President Obama will 'bypass Congress' over war in Iraq

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-27916806

Obama will declare war, not the Congress


http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/75632000/jpg/_75632150_022760355-1.jpg


US President Barack Obama had told Congressional leaders he does not need lawmakers' approval for any action in Iraq, the top Senate Republican says.

Senator Mitch Mc McConnell was speaking after a meeting between the president and senior members of Congress.

Iraq has asked for US air strikes against advancing Sunni militants.

Meanwhile US Vice-President Biden and Iraqi PM Nouri Maliki discussed possible "additional measures" by the US to assist Iraqi forces.

The two men considered ways "to roll back the terrorists' advances", a White House statement said.

On Wednesday Mr Obama met Congressional leaders at the White House to discuss the US response to recent advances by ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant).

Speaking afterwards, Mr McConnell said the president had "indicated he didn't feel he had any need for authority from us for steps that he might take".

Correspondents say the White House has so far avoided the thorny question as to whether it needs Congressional authority for any military action in Iraq.

Last year the president did not seek consent for possible attacks against Syria, although he abandoned such a move once it became clear that Congress would not support it.

Earlier this month a number of lawmakers condemned the lack of congressional consultation over the release of army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl from the Taliban in Afghanistan in exchange for five Guantanamo Bay detainees.

Administration officials say the president may be able to act unilaterally in Iraq because its government has requested US air strikes against ISIS militants who have seized several key cities over the past week.

ISIS and their Sunni Muslim allies are also reported to be advancing in Diyala and Salahuddin provinces after they overran Iraq's second city, Mosul, last week.

And to think Obama studied constitutional law.....


"Congress shall have power to ... declare War".

Only the Congress has the power to declare war, not the Emperor President. Period, end of story.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HjeOKDFrv0

Obama should be impeached if you ask me, this is about the most serious thing a President can do as the decision to declare a war (military action) involves lives and a hell of a lot of money, and the office of the President doesn't have this power. He's acting like a tyrant.

Thoughts?

[Chippiewill]

Straw-man.

I'm sorry Dan, but this thread is pathetic.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Straw-man.

I'm sorry Dan, but this thread is pathetic.

The separation of powers and and US Constitution are pathetic? You believe the executive branch should be able to declare war without the Congress?

Then you agree with Obama, but I disagree and believe in the rule of law. And that's what the thread is about.

[Chippiewill]

Nigel Farage will deport all Romanians and admits to being a racist
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/16/nigel-farage-lbc-interview-key-moments

The Ukip leader endured a 'car-crash' interview as radio presenter James O'Brien quizzed him over racism, expenses and his party's links to far-right European politicians

'You know what the difference is [it's their race]'
Why did Farage say people wouldn't want to live next door to Romanians? He's racist.

O'Brien: "What about if a group of German children [moved in]? What's the difference?"

Farage: "You know what the difference is … We want an immigration system based on controlling not only quantity but quality as well."

Farage, who has a German wife, has openly endorsed Hitler and racial supremacy based on subjective quality


"Best friends" with Racist BNP Activist

In 1997, said O'Brien said, Farage had lunch with [Mark] Deavin, a BNP activist who had written an "exposé of Jews in the media called Mindbenders … It was reported at the time that you were a man who often used words like nig-nog and the N-word that Jeremy Clarkson recently got into trouble for." Deavin wrote an article suggesting the BNP and Ukip should "get into bed together".

The lunch you had with him was after he was exposed, O'Brien pointed out.

Farage: "I wanted to find out why … why somebody who'd been held up to me … he was going to make a very big difference …"

O'Brien: "But you'd seen what he'd written. The Grand Plan: the Origins of Non-white Immigration."

Farage "eats" children who don't natively speak English - except his own

Farage spoke recently of feeling "awkward" on a train when other passengers were not speaking English. Farage's wife and daughters speak German, O'Brien pointed out: do they make you feel uncomfortable?

Farage: "No, because they can speak German, heil Hitler!"

O'Brien: "The children you refer to are recorded as having English as a second language … Your own children would fit into that category … You felt uncomfortable about people speaking foreign languages, despite the fact that presumably your own wife does when she phones home to Germany."

"I don't suppose she speaks it on the train," an exasperated Farage responded.

Farage can't trust own wife not to speak German on trains! Leak: Trouble in the bedroom.


Farage admits Racism is about nationality

Farage: "What is racism? Is racism between races?"

O'Brien: "Don't you know? How can you say you're not something if you don't know what it is?"

Farage: "Is race about colour? Is race about race? Is it about nationality?"

Farage given unfair representation by the BBC, state media, to support his own racist political platform

O'Brien: "You write columns in the Express and the Independent every week. You've been on Question Time more often than anyone apart from David Dimbleby."

Farage steals money from his tax-paying Romanian neighbours

Farage: "What they [Labour MEPs] do, is they have an auditor to make sure they spend the money in accordance with the rules … "

O'Brien: "You say that as if there's something wrong with it."

I keep telling you guys that Farage is a Racist, yet you keep voting this Fascist into the European Parliament. The rise in the extreme right in France is a direct result of you voting for UKIP - if we keep this up then they'll be sending anyone who votes Labour to concentration camps. They can try and censor us, but the people's republic will not be silenced by the fascist right!

He also denies climate change, he wants to melt the ice caps and frack our land, which we own and should be paid for, to put us all in danger. He's clearly been paid off by the oil companies to sell us all out whilst he goes to retire on his tax-payer funded mega-yacht floating over the region previously known as Cornwall.

We must not let this amateur politician who rides the Brussels gravy train into Westminster - we can only trust the professionals who have worked their whole lives for this career, like my best bud Mr Clegg.

--

This is in essence what you have done with this Article Dan. Excuse the hyperbole, but I wanted to make it clear in what way you *******ised this article. It is inexcusable and disrespectful to the author, me, every other forum user. You should be ashamed.

Edited by Calum0812 (Forum Super Moderator): Please do not post off topic, thanks!

[-:Undertaker:-]

This is in essence what you have done with this Article Dan. Excuse the hyperbole, but I wanted to make it clear in what way you *******ised this article. It is inexcusable and disrespectful to the author, me, every other forum user. You should be ashamed.

What have I done to the article? The article is unchanged.

But let's get this clear....

MY thread.
MY sources.
MY commentary.
MY rules.

Rights you have over anything I post or how I word my comments: nilch. You don't have any say in what I post or how I word my posts, or even my thread titles: and you never ever will. Stop trying is my advice to you, or call a hotline or something. I don't give a hoot.

And that's all I have to say on thread titles. Now if anybody wants to debate or comment on the constitutional powers of war, they're welcome to.

[FlyingJesus]

Zero quotes from Obama, the word of an opposition Senator who feels it was "indicated", and a whole lot of dodgy writing.

Also if you look further at what was actually said (http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/iraq-white-house-meeting-mitch-mcconnell-108031.html) you'd see that it was actually the claim of the congressional leaders that Obama wouldn't need their go-ahead, and interestingly Obama has (again) pledged that he absolutely will not send US troops back into Iraq, so basically everything you've said is entirely and provably wrong. Sure you can word things how you like but you can also fully expect to be called out when you're spewing utter bull

[-:Undertaker:-]

Zero quotes from Obama, the word of an opposition Senator who feels it was "indicated", and a whole lot of dodgy writing.

Also if you look further at what was actually said (http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/iraq-white-house-meeting-mitch-mcconnell-108031.html) you'd see that it was actually the claim of the congressional leaders that Obama wouldn't need their go-ahead, and interestingly Obama has (again) pledged that he absolutely will not send US troops back into Iraq, so basically everything you've said is entirely and provably wrong. Sure you can word things how you like but you can also fully expect to be called out when you're spewing utter bull

Uh dummy, he's already sent troops back to Iraq - http://www.ronpaulchannel.com/editorial/rons-blog/ron-paul-responds-president-obamas-statement-iraq/ He's a politician, and as for what the Republican leaders are saying - don't you understand they they SUPPORT him over Iraq? They're pushing for military action, and they won't expect him to go to Congress just as George W Bush didn't go to Congress (illegally).


http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121219234327/glee/images/6/6c/DUH!.gif

He's looking at military action in Iraq and is not going to go to Congress if he decides so. So who is spewing bull? You, not me or the BBC.

[FlyingJesus]

That's not troops, and the military action being discussed currently isn't anything invasive or war-like because it's in support of the current government and not looking to overthrow anyone. Also still no quote from Obama himself. Are you even trying these days?

[-:Undertaker:-]

That's not troops, and the military action being discussed currently isn't anything invasive or war-like because it's in support of the current government and not looking to overthrow anyone. Also still no quote from Obama himself. Are you even trying these days?

That IS troops my dear, Obama and the administration only call them 'special x' or whatever other word they can come up as to avoid having to declare war. Are you aware of the Vietnam war for example? America never declared war on north Vietnam, and only initially sent a few hundred troops there...... to avoid calling it a war, and then it escalated yet was still never declared a war. Yet as Ron Paul says in the video I posted above, who would claim that Vietnam wasn't an act of war?

As for what Obama plans to do in Iraq, that's not the point - the point is that military action (an act of war) must be declared as a war under the US constitution by the Congress. The executive isn't supposed to have the power to invade airspace either at the request of the Iraqi government or simply to bomb ISIS positions: that's the role of the Congress as defined by the constitution. Obama ignoring the Congress, as he did in Libya, is illegal.

And why do I need a direct quote? The administration and Democrat leaders haven't denied it, the BBC and CNN are both reporting it: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/18/politics/us-iraq/

Learn some history, learn about the separation of powers and then get back to me. Cheers.

[FlyingJesus]

"Why do I need a direct quote when I'm making claims on what someone said"

[lucaskf390]

To be honest I ask myself everyday why in 21st century people still want to make war, If US spends 10% of their defense money in research to create new technologies or fuelling, there would be no excuse to make war to steal oil.
And If The United States Constitution don't allow Obama to declare war by his own, then he's wrong and something need to be made.

[iBlueBox]

The Vietnam War was technically through the UN.

Also does Obama not have emergency powers?

[dbgtz]

Uh dummy, he's already sent troops back to Iraq - http://www.ronpaulchannel.com/editorial/rons-blog/ron-paul-responds-president-obamas-statement-iraq/ He's a politician, and as for what the Republican leaders are saying - don't you understand they they SUPPORT him over Iraq? They're pushing for military action, and they won't expect him to go to Congress just as George W Bush didn't go to Congress (illegally).


http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121219234327/glee/images/6/6c/DUH!.gif

He's looking at military action in Iraq and is not going to go to Congress if he decides so. So who is spewing bull? You, not me or the BBC.

Why do you support and trust the BBC when it suits you, but when it goes against what you think it's some kind of evil corporation biased in favour of the government?

[GommeInc]

Is it me or were both sources incredibly stupid? Obama doesn't appear to have said anything of the sort in the article and the sources referencing Nigel Farage (for no reason) by Chippiewill make claims he said something but never actually give any sources going so far as refusing to quote what he actually said. Furthermore, xenophobia still exists yet for some reason people opt to use racism (no surprise, the media picking the more exaggerated form) despite both being obviously different.

It's like the Guardian has become the new Sun newspaper in that post. Mixing up words, making a claim yet failing to support it and also misquoting actual quotes which are important. Farage was xenophobic/sexist when he made the comment that he feared Romanian males moving next door. Feared = xenophobic (fear of Romanians) and purposely pointing at males = sexism. Racism is about superiority, not a fear.

This thread is stupid.


The Vietnam War was technically through the UN.

Also does Obama not have emergency powers?
Usually. The executive tends to have the power to declare war as congress may take too long to decide to go to war and more damage, money and time will have to wasted to right the troubles. Same with our system where the PM can declare war, though we're not so strict and I believe we now wish for the commons to debate it.

[Kardan]

Is it me or were both sources incredibly stupid? Obama doesn't appear to have said anything of the sort in the article and the sources referencing Nigel Farage (for no reason) by Chippiewill make claims he said something but never actually give any sources going so far as refusing to quote what he actually said. Furthermore, xenophobia still exists yet for some reason people opt to use racism (no surprise, the media picking the more exaggerated form) despite both being obviously different.

It's like the Guardian has become the new Sun newspaper in that post. Mixing up words, making a claim yet failing to support it and also misquoting actual quotes which are important. Farage was xenophobic/sexist when he made the comment that he feared Romanian males moving next door. Feared = xenophobic (fear of Romanians) and purposely pointing at males = sexism. Racism is about superiority, not a fear.

This thread is stupid.


Usually. The executive tends to have the power to declare war as congress may take too long to decide to go to war and more damage, money and time will have to wasted to right the troubles. Same with our system where the PM can declare war, though we're not so strict and I believe we now wish for the commons to debate it.

I think that is his point - he's just doing what Undertaker does :P

[GommeInc]

I think that is his point - he's just doing what Undertaker does :P
So not really doing anything useful? :P

[-:Undertaker:-]

"Why do I need a direct quote when I'm making claims on what someone said"

Republican leaders have said it, and the BBC and CNN are reporting it. He's already sent troops too.

Nice climbdown though after I pointed out that he's ALREADY sent troops to Iraq bypassing the Congress, thus breaking the constitution.


To be honest I ask myself everyday why in 21st century people still want to make war, If US spends 10% of their defense money in research to create new technologies or fuelling, there would be no excuse to make war to steal oil.
And If The United States Constitution don't allow Obama to declare war by his own, then he's wrong and something need to be made.

Indeed, thank you for an intelligent reply as opposed to the rubbish that others have posted.

And I agree, personally I would vote to impeach him - it's a pretty serious breach of executive power.


The Vietnam War was technically through the UN.

Also does Obama not have emergency powers?

US Constitution is the ultimate law of America, not UN resolutions.

And he uses executive powers, but they cannot triumph constitutional amendments - executive powers are clarifying acts of law.


Why do you support and trust the BBC when it suits you, but when it goes against what you think it's some kind of evil corporation biased in favour of the government?

When I posted from the Daily Mail i'm criticised, and now when I post from the BBC i'm criticised.

All news sources are biased, my point against the Beeb is that people tend to believe it's an infallible and neutral source when it isn't.


Usually. The executive tends to have the power to declare war as congress may take too long to decide to go to war and more damage, money and time will have to wasted to right the troubles. Same with our system where the PM can declare war, though we're not so strict and I believe we now wish for the commons to debate it.

But it doesn't have that power, it simply subverts the constitution (as they did in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq) by claiming that it technically isn't a war but is a "limited targeted airstrike" or that the troops are "military advisors" yet we all know that sending troops or using drones/airstrikes is military action that constitutes an act of war. The executive, according to the constitution, doesn't have that power: only the Congress does.

And that's why I posted this, to warn over the abuse and centralisation of power as well as the danger of yet another Vietnam-style conflict.

[FlyingJesus]

Republican leaders have said it, and the BBC and CNN are reporting it. He's already sent troops too.

Nice climbdown though after I pointed out that he's ALREADY sent troops to Iraq bypassing the Congress, thus breaking the constitution.

So if two news sources and someone who wants a midfield position in the England squad say that Gerrard hates the Queen and wants to shoot her that would magically be true too.

And no, still not troops no matter how often you repeat it.


All news sources are biased, my point against the Beeb is that people tend to believe it's an infallible and neutral source when it isn't.

And his point was that you're now attempting to use it as one when it takes on the word of an opposition senator as gospel

[Chippiewill]

Technically it's not breaking the constitution anyway since I'm pretty certain America hasn't declared war since WW2.