetoed the bill, the House effort to override failed on a vote of 241 to 173, or 35 votes short of the necessary two-thirds majority.28 A lawsuit by Representative Elizabeth Holtzman asked the courts to determine that President Nixon could not engage in combat operations in Cambodia and elsewhere in Indochina in the absence of congressional authorization. A federal district court held that Congress had not authorized the bombing of Cambodia. Its inability to override the veto and the subsequent adoption of an August 15 deadline for the bombing could not be taken as an affirmative grant of legislative authority: “It cannot be the rule that the President needs a vote of only one-third plus one of either House in order to conduct a war, but this would be the consequence of holding that Congress must override a Presidential veto in order to terminate hostilities which it had not authorized.”29 Appellate courts mooted the case because the August 15 compromise settled the dispute between the two branches and terminated funding for the war.30

    Through its power to authorize programs and appropriate funds, Congress can define and limit presidential military actions. Some claim that the power of the purse is an ineffective and impractical method of restraining presidential wars. Senator Jacob Javits said that Congress “can hardly cut off appropriations when 500,000 American troops are fighting for their lives, as in Vietnam.”31 The short answer is that Congress can, and has, used the power of the purse to restrict and terminate presidential wars. If Congress is concerned about the safety of American troops, those lives are not protected by voting additional funds for a war it does not support.

    A proper and responsible action, when war has declining value or purpose, is to reevaluate the commitment by placing conditions on appropriations, terminating funding, moving U.S troops to a more secure location, and taking other legislative steps. There is one central and overriding question: Is the continued use of military force in the nation’s interest? If not, then U.S. soldiers need to be safely withdrawn and redeployed. Answering that difficult question is not helped by speculation about whether congressional action might “embolden the enemy.”

    Other examples of congressional intervention can be cited. In 1976, Congress prohibited the CIA from conducting military or paramilitary operations in Angola and denied any appropriated funds to finance directly or indirectly any type of military assistance to Angola. In 1984, Congress adopted the Boland Amendment to prohibit assistance of any kind to support the Contras in Nicaragua. No constitutional objection to this provision was ever voiced publicly by President Reagan, the White House, the Justice Department, or any other agency of the executive branch.32

    Congress has options other than a continuation of funding or a flat cutoff. In 1986, Congress restricted the President’s military role in Central America by stipulating that U.S. personnel “may not provide any training or other service, or otherwise participate directly or indirectly in the provision of any assistance, to the Nicaraguan democratic resistance pursuant to this title within those land areas of Honduras and Costa Rica which are within 20 miles of the border with Nicaragua.”33 In 1991, when Congress authorized President George H. W. Bush to use military force against Iraq, the authority was explicitly linked to UN Security Council Resolution 678, which was adopted to expel Iraq from Kuwait.34 Thus, the legislation did not authorize any wider action, such as using U.S. forces to invade and occupy Iraq. In 1993, Congress established a deadline for U.S. troops to leave Somalia. No funds could be used for military action after March 31, 1994, unless the President requested an extension from Congress and received prior legislative priority."
    Exercising Congress’s Constitutional Power to End a War by Louis Fisher
    and why have they not done it? Either they do not think they have the power or do not wish to exercise it.

    Previously there was not a majority of Americans that wanted an end to the war, now there is:


    Poll: Nearly 6 in 10 oppose war in Afghanistan


    ThinkProgress » POLL: 59 Percent of Americans Think It’s Time To Leave Afghanistan



    You seem to think Congress has the power to force withdrawal. Maybe a smart dude like you can come up with some way to force them to force the President to withdraw.

    I do have a way, public pressure. Its how we ended Vietnam.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  8. #38
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,032

    Re: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    It is we the people that have the power to force them to act.
    "We the People" don't mean **** after "We the People" have cast our vote. Or did I miss something? Did "We the People" get us out of Iraq before they decided to end it? Did "We the People" close down GITMO? Did "We the People" get a hold of the spending spree? "We the People" seem to be more about our illusions than the reality.

    This is how this works: "We the People" matter now to Washington because they need to trick you into believing you are represented. After you have swallowed the rhetoric and newspaper headlines, which never reveal complete truth beyond the fancy excitable headline by the way, you will cast your vote with the hope that you will "win." If you "lose," you will spend the next two years hating everything that comes out of Washington and blaming the other side for "winning." If you "win" you will spend the next two years finding reasons that "your guy(s)" fail you so that you can continue to think you are represented.

    In the end, you simply don't matter anymore. America needs a reboot button. There are far too many escallating viruses infecting Washington.
    Last edited by MSgt; 05-16-11 at 04:09 AM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  9. #39
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    "We the People" don't mean **** after "We the People" have cast our vote. Or did I miss something?

    Evidently you missed how We the People ended the Vietnam war.

    Did "We the People" get us out of Iraq before they decided to end it? Did "We the People" close down GITMO? Did "We the People" get a hold of the spending spree? "We the People" seem to be more about our illusions than the reality.
    The power of we the people works only when it is exercised, as it was to stop the Vietnam war. We get the government we deserve!
    America needs a reboot button.

    We have one, it is called elections. Don't like the government, vote in a new one!
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  10. #40
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,032

    Re: Should Congress require Obama end the war in Afghanistan?

    I've said it before.... Redefine your ideas of victory. Iraq was always going to end with democracy in the making despite the ignorant gloom of headlines. So too will Afghanistan end exactly how it was always going to. It's all in the cultures.

    Afghanistan is going to crack up into internal conflict eventually after we leave. However, the ANA will have been empowered and organized to "take care of business." Unlike the ANP, they hate the Taliban and are less corrupt. That is our "victory" in this region. When we are at that point (pretty soon), President Obama will end this war within the big war.

    At this point Americans will feel as if "they the people" forced this end and that their most cherished politicians heard them. Ignorance is why so many remain clueless about this effort. I could blame politicians and their lack of Middle Eastern education and celebration of microphone sound bytes. But Americans have free access to information and are more than capable of understanding events beyond a politician's lies and the media's misleading headlines. Still, the protestor finds any reason to refrain from learning.

    "Now that Bin Laden is dead, our problems are over." - Average idiot.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 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
  •