• 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!

US may send ground troops to Libya

No he didn't. Congress did when they abdicated their Constitutional responsibility by passing the War Powers Act. But, since Obama did go to war under that illegal law, that kind of makes him an accessory, don't you think?

No, I don't think so. Mainly, because Congress didn't pass an illegal law. It's no more illegal for Congress to pass the War Powers Act than it is for Congress to pass a declaration of war.

Prior to WPA, there were no restrictions on the president to deploy combat forces. The WPA was intended to restrict the president's power, not enhance it.
 
Last edited:
It makes no difference how many laws someone breaks if there's no one there to enforce the laws. And who the hell is going to enforce the WPA? Congress? LOL :rolleyes:

What is the penalty for actually violating the WPA?
 
I believe that air and missile strikes against a sovereign nation should require a declaration of war or, at least, the formal agreement from congress.
 
Ground troops have been over in Libya for awhile, that is, if you count rogue CIA agents as troops.
 
There is no penalty because the law is not enforced.

Why is that?


We have a robust legal system and we should use it, not circumvent it
 
It makes no difference how many laws someone breaks if there's no one there to enforce the laws. And who the hell is going to enforce the WPA? Congress? LOL :rolleyes:

Kind of Al Gore and the Buddhist monks. "No controlling legal authority."
 
There is no penalty because the law is not enforced.

There's no penalty, because the law hasn't been broken.

What some of you don't seem to realize, is that before the war powers act was passed, there were no restrictions on the president's power to wage war.
 
There's no penalty, because the law hasn't been broken.

What some of you don't seem to realize, is that before the war powers act was passed, there were no restrictions on the president's power to wage war.

The WPA is current law and prohibits a POTUS from using the military in a foreign war without consulting w/Congress, and prohibits sustained engagements of more than 90 days without formal Conressional authorization or a declaration of war.

Obama may have broken that law, because I don't recall him ever consulting w/Congress when he launched missile strikes against Libya.

But whether he breaks the law is irrelevant for all practical purposes, because the WPA is much like the laws against hiring undocumented workers--it is seldom, if ever, enforced.

The US is a plutocracy, so if a President's waging of the war is consistent w/the interests of oil companies, hedge funds, etc., the President is allowed to do anything he wants, even if it's illegal.

A POTUS can only be impeached for violating the WPA if in doing so he harms US corporate interests, because (w/the possible exception of Kucinich), Congress' allegiance is to those interests.
 
The WPA is current law and prohibits a POTUS from using the military in a foreign war without consulting w/Congress, and prohibits sustained engagements of more than 90 days without formal Conressional authorization or a declaration of war.

The WPA states that the president must consult Congress, within 48 hours of deploying troops.

Obama may have broken that law, because I don't recall him ever consulting w/Congress when he launched missile strikes against Libya.

But whether he breaks the law is irrelevant for all practical purposes, because the WPA is much like the laws against hiring undocumented workers--it is seldom, if ever, enforced.



The US is a plutocracy, so if a President's waging of the war is consistent w/the interests of oil companies, hedge funds, etc., the President is allowed to do anything he wants, even if it's illegal.

A POTUS can only be impeached for violating the WPA if in doing so he harms US corporate interests, because (w/the possible exception of Kucinich), Congress' allegiance is to those interests.

Obama didn't break the law. face it.
 
The WPA states that the president must consult Congress, within 48 hours of deploying troops.



Obama didn't break the law. face it.

All politicians break laws.

As for the WPA, there is no way you could know if he broke that law. Neither you nor anyone other ordinary American is privy to what happens behind closed doors.
 
Back
Top Bottom