Comment

Comment by FCTP on March 18, 2011 at 9:01pm

YOu can go to Congress.org and send emails.

Comment by Ernest N. Mulich on March 18, 2011 at 8:56pm

Does anyone out there have a list of US House and Senate Email addresses. I am tired of sending faxes at excessive cost.

Nicknjax

Comment by J.R. on March 18, 2011 at 2:19pm

Roma and Tom.  Just for clarification, a bill is acted on only by Congress.  A bill that is introduced in either chamber of Congress has to be passed by both the House and Senate and then signed by the President in order to become a law.  The War Powers Act, which is a federal law, is also referred to as War Powers Resolution.  That is the law that has, I believe, given unconstitutional power to the President to order U.S. military engagement, for a limited period of time only, outside of the continental U.S., even when the continental U.S. has not been attacked. We all know they don't stick to that time limit.  We have proof of that in Iraq and Afghanistan.  There has been no war declared by the U.S. Congress since World War II. There have been actual wars the U.S. has engaged in for extended periods of time, even years.  But, even though we call them wars, they were never declared by the U.S. Congress as authorized wars. 

Comment by tamara stephenson on March 18, 2011 at 1:21pm

It would be one thing if the US military swooped in, finished the job and came home.  We still have troops in Kosovo!  Heck, we still have troops in South Korea!  Once we move in, it never ends.

Comment by J.R. on March 18, 2011 at 1:15pm

Excellent observation, Mr. Korach.  The president does, as Commander in Chief, have constitutional military powers to protect this country from attack or invasion, but he does not have the authority to go beyond the powers granted to him in the Constitution.  The power to declare war is vested solely in the U.S. Congress.  The War Powers Resolution is definitely questionable as to its constitutionality, and when the U.S. military is engaging in military action under its authorization, they are, as you indicated, bound by its time limits.  I believe that for the President to act under the War Powers Resolution, without first having express authorization to enter into what could become an extended military engagement, facilitates dragging the United States into a military engagement of duration exceeding what the War Powers Resolution covers and gets this country involved, though the back door, in actual undeclared wars. Once such an engagement begins, is in operation, and the mission has not yet been accomplished, they can't just say "Well, we've exhausted our allowed number of days... let's go home."  We can see prime examples of that in the on-going U.S. military actions in both Iraq and Afghanistan, neither of which are declared wars.  Do we want to see that repeated in Libya? 

And surely no one believes U.N. troops are capable of actual "peacekeeping" as a follow-up to military actions. All you have to do is look at all their failed missions around the world that were, and are, operated under the rubric of "peace-keeping."  Witness their miserable failure while based in Lebanon, where they sat idle and didn't help Israeli troops in Lebanon after Lebanon had attacked Israel and Israel retaliated, as well as their subsequent acquiesence to Hamas' essential takeover of the Lebanese government.  And look at their role in the Oil for Food Program that benefitted no-one but Saddam Hussein and some corrupt officials at the United Nations.  It provided Saddam Hussein millions of dollars to pour into his defense.  Approximately 95% of the United Nation's budget has long been coming from the United States and Japan, neither of which can now afford it and need to stop doing so, particularly in light of the fact that most U.N.member nations are aligned against us in almost every respect.  

Interestingly, Justice Storey, as the founder of Harvard Law School who believed in the importance of Christianity to our laws, would surely have also known that the original Harvard College was founded to train young men for the Christian ministry, as were other institutions of higher learning during that time period.    

Comment by William Korach on March 18, 2011 at 1:00pm

Tom;

I did not say that the president has the sloe authority to declare war. I said that the the president has the authority to approve limited military action without congressional approval. Example: President Reagan bombed Tripoli in reprisal for the Libyan terror bombing of the night club in Berlin killing US servicemen. These include covert operations and military actions lasting less than 60 days.

This is well established and was manifest in the 2001 War Powers Act.

Bill

Comment by William Korach on March 18, 2011 at 11:54am

Justice Storey's home was nearby ours in Salem, MA. Storey was the founder of Harvard Law School, and later Supreme Court Justice. He was a great believer in the importance of Christianity to out laws and ethics. I discuss Justice Storey at some length in my book, "Rock of the Republic." Having said that, the president, as Commander in Chief of the armed forces, has some executive latitude in taking limited military action. 

 

Bill

http://www.rockoftherepublic.com

Comment by William Korach on March 18, 2011 at 11:24am

I am of two minds on the topic of supporting rebels in Libya. The first is that America should act in her own self interest, and as the leader of the free world. I do not support asking the UN for permission for our own self defense. I dislike Obama's endless entreaties to the "international community," and his uncertainty about America's exceptionalism. If America needs to act, we should lead! However, I am convinced that Qadaffi is in fact, a threat to America. Qadaffi has much American blood on his hands-Lockerbie, the Berlin nightclub bombing-and it took Reagan's bombs on Tripoli to get Qadaffi to back away from global terrorism. I do believe he needs to be ousted by his own people. If we can do this with a low cost, no fly zone, we probably should do it. However, at this late date, and with Obama's dithering, it may be too late and a moot point.

CDR Bill Korach, USNR, ret.

Comment by J.R. on March 18, 2011 at 11:21am

It's interesting to see the diversity in the authority upon which the United States has engaged in military actions since World War II, which was the last war that was officially declared by the Congress of the United States, through the authority vested in it by the U.S. Constitution. In 1973, following debate about presidential power with regard to troops having been deployed to Vietnam without a declaration of war, a compromise was reached by passage of the War Powers Resolution, which clearly defined how many soldiers could be deployed by the President of the U.S. and for how long. It also required formal reports by the President to Congress explaining the status of such deployments and limited the extent of time American forces could be employed without a formal declaration of war.

I believe Congress acted unconstitutionally in passing a war powers act (law) that established circumstances and conditions under which the President of the United States could deploy troops to foreign nations, thus ceding Congress' sole constitutionally-mandated power and authority to declare war. In doing so, Congress ceded an enormous amount of its own mandated military authority and power to the President. This resolution was passed AFTER the Vietnam "War" was over. By passing the resolution, Congress handed to one person, a power that was constitutionally mandated to belong to the collective 535 members of the U.S. Congress, who represent all citizens of the United States as their voice in government. The founding fathers would likely roll over in their graves if they knew the escape of kingly powers their countrymen fought and died to achieve had been handed by Congress (the Legislative Branch) to a temporary chief executive in the Executive Branch of the U.S. government without an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In other words, Congress abdicated its role the Constitution clearly gave only to them as representatives of all the people of this country. (*** Read the rest of this blog entry at J.R. Cottingham's blog or All Blogs as soon a it is posted there)

Comment by Bunny Harrison on March 18, 2011 at 10:54am

I'm responding off the top of my head so well may be incorrect -- but isn't the delay in backing up the Libyan freedom fighters because Mr. O didn't want to take on a war by himself -- so delayed, delayed until the UN would vote collectively the thinking of the world?  Don't think I'm defending him, for I believe this is anothe example of NON LEADERSHIP.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page