• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NATO Disasters Stack Up In Afghanistan

notquiteright said:
interesting-
a President who leans into military operations is seen as micromanaging. BushII claimed to always defer to his Generals,(as long as they didn't say 200,000 troops would be needed to occupy Iraq after the fall of Saddam.), but Obama should be directing soldiers at the tactical level?
Click to expand...

Maybe thats how you see it. I think the commander is supposed to command. And you do that by listening to your generals and then making decisions. And since the Commander is also a polticial representative, its his job to explain to us whats going on, and be accountable to us. To make the military accountable to us. And while we're at it, congress is suppose to supervise the president, and hold him accountable to us.
 
jerry7 said:
If you don't stand with your allies who will trust you? And bear in mind that Obama owns Libya. Obama issued an executive order describing Libya as an unusual threat to US security and then engaged in an illegal war against them in support of a UN resolution. He never got approval from the US Congress in violation of the War Powers Act. He also ignored the Iranians when they asked for help and attempted to revolt in 2009. His policies in the Middle East have been a disaster.
Prior to this meltdown he and Biden had been doing a lot of boasting on the campaign trail about bin Laden and taking out Al Quaeda. Now they are attempting to place responsibility for all of this on an obscure movie. They are always pointing the finger at someone else.
Click to expand...

Supporting tyrants and suppressing democracy is good in your world? It's a good thing the rest of the worlds view of America differs.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Supporting tyrants and suppressing democracy is good in your world? It's a good thing the rest of the worlds view of America differs.
Click to expand...

You seem to be confuse with those who do not believe that the ends justifies the means with supporting someone. Many who did not like Obama's actions in Libya and elsewhere did not dislike the actions because they supported Qaddafi or anyone else. What the do recognize is that if you allow Obama to act without taking the proper steps, then it sets the precedent for all future presidents to do the same. While you may agree with the results that Obama tried to achieve in this and other things where he short circuited the system, keep in mind that because he was allowed to, all future presidents now have a precedent to do so also and the results they desire may not be to your liking.

You may have liked him taking the actions in Libya, but because of the way he did it, what happens when a future President takes similar actions someplace you don't support, he is just following precedent set down by Obama.

You may like his executive orders on immigration and welfare, but what happens if the next President is someone who uses the same methodology to dismantle environmental laws or something else you support, again, he will be following the precedent established by Obama.

By supporting Obama's questionable and illegal means to accomplish ends you want, you allow such means to be used in the future for whatever ends that President has in mind. By not holding Obama accountable for his actions because they support his ends and allow him any means necessary to achieve them, the Dems in Congress have weakened the Congress as a whole and their future ability to hold any future President accountable.

So in the Future, when a Republican President, or hopefully someday an Independent, takes similar actions you don't like, don't be on here bitching and complaining they are doing something illegal or unconstitutional when, by voting for Obama, you are partly responsible for them being able to do it.
 
DVSentinel said:
So in the Future, when a Republican President, or hopefully someday an Independent, takes similar actions you don't like, don't be on here bitching and complaining they are doing something illegal or unconstitutional when, by voting for Obama, you are partly responsible for them being able to do it.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. The argument above is basically ~"if you get what you want, then you gotta stfu". That's not how it works. People speak out. Congress looks at it. The SC looks at it. If enough people OR representatives OR the SC think something was illegal, we (the people) prosecute. Testing the legality, by questioning the legality, is part of the US system and we're always gonna do it. We're not goin' with the dictator option, let's not pretend we are.
 
Last edited:
Well our military has fought many 'wars' that congress never declared war, infact since the Tonkin Resolution Presidents have taken over war declaring as well as being commander in chief. (FYI as commander in Chief the President has done his duty. he has held the military accountable and again the comparison to Nixon trying to get us the hell out of Vietnam- Nixon launched secret attacks, invasion in to Cambodia, mining the harbors in the North... secret deals with the North and South...)

As far as the ends justifying the means- that pretty much sums up BushII's push to attack Iraq. Any lie was flung into the mix and as it was batted down a new one tossed in. yellow cake, centrifuge tubes, meetings in Prague... the ends justify the means.

I realize the right is trying very hard to paint President Obama's lack of cowboy swagger and snickering style as a failure to lead, but the fact is no President or nation can 'manage' 6 other nations in the Middle East to everyone's satisfaction. some on the right would have us invade Libya, prop up Mubarak, bomb the crap out of Syria and supply the rebels with advanced arms.

The cost of which would be staggering, so I guess the Right would write another check for others to pay.
 
ecofarm said:
Nonsense. The argument above is basically ~"if you get what you want, then you gotta stfu". That's not how it works. People speak out. Congress looks at it. The SC looks at it. If enough people OR representatives OR the SC think something was illegal, we (the people) prosecute. Testing the legality, by questioning the legality, is part of the US system and we're always gonna do it. We're not goin' with the dictator option, let's not pretend we are.
Click to expand...

I disagree, but you can hold on to your opinion. I do believe that Obama has acted incorrectly/unconstitutionally and no one has held him accountable, as of yet. When did the SC revue and approve his executive orders? Where is their published opinion on them? Where was the debate or consideration in Congress of taking action? The Republicans knew without any doubt that they could not win such actions with a Dem majority in the Senate, so they never wasted the time and money to pursue it. The people, at present, don't seem to be overly concerned about it either, they care far more about their entitlements or taxes from the government than how the government actually works or what it does outside of their entitlements and taxes. And I do believe that going with Obama is supporting the dictator option. That is my opinion and I will hold onto it, and I believe the available data supports my opinion.
 
Ollie North is a hero.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Supporting tyrants and suppressing democracy is good in your world? It's a good thing the rest of the worlds view of America differs.
Click to expand...

According to Obama and Biden, Maubarak was not a dictator. He was an ally. They have no justification for abandoning him.


“Look, Mubarak has been an ally of ours in a number of things,” Biden told PBS Newshour, “and he’s been very responsible on, relative to geopolitical interests in the region: Middle East peace efforts, the actions Egypt has taken relative to normalizing the relationship with Israel.”





“I would not refer to him as a dictator,” he added.

Raw Story (Biden: Egypt leader Mubarak not a ‘dictator,’ shouldn’t step down | The Raw Story)
 
notquiteright said:
Well our military has fought many 'wars' that congress never declared war, infact since the Tonkin Resolution Presidents have taken over war declaring as well as being commander in chief. (FYI as commander in Chief the President has done his duty. he has held the military accountable and again the comparison to Nixon trying to get us the hell out of Vietnam- Nixon launched secret attacks, invasion in to Cambodia, mining the harbors in the North... secret deals with the North and South...)

As far as the ends justifying the means- that pretty much sums up BushII's push to attack Iraq. Any lie was flung into the mix and as it was batted down a new one tossed in. yellow cake, centrifuge tubes, meetings in Prague... the ends justify the means.

I realize the right is trying very hard to paint President Obama's lack of cowboy swagger and snickering style as a failure to lead, but the fact is no President or nation can 'manage' 6 other nations in the Middle East to everyone's satisfaction. some on the right would have us invade Libya, prop up Mubarak, bomb the crap out of Syria and supply the rebels with advanced arms.

The cost of which would be staggering, so I guess the Right would write another check for others to pay.
Click to expand...

Waging war doesnt require declaration, so why does it matter?
 
Seems many on the Right are sticklers for the Constitution, when it suits like the 2nd amendment, Congress declares war according to the Constitution. I suppose if the Constitution was a living document and modern warfare doesn't have time to obey the Constitution then congress can be bypassed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom