demos
Legend
Posts: 9,211
|
Post by demos on Oct 14, 2024 16:50:24 GMT
Are they enlisting in the IDF? They might as well since they're going to be doing the IDF's job. |
|
|
|
Post by archie on Oct 14, 2024 16:56:05 GMT
AND SO was low IQ Fiddler's statement dumbass 🙄 I misread. But I’ve heard many here call Dems racists. The truth is there are racist’s ignorant people on either sides, democrat or republican. That has nothing to do with which party will run the country greater. So far it is obvious that the republican way of production is much greater than the democrat junk yard. |
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Oct 14, 2024 19:15:15 GMT
Are they enlisting in the IDF? They might as well since they're going to be doing the IDF's job. Heaven forbid we help an ally defend their people against incoming missiles and other attacks. We wouldn't want to upset the radical Muslims who are already upset and don't need an excuse to continue their terror. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,211
|
Post by demos on Oct 14, 2024 19:18:47 GMT
Heaven forbid we help an ally defend their people against incoming missiles and other attacks. We wouldn't want to upset the radical Muslims who are already upset and don't need an excuse to continue their terror. This is a violation of the our Constitution and statutes.
IF you want to do this, then get Congress to do its job. The President cannot legally do this unilaterally.
|
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Oct 14, 2024 19:39:32 GMT
Heaven forbid we help an ally defend their people against incoming missiles and other attacks. We wouldn't want to upset the radical Muslims who are already upset and don't need an excuse to continue their terror. This is a violation of the our Constitution and statutes.
IF you want to do this, then get Congress to do its job. The President cannot legally do this unilaterally.
Yawn. This whole violation of the Constitution schtick has long been settled now. You don't have to like it, but the facts are the facts. Congress gave up this power long ago and has yet to claw it back. Your notion of this being a violation doesn't hold up to any precedent. Beyond that, the President doesn't need Congressional approval for any deployment. He is not committing troops to war in providing aid in missile defense. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,211
|
Post by demos on Oct 14, 2024 19:44:18 GMT
Yawn. This whole violation of the Constitution schtick has long been settled now. You don't have to like it, but the facts are the facts. Congress gave up this power long ago and has yet to claw it back. Your notion of this being a violation doesn't hold up to any precedent. Beyond that, the President doesn't need Congressional approval for any deployment. You're right it has been settled - in the form of the War Powers Act, which is statutory law, and according to that, he does need Congressional approval for this. Violating the law is not a legal precedent, unless you can get courts to rule on it, and they haven't.
There is a war going on. He is sending troops to operate the THAAD in expectation of a response from Iran to whatever it is Israel is planning to do in response Iran's attack. That is a troop commitment. Read the article posted on p. 3.
|
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Oct 14, 2024 19:53:44 GMT
Yawn. This whole violation of the Constitution schtick has long been settled now. You don't have to like it, but the facts are the facts. Congress gave up this power long ago and has yet to claw it back. Your notion of this being a violation doesn't hold up to any precedent. Beyond that, the President doesn't need Congressional approval for any deployment. You're right it has been settled - in the form of the War Powers Act, which is statutory law, and according to that, he does need Congressional approval for this. Violating the law is not a legal precedent, unless you can get courts to rule on it, and they haven't.
He is sending troops to operate the THAAD. That is a troop commitment. Read the article posted on p. 3.
Hell, the War Powers Act itself is still contested as likely not being Constitutional... which is why Presidents operate in the grey area of not saying they are following it, but just kind of going along with it just because. So, this is your argument and it appears you have none. Like I said... The War Powers Act was not a constraint on mere troop "commitments" and doesn't even automatically forbid deployment of forces directly into combat either. The President must notify and has some time constraints. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,211
|
Post by demos on Oct 14, 2024 20:13:49 GMT
Hell, the War Powers Act itself is still contested as likely not being Constitutional... which is why Presidents operate in the grey area of not saying they are following it, but just kind of going along with it just because. Oh, so it's not settled then (pretty sure you said the issue was settled). And no one has challenged the War Powers Act in court. From the guy who's position is apparently that the President can just do whatever he wants regardless of the Constitution or the law. The War Powers Act states: "The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
And, "For purposes of this chapter, the term 'introduction of United States Armed Forces' includes the assignment of members of such armed forces to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or accompany the regular or irregular military forces of any foreign country or government when such military forces are engaged, or there exists an imminent threat that such forces will become engaged, in hostilities."
This deployment does not meet those conditions: declaration of war, specific statutory authority, or a national emergency. So, it's illegal. The notification and time constraints have to do with those 3 conditions. Everyone seems to forget that part, because as part of the reporting process the President has to set forth the constitutional and legislative authority for his actions (and Article 2 authority is covered under the 3rd condition).
The War Power Act also reflects the precedents set by the Founders. See Louis Fisher's Presidential War Power. Or just look at the precedents set during the Quasi-War and Barbary Wars (three different Presidents setting the precedent - Adams, Jefferson and Madison).
|
|
|
|
Post by MojoJojo on Oct 14, 2024 20:17:19 GMT
Israel's response to Oct 7 will only ensure the cycle continues. Oh please. You have no idea what their response should be other than you just don't like it. It is a woefully naive position that expects Israel to just sit there and not care that their people are tortured, raped, murdered, and taken hostage. The IDF is making the same mistake we did by going after the terrorists militarily. They'll win every engagement, taking some casualties and inflicting destruction wherever they are. They'll parade pictures of eliminated head honchos and release video of the surgical strike that ended them. We'll all cheer and celebrate the justice due. Meanwhile, the replenished cycle of hatred spins on with no solution in sight. But, I don't have a plan so my observations don't matter, as criticism should remain unsaid in these trying times. |
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Oct 14, 2024 20:20:42 GMT
Oh please. You have no idea what their response should be other than you just don't like it. It is a woefully naive position that expects Israel to just sit there and not care that their people are tortured, raped, murdered, and taken hostage. The IDF is making the same mistake we did by going after the terrorists militarily. They'll win every engagement, taking some casualties and inflicting destruction wherever they are. They'll parade pictures of eliminated head honchos and release video of the surgical strike that ended them. We'll all cheer and celebrate the justice due. Meanwhile, the replenished cycle of hatred spins on with no solution in sight. But, I don't have a plan so my observations don't matter, as criticism should remain unsaid in these trying times. LOL, of course! They should have gone after the terrorists with flower deliveries and love letters. The cycle of hatred goes on because Hamas runs Gaza and has institutionalized it. They teach it to the children. Nothing Israel will ever do other than remove Hamas would end that cycle. |
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Oct 14, 2024 20:28:03 GMT
Oh, so it's not settled then (pretty sure you said the issue was settled). And no one has challenged the War Powers Act in court. YOU brought up the War Powers Act specifically, not me. That is what I said was not settled. You can't defend your own ignorant assertions, so you build a strawman to argue against. Again... this is not entering troops into any direct combat. Don't need any of those things. You are glossing over a lot of history around the contention over what constitutes hostilities and how it was never specifically defined by Congress, once again, leaving a lot of grey area for the President to faithfully execute the law as they interpret it. Not that the Executive has agreed they are bound by it. So, once again, you are here to piss into the wind all you like. These troops will be deployed and nothing will be done about it by Congress to say it is illegal. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,211
|
Post by demos on Oct 14, 2024 20:42:46 GMT
YOU brought up the War Powers Act specifically, not me. That is what I said was not settled. And what you said was settled was: "This whole violation of the Constitution schtick has long been settled now."
It's been settled in statute, and no one has challenged that statute in court. Presidents violating the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to declare war, doesn't mean that their violations are legal and thus settled.
Is that not what you're essentially arguing? Or do you actually agree that there are constitutional limits on what a President can legally do? If so, what are they.
They're being sent into a war zone to participate in a conflict, specifically shooting down any Iranian retaliatory strike depending on what Israel eventually does.
No one is glossing over anything; you're just choosing to focus on hostilities now, because the 3 conditions given in the law don't apply here.
But if you want a definition, other parts of US Code do define hostilities: "The term 'hostilities' means any conflict subject to the laws of war." ( Source) Or try international law, or you know, just use the dictionary definition of it. The Oxford Essential Dictionary of the U.S. Military defines hostilities as " acts of warfare."
Based on the actual definition, this is a situation "where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances" (otherwise we wouldn't be sending this battery and accompanying soldiers). So, this action still needs to fit one of those 3 conditions, and it doesn't.
Furthermore, if you don't like the War Powers Act, then look at the precedents set by Adams, Jefferson and Madison in the Quasi War and the Barbary Wars.
And if Congress passes a War Powers Resolution like they did with Yemen? (Unlikely, because this is Israel and domestic politics precludes that, but what if).
Furthermore, shouldn't Congress do something about? I think so. What about you? Or do you think the President should do what he wants?
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,482
|
Post by thor on Oct 14, 2024 22:59:57 GMT
They worship the same god you do, retard. Which ones are the enemy of your country Thor? Look in your mirror to see one Figa. |
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,587
Member is Online
|
Post by bama beau on Oct 15, 2024 1:45:59 GMT
The one year anniversary of the HAMAS led military incursion into Palestinian land held by the state of Israel, HAMAS being the main resistance political arm available to Palestinians who have more right to the land than the Zionists. Israel has more than proven HAMAS right. Zionism is ethnic cleansing, make no mistake. Free Palestine. LOL, and to think you were in the other thread chastising me on morality. You have none you terrorist supporting, rape supporting, murder supporting, torture supporting, hostage taking supporting, disgusting piece of shit. Who could argue against evidence like that? Certainly not a terrorist supporter, or worse, a person who knowingly, openly and falsely accuses another person of anything like that. Neither a rape supporter nor a false accuser am I. The same is true of my support for murder, torture, or almost anything else you can name against me. You know that, but you post the above sh*t anyway. What does that say about you? Not me. You. |
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,587
Member is Online
|
Post by bama beau on Oct 15, 2024 3:15:31 GMT
Are they enlisting in the IDF? They might as well since they're going to be doing the IDF's job. The IDF being the military arm of Israeli Zionists? |
|
|
|
Post by MojoJojo on Oct 15, 2024 11:24:48 GMT
The IDF is making the same mistake we did by going after the terrorists militarily. They'll win every engagement, taking some casualties and inflicting destruction wherever they are. They'll parade pictures of eliminated head honchos and release video of the surgical strike that ended them. We'll all cheer and celebrate the justice due. Meanwhile, the replenished cycle of hatred spins on with no solution in sight. But, I don't have a plan so my observations don't matter, as criticism should remain unsaid in these trying times. LOL, of course! They should have gone after the terrorists with flower deliveries and love letters. The cycle of hatred goes on because Hamas runs Gaza and has institutionalized it. They teach it to the children. Nothing Israel will ever do other than remove Hamas would end that cycle. LOL, you keep attributing strawman arguments to me. "You have no idea what their response should be other than you just don't like it. It is a woefully naive position that expects Israel to just sit there and not care that their people are tortured, raped, murdered, and taken hostage." "They should have gone after the terrorists with flower deliveries and love letters." Those arguments are yours. I get it, you're defending Israel's right to defend itself, we're on the same page. Ideally, the IDF takes out every Hamas/Hezbollah terrorist and Israel is safe again. Sounds great. Do you think the current approach will deliver that desired outcome? Or, taking lessons from the US's 20 year WoT, will it end just how it started? are there alternative approaches?? Is Bibi taking the exact course required and there can be no deviation??? |
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 26,021
|
Post by petep on Oct 15, 2024 11:53:39 GMT
LOL, of course! They should have gone after the terrorists with flower deliveries and love letters. The cycle of hatred goes on because Hamas runs Gaza and has institutionalized it. They teach it to the children. Nothing Israel will ever do other than remove Hamas would end that cycle. LOL, you keep attributing strawman arguments to me. "You have no idea what their response should be other than you just don't like it. It is a woefully naive position that expects Israel to just sit there and not care that their people are tortured, raped, murdered, and taken hostage." "They should have gone after the terrorists with flower deliveries and love letters." Those arguments are yours. I get it, you're defending Israel's right to defend itself, we're on the same page. Ideally, the IDF takes out every Hamas/Hezbollah terrorist and Israel is safe again. Sounds great. Do you think the current approach will deliver that desired outcome? Or, taking lessons from the US's 20 year WoT, will it end just how it started? are there alternative approaches?? Is Bibi taking the exact course required and there can be no deviation??? Hamas are the Palestinians. The Arab “Palestinians” are simply groups of people from neighboring countries who hate Israel. Hamas is not a “few” rogue terrorists. They have the full support of the people living in Palestine and the neighboring Arab countries. |
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Oct 15, 2024 15:11:09 GMT
The one year anniversary of the HAMAS led military incursion into Palestinian land held by the state of Israel, HAMAS being the main resistance political arm available to Palestinians who have more right to the land than the Zionists. Israel has more than proven HAMAS right. Zionism is ethnic cleansing, make no mistake. Free Palestine. LOL, and to think you were in the other thread chastising me on morality. You have none you terrorist supporting, rape supporting, murder supporting, torture supporting, hostage taking supporting, disgusting piece of shit. Perhaps you'd be more concerned if the children Israel was murdering were fetuses ..
That is if you weren't a lying hypocrite .. 'cept you are ..
|
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,587
Member is Online
|
Post by bama beau on Oct 16, 2024 4:59:43 GMT
Oh please. You have no idea what their response should be other than you just don't like it. It is a woefully naive position that expects Israel to just sit there and not care that their people are tortured, raped, murdered, and taken hostage. The IDF is making the same mistake we did by going after the terrorists militarily. They'll win every engagement, taking some casualties and inflicting destruction wherever they are. They'll parade pictures of eliminated head honchos and release video of the surgical strike that ended them. We'll all cheer and celebrate the justice due. Meanwhile, the replenished cycle of hatred spins on with no solution in sight. But, I don't have a plan so my observations don't matter, as criticism should remain unsaid in these trying times.Your observations matter, even if Que doesn't think so. |
|
