Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

War powers acts

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post

    Europe wil do nothing: the European states have disarmed,not only morally but also militarily . Europe is doing 2 things :
    shouting : Yankee go home
    and whining : Yankee come back, at our conditions .
    The Muslim lobby is dominating Europe .
    Then the consensus is clear.

    Except for the Neo-Cons, nobody wants us to be there.... and maybe the Muslim-style Hillbillies that want something unusual to shoot at.
    Last edited by Phaing; 15 Jan 20, 01:03.

    Comment


    • #77
      Can anybody show me the videos of the Americans who were aware of Soleimani celebrating his death on the streets or in the stadiums?

      I mean something approaching what happened when Osama was killed:







      Let's be serious please...
      My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by pamak View Post

        I am asking you a question about Trump's tactic in justfying this use of force. And I said that tomorrow somebody other than Trump may copy the same tactic.

        And do not assume what I would support or not. Every decision is a matter of judging the balance of the benefits it brings to the possible consequences that accompany it.

        OBL was involved in 9/11 and was leading an organization which was directly in war with the US and the US army had initiated many operations in Pakistan BEFORE the raid that killed OBL and the Congress went along with that! And that provocation involved a US ally and was not creating a risk of starting military operations between the two countries.

        So, in a similar situation in the future, I would be okay with a similar action. By contrast, this Iranian General was not known to most Americans up until Trump mentioned his name and there was no history to suggest that the Congress was okay with the tactic of targeting in public an Iranian official. Also Iran was a rival and a provocation against it created a much more serious risk of starting military operations.

        So, as you can see I have no problem to answer your questions. Now, can you AT LAST accept my challenge and answer finally my question?


        Are you ready to take the risk to let a future president support a new Arab Spring under the pretext (and without providing evidence) that the US faces an imminent threat?


        Stop dancing around and face it honestly!
        Yes, we get it. You support whatever the Democrats do, and oppose whatever the Republicans do. This is where your "lawyer" skills come in, and you dance and shift and jockey for position until you think you got the other guy cornered in a partisan position. It doesn't work that way. If Obama did what Trump did, you would be here defending him. But Trump did it, so you are attacking his position.

        Your question doesn't make sense. You're asking if I would support a future president getting involved in an Arab Spring. The Arab Spring was a failure. So what you're asking is, "would you support a future president getting involved in a failed Middle East policy?" But that question is ridiculous, so you must mean something else.

        So the question is, would you support a president who launched a military operation on another country's soveriegn territory, in order to take out a terrorist leader? The answer is yes, because Obama did it. If it was Trump, your answer would be no.
        "It is a fine fox chase, my boys"

        "It is well that war is so terrible-we would grow too fond of it"

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by American87 View Post

          Yes, we get it. You support whatever the Democrats do, and oppose whatever the Republicans do. This is where your "lawyer" skills come in, and you dance and shift and jockey for position until you think you got the other guy cornered in a partisan position. It doesn't work that way. If Obama did what Trump did, you would be here defending him. But Trump did it, so you are attacking his position.

          Your question doesn't make sense. You're asking if I would support a future president getting involved in an Arab Spring. The Arab Spring was a failure. So what you're asking is, "would you support a future president getting involved in a failed Middle East policy?" But that question is ridiculous, so you must mean something else.

          So the question is, would you support a president who launched a military operation on another country's soveriegn territory, in order to take out a terrorist leader? The answer is yes, because Obama did it. If it was Trump, your answer would be no.
          I agree with you 100%, this has nothing to do with future Presidents, but everything with Trump, the WPA has NEVER come up as far as I can remember going back to Eisenhower, the democRats are trying to BS the people (like they always do), but people like me, (sane) ain't buying!
          Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by pamak View Post

            I am talking in general. I said that Suleimani was not known to most Americans and they did not care about him. Some people knew indeed, but Congress does not make decisions based on some people.The politicians feel compelled to act only when a good part of people demand an action against a certain target.
            What does Congress have to do with it, the President can take action if he deems!
            Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Trung Si View Post

              What does Congress have to do with it, the President can take action if he deems!
              I answered his claim that

              If Obama sent troops into Pakistan to take out Bin Lahdie, and he never notified Congress until after the fact, let alone senators in a closed door meeting, you would support him.

              and I explained why the case with OBL cannot be compared with this case.

              And I also do not accept that without an imminent threat a president can target any official of any country he wants risking a war with that country without having the green light from Congress.

              and again, the US military had staged operations in Pakistan before OBL raid, and the Congress was aware of such operations.
              My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

              Comment

              Latest Topics

              Collapse

              Working...
              X