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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (132076)	8/12/2005 9:28:19 PM
From: Gut Trader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793807

There really seems no option other than US military to handle a real terrorist "problem".

To: Ilaine who wrote (132076)	8/13/2005 6:23:24 PM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793807

Resolution, which I read as requiring consultation with Congress before introducing US forces into a theater of operations unless there is an emergency In the absence of a "declaration of war", which the AUF constitutes - it was enough to satisfy the Supreme Court. The President doesn't have to consult Congress before responding to an invasion or national emergency. See the Blockade Cases from the Civil War. When the President already has Congressional authorization to act, his powers are at their maximum. In the event of a terrorist attack on CONTUS again, do you really think Congress or the Court is going to quibble? I don't. Derek