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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geode00 who wrote (198989)	8/24/2006 1:36:45 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Getting "I know exactly what would have happened if..." from "...but the effect would likely have been moderate, possibly even minor. It wouldn't have broken Al Qaeda." Also isn't very reasonable. Esp since the full context of that statement was "I'm pretty sure there would have been an effect, but the effect would likely have been moderate, possibly even minor. It wouldn't have broken Al Qaeda." Note: "I'm pretty sure" "would likely have been" "possibly even" If you get that I claim to know exactly what the effect is from that sentence that it would appear that you either didn't pay much attention to what I wrote, or you are deliberately distorting what I wrote. What passage(s) in the Constitution are you talking about? There are many web pages with the full text of the constitution. Its pretty easy to find the presidential powers listed. Since I specifically mentioned the powers of commander in chief it shouldn't be ridiculously easy to find that part of the constitution, but I'll do it for you. law.cornell.edu Now its true that the constitution doesn't specifically define what "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" means but it does obviously mean that the president controls the military. When we are in a conflict the president can order a specific target be bombed or otherwise attacked (it might be micromanagement during an ongoing conflict, but its within his constitutional powers). It seems rather unreasonable to say that the president can order bombs to be dropped on the enemy but he can't try to intercept their communication, or otherwise spy on them.