Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (150060)	8/20/2002 12:28:31 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1570744

Tim, your comments are not true.......for a war to be legal, then it requires Congress's approval. Well, you're not exactly correct about this. The War Powers Act provides for the president launching a military action without congressional approval, however, by law the military action must be withdrawn if congressional approval isn't received within 60 days of the beginning of the military action. In the instant case, no military action has begun, and thus, the 60 day period has not started. As I said earlier, all Bush has to do is to comply with this provision. This has been tested in the Supreme Court, I believe. NOW, IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT A PRESIDENT VIOLATING THIS REQUIREMENT -- Bill Clinton DID run a war illegally when the war against Milosevic proceeded beyond the 60 day approval period. Here's one for you, regarding Clinton's refusal to seek approval: "he would not seek Congressional approval, since, as his spokesman, Joe Lockhart, said, "such a step would raise a host of constitutional questions." " (NY TIMES 4/29/99) So, because Clinton didn't want to get involved in "constitutional" questions, he just flat out broke the law. And you complain about BUSH! HA!

To: tejek who wrote (150060)	8/20/2002 12:37:30 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570744

for a war to be legal, then it requires Congress's approval. The Constitution is very clear about that.... Its not at all clear. The Constitution says Congress has the power to declare war and it says that the president is the commander in chief. It doesn't go in to any detail beyond that. Specifically it says that congress has the following powers - "Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy; Clause 14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress; " and the President - "Clause 1: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States"