illmyrin
Posts:
16,612
Registered:
Dec 25, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 10,815
User ID: 574,488
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5zNwOeyuG84
Wow- fast forward to the last min or so.
WASHINGTON, March 7—Under question from Sen. Sessions at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing today, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey indicated that "international permission," rather than Congressional approval, provided a 'legal basis' for military action by the United States.
At first I didn't think Panetta understood what the Senator was asking. He asked it over and over and Panetta just patiently explained various points. Then the Senator flat out told him that the US military receives NO authority or legal standing from any other bodies outside of Congress and the Presidency.
Panetta's reaction was shocking. A bit scarey.
-----signature-----
Hold up your opinions and I'll tell you which one is my favorit.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Sin_of_Onin
Posts:
35,113
Registered:
Jun 29, '05
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 23,763
User ID: 1,062,657
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
-----signature-----
"Okay... I'm with you fellas" --Delmar
F is for Fake-believe
"We apologise for the inconvenience" --God
"What Jesus fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem"--Reg
Run, Forrest! Run!
|
|
Link to this post
|
Abaddon_Ambrosius
Title: Retired Theurgist TL
Posts:
25,187
Registered:
Dec 21, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 25,057
User ID: 568,022
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
So... is Congress going to DO anything about it?
They make noise on this point... then do nothing... over and over.
-----signature-----
In the immortal words of Socrates - "I drank what?"
"God you guys suck at the internet - how can you fail to locate porn?!" - Eternal_Midnight
"Knowing means nothing." - Fat-badger
|
|
Link to this post
|
paulg_68
Posts:
30,961
Registered:
Jul 27, '09
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 30,669
User ID: 1,364,918
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
The executive branch has been growing out of control since Bush Jr took office and Obama has only sped up the power grab even faster.
Congress and the Supreme Court need to team up to give the Whitehouse a major smackdown.
-----signature-----
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSgiXGELjbc "Everyone has a chance to become rich." - Groucho48 "Most of the human wealth on earth exists between the ears of live human beings." - theredkay1
|
|
Link to this post
|
Abaddon_Ambrosius
Title: Retired Theurgist TL
Posts:
25,187
Registered:
Dec 21, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 25,057
User ID: 568,022
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
I'm with you on this one, Paul.
I don't understand WHY Congress keeps ceding this kind of authority to the Executive. During W, and continuing under O.
There's just no reason to let the executive continue taking major offensive military actions with no Congressional permission. Except for in direct defense of our homeland soil, there's just no reason.
-----signature-----
In the immortal words of Socrates - "I drank what?"
"God you guys suck at the internet - how can you fail to locate porn?!" - Eternal_Midnight
"Knowing means nothing." - Fat-badger
|
|
Link to this post
|
Darkblade_The_Great
Posts:
7,838
Registered:
Aug 10, '00
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 6,360
User ID: 39,086
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
I would love to say that I am surprised and shocked but I am not.
-----signature-----
 the less you gamble, the more you lose when you win. "Just get us on the ground." "I think that part'll happen pretty definitely!" Freedom only lives where good men make a stand
|
|
Link to this post
|
ZigmundZag
Title: Grammar Nazi
Posts:
25,948
Registered:
Mar 25, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 22,707
User ID: 661,552
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
|
I think you have to look back a little further than W. to figure out when presidents started deploying troops without congressional approval.
-----signature-----
"Take the cheese to sickbay!"
|
|
Link to this post
|
Abaddon_Ambrosius
Title: Retired Theurgist TL
Posts:
25,187
Registered:
Dec 21, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 25,057
User ID: 568,022
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
ZigmundZag posted:
I think you have to look back a little further than W. to figure out when presidents started deploying troops without congressional approval.
I don't care where it lands. It should stop.
Unlike some of the nutbags, I don't throw around the word "unconstitutional" very often. But this kindof is.
-----signature-----
In the immortal words of Socrates - "I drank what?"
"God you guys suck at the internet - how can you fail to locate porn?!" - Eternal_Midnight
"Knowing means nothing." - Fat-badger
|
|
Link to this post
|
__Bonk__
Posts:
53,947
Registered:
Jul 25, '09
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 53,339
User ID: 1,364,654
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
The US needs to stop a lot of things. It needs to stop meddling with every country. It needs to stop going to war without declaring it. It needs to stop holding people forever without a trial just because they are foreign combatants. Thats just a start of the things the US needs to stop. I wonder if the US really is the good guy?
-----signature-----
I keep my eyes fixed on the sun!
A change in feeling is a change in destiny.
|
|
Link to this post
|
illmyrin
Posts:
16,612
Registered:
Dec 25, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 10,815
User ID: 574,488
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
People in Congress are preparing impeachment papers.
-----signature-----
Hold up your opinions and I'll tell you which one is my favorit.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Allstarslacker
Posts:
9,760
Registered:
May 23, '06
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 9,653
User ID: 1,140,793
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
|
Who is responsible for enforcing treaties the United States makes?
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
illmyrin
Posts:
16,612
Registered:
Dec 25, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 10,815
User ID: 574,488
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
Allstarslacker posted:
Who is responsible for enforcing treaties the United States makes?
Enforcement? It's not like that. It's regulated into the system through legislatures. The Courts ultimately have the enforcement powers over treaty legal matters. If you're asking more specifically about, say, a mutual defense treaty and who enforces it then you'd have to back up a bit. The President negotiates treaties and 2/3rds vote in senate allows it to become law of the land.
There is a gem under all of this though. Obama can easily find a few different ways to say that he is operating within a treaty with regards towards excluding congress from it's war powers and responsibilities. On top of all this, we've got former CIA, current Defense Secretary chopping his fist at the Civilian agency responsible for managing national defense of all manners. This is a breakout move. A complete middle finger to the spirit of this country and the purpose of our government. It's the natural progression of a secretive political culture where now a select group decides its unsafe for Congress to know what our country will be doing. Impeachment INC.
-----signature-----
Hold up your opinions and I'll tell you which one is my favorit.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Groucho48
Posts:
11,206
Registered:
Oct 22, '03
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 11,136
User ID: 847,611
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
The President has acted as though he could attack another country on his own prerogative at least since LBJ. Congress always whines about it but does nothing to prevent it.
What is going on in the clip is that Panetta is taking this same assumption for granted and Sessions is acting shocked and amazed by something that has been happening regularly for half a century.
Panetta is refusing to discuss that part of things and is focusing on what legal hoops have to be jumped through before, say, NATO can intervene in Syria.
Now, I am not happy that the executive branch has this power, and right wingers aren't happy about it when Obama has this power, but, Congress can challenge it anytime it wants to.
-----signature-----
“Science is like sex: sometimes something useful comes out, but that is not the reason we are doing it.†– Richard Feynman
|
|
Link to this post
|
Sin_of_Onin
Posts:
35,113
Registered:
Jun 29, '05
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 23,763
User ID: 1,062,657
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
Just watched it again.
-----signature-----
"Okay... I'm with you fellas" --Delmar
F is for Fake-believe
"We apologise for the inconvenience" --God
"What Jesus fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem"--Reg
Run, Forrest! Run!
|
|
Link to this post
|
Darkblade_The_Great
Posts:
7,838
Registered:
Aug 10, '00
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 6,360
User ID: 39,086
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
Groucho48 posted:
The President has acted as though he could attack another country on his own prerogative at least since LBJ. Congress always whines about it but does nothing to prevent it.
What is going on in the clip is that Panetta is taking this same assumption for granted and Sessions is acting shocked and amazed by something that has been happening regularly for half a century.
Panetta is refusing to discuss that part of things and is focusing on what legal hoops have to be jumped through before, say, NATO can intervene in Syria.
Now, I am not happy that the executive branch has this power, and right wingers aren't happy about it when Obama has this power, but, Congress can challenge it anytime it wants to.
I think you are missing an important part that Sessions was attempting to show. Panetta is more worried about gaining the permission and authority of international bodies than he is about the Constitution or Congress's authority. As far as I know our constitution makes no mention of asking NATO or the UN for permission if we can enforce a no-fly-zone over Syria.
-----signature-----
the less you gamble, the more you lose when you win. "Just get us on the ground." "I think that part'll happen pretty definitely!" Freedom only lives where good men make a stand
|
|
Link to this post
|
Groucho48
Posts:
11,206
Registered:
Oct 22, '03
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 11,136
User ID: 847,611
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
Darkblade_The_Great posted:
Groucho48 posted:
The President has acted as though he could attack another country on his own prerogative at least since LBJ. Congress always whines about it but does nothing to prevent it.
What is going on in the clip is that Panetta is taking this same assumption for granted and Sessions is acting shocked and amazed by something that has been happening regularly for half a century.
Panetta is refusing to discuss that part of things and is focusing on what legal hoops have to be jumped through before, say, NATO can intervene in Syria.
Now, I am not happy that the executive branch has this power, and right wingers aren't happy about it when Obama has this power, but, Congress can challenge it anytime it wants to.
I think you are missing an important part that Sessions was attempting to show. Panetta is more worried about gaining the permission and authority of international bodies than he is about the Constitution or Congress's authority. As far as I know our constitution makes no mention of asking NATO or the UN for permission if we can enforce a no-fly-zone over Syria.
There are two different permission issues in play.
Does the president need approval of Congress to intervene militarily in, say, Syria.
Does NATO or the UN need some kind of legal framework to intervene militarily in, say, Syria.
Virtually every President in modern times has acted as though the answer to the first question is No. And Congress has always gone along with that, though it whines a lot.
Panetta completely ignored Sessions' attempt to talk about question 1 and focused completely on question 2. Sessions kept trying to meld the two questions together.
Another thing going on is that Obama has made it clear that the U.S. isn't going to go in unilaterally and do all the heavy lifting. We'll only intervene in situations that aren't directly threatening us if we are just one part of a broad, international effort.
-----signature-----
“Science is like sex: sometimes something useful comes out, but that is not the reason we are doing it.†– Richard Feynman
|
|
Link to this post
|
Sin_of_Onin
Posts:
35,113
Registered:
Jun 29, '05
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 23,763
User ID: 1,062,657
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
|
Sessions was being an obtuse moron. It was like an outpost debate. It was sad.
-----signature-----
"Okay... I'm with you fellas" --Delmar
F is for Fake-believe
"We apologise for the inconvenience" --God
"What Jesus fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem"--Reg
Run, Forrest! Run!
|
|
Link to this post
|
Brother_Tempus
Title: Patriot
Posts:
48,624
Registered:
Jan 9, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 48,310
User ID: 61,868
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
paulg_68 posted:
The executive branch has been growing out of control since FDR
Fixed for accuracy
But Congress needs to reassert its authority by taking back the powers it has abdicated to the executive and to the Federal Reserve
-----signature-----
You win ACF, dude - Osmenthe
BT is usually right - Onslaught
i think we need more BT on page 1 - FighterUSAF
Yep, BT is right - Aerlinthian
Got guns & ammo? Food? Precious metals?
|
|
Link to this post
|
Koneg
Title: Evil Genius
Posts:
31,388
Registered:
Dec 4, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 28,579
User ID: 530,943
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
illmyrin posted:
Then the Senator flat out told him that the US military receives NO authority or legal standing from any other bodies outside of Congress and the Presidency.
So... what's the problem?
The President can authorize the military to act without Congressional approval. He has to turn around and get permission and funding after-the-fact, but he doesn't need to ask first.
That said, Panetta and the General in that video were stumbling big time and they both need to be smacked around.
-----signature-----
* First rule of a gun fight: Have a gun.
|
"Any sufficiently advanced idiocy is
indistinguishable from trolling." -- Arthur C Clarke
|
|
Link to this post
|
illmyrin
Posts:
16,612
Registered:
Dec 25, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 10,815
User ID: 574,488
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
Koneg posted:
illmyrin posted:
Then the Senator flat out told him that the US military receives NO authority or legal standing from any other bodies outside of Congress and the Presidency.
So... what's the problem?
The President can authorize the military to act without Congressional approval. He has to turn around and get permission and funding after-the-fact, but he doesn't need to ask first.
That said, Panetta and the General in that video were stumbling big time and they both need to be smacked around.
Koneg the way you say that makes me wonder if you believe that's exactly how the Constitution describes the process. You're ideas are a product of 20 years of twisted executive power media arms.
Congress declares war. Congress tells the president to execute war. Everyone knows the Executive branch has been building foundations to end run Congress for decades but no powers or authority are granted to the Presidency that gives it the ability to immunize itself from the separation of powers.
Agree?
-----signature-----
Hold up your opinions and I'll tell you which one is my favorit.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Sin_of_Onin
Posts:
35,113
Registered:
Jun 29, '05
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 23,763
User ID: 1,062,657
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
ill your complaint is noted but it is nothing new. No one with half a brain thinks this is anything new.
It is also in no way controversial or new to suggest that the US builds consensus and can add legitimacy(internationally) to military action through international agreements. That the US as an actor has to worry about the legal authority of our laws but also the legality of action from the standpoint of other nations.
The most interesting part of the video is the obtuse nature of Sessions and the fact it seemed like the general was trolling him.
-----signature-----
"Okay... I'm with you fellas" --Delmar
F is for Fake-believe
"We apologise for the inconvenience" --God
"What Jesus fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem"--Reg
Run, Forrest! Run!
|
|
Link to this post
|
MatrexMistwalker
Posts:
????
Registered:
????
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 0
User ID: 0
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
|
I thought the president could authorize small short term actions but it is supposed to take an act of congress to stay in a conflict for an extended time period.
-----signature-----
|
|
Link to this post
|
Koneg
Title: Evil Genius
Posts:
31,388
Registered:
Dec 4, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 28,579
User ID: 530,943
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
illmyrin posted:
Koneg the way you say that makes me wonder if you believe that's exactly how the Constitution describes the process. You're ideas are a product of 20 years of twisted executive power media arms.
I am reminding you of what the law is, not what you might dream it to be. Unless and until the SCOTUS declares it unconstitutional the War Powers Act is the law of the land. Period.
You don't like it? Change the law.
Edit:
MatrexMistwalker posted:
I thought the president could authorize small short term actions but it is supposed to take an act of congress to stay in a conflict for an extended time period.
That's exactly what we're talking about - the War Powers Act.
-----signature-----
* First rule of a gun fight: Have a gun.
|
"Any sufficiently advanced idiocy is
indistinguishable from trolling." -- Arthur C Clarke
|
|
Link to this post
|
Z-Elder
Posts:
8,621
Registered:
Mar 15, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 8,465
User ID: 657,803
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
Koneg posted:
illmyrin posted:
Koneg the way you say that makes me wonder if you believe that's exactly how the Constitution describes the process. You're ideas are a product of 20 years of twisted executive power media arms.
I am reminding you of what the law is, not what you might dream it to be. Unless and until the SCOTUS declares it unconstitutional the War Powers Act is the law of the land. Period.
You don't like it? Change the law.
Edit:
MatrexMistwalker posted:
I thought the president could authorize small short term actions but it is supposed to take an act of congress to stay in a conflict for an extended time period.
That's exactly what we're talking about - the War Powers Act.
Boom!
-----signature-----
"The poison of our ordinary habits has killed the magic of the moment"
"Men are not in hell because God is angry with them . . .
they stand in the state of division and separation which by their own motion, they have made for themselves"
|
|
Link to this post
|
illmyrin
Posts:
16,612
Registered:
Dec 25, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 10,815
User ID: 574,488
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
The War Powers Act was trumped by the War Powers Resolution.... I think Koneg is confusing the two. I'll find.. ok found.
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548)[1] is a federal law intended to check the power of the President in committing the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
So What's the Law you're telling me I need to change? Obama ignored this in Libya. Clinton Ignored it in Bosnia. You should be on my side of this argument Koneg. Why aren't you? 
-----signature-----
Hold up your opinions and I'll tell you which one is my favorit.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Koneg
Title: Evil Genius
Posts:
31,388
Registered:
Dec 4, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 28,579
User ID: 530,943
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
illmyrin posted:
So What's the Law you're telling me I need to change?
This one? Act, Resolution - we're talking about the exact same law.
He does need to seek approval and funding - but only after the fact.
-----signature-----
* First rule of a gun fight: Have a gun.
|
"Any sufficiently advanced idiocy is
indistinguishable from trolling." -- Arthur C Clarke
|
|
Link to this post
|
illmyrin
Posts:
16,612
Registered:
Dec 25, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 10,815
User ID: 574,488
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
Koneg posted:
illmyrin posted:
So What's the Law you're telling me I need to change?
This one? Act, Resolution - we're talking about the exact same law.
He does need to seek approval and funding - but only after the fact.
The war powers act was from the 40s Koneg. The resolution passed in the 70s. Not the same thing.
-----signature-----
Hold up your opinions and I'll tell you which one is my favorit.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Koneg
Title: Evil Genius
Posts:
31,388
Registered:
Dec 4, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 28,579
User ID: 530,943
|
Subject:
Obama's Coup!
|
illmyrin posted:
The war powers act was from the 40s Koneg. The resolution passed in the 70s. Not the same thing.
Uh, I know that. I used the word "Act" but was in fact referring to the "Resolution". My bad. Sue me.
It's still the exact same law we're talking about. The President does not need to seek approval until after the fact.
In fact, the very next sentence in your cut-n-paste source material says exactly that - which is probably why you omitted it.
-----signature-----
* First rule of a gun fight: Have a gun.
|
"Any sufficiently advanced idiocy is
indistinguishable from trolling." -- Arthur C Clarke
|
|
Link to this post
|
