Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Ohmar, Lee, Kaine, announce war powers resolution to prevent war with Iran

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ohmar, Lee, Kaine, announce war powers resolution to prevent war with Iran

    Reps. Ilhan Omar and Barbara Lee Announce War Powers Resolution To Prevent War With Iran:

    Rep. Ilhan Omar and Rep. Barbara Lee today announced a War Powers Resolution in the United States House of Representatives to direct the removal of the United States Armed Forces from hostilities against Iran that have not been authorized by Congress. The resolution is a companion to a War Powers Resolution authored by Sen. Tim Kaine in the Senate.

    “‪Let’s not mince words: the assassination of Qasem Soleimani was an act of war undertaken without Congressional authorization, in violation of the Constitution of the United States of America. Following the assassination, thousands of additional troops were sent to the Middle East in one of the largest rapid deployments seen in decades. This follows years of saber-rattling and threats of war against Iran by President Trump and his accomplices. We in Congress must exercise our Constitutional duty—and do everything in our power to stop another disastrous war. ” Rep. Omar said...

    The resolution underscores that Congress has the sole power to declare war, as laid out in the Constitution. The resolution requires that any hostilities with Iran must be explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force, but does not prevent the United States from defending itself from imminent attack. The resolution will force a public debate and vote in Congress as intended by the framers of the Constitution to determine whether United States forces should be engaged in these hostilities.


    A similar measure was attempted in the Senate in June this year, and got 50 votes for and 40 votes against, but that failed to pass because a super-majority was required:

    Senators this week voted on a measure that would make it mandatory for the White House to obtain congressional approval in order to move forward with military action against Iran. The majority of Republicans opposed it, though Sens. Rand Paul (KY), Mike Lee (UT), Susan Collins (ME), and Jerry Moran (KS) joined with Democrats to support it.

    Echoing a position that some Republicans have expressed openly in this past, Friday’s vote confirmed that the majority of Senate Republicans aren’t interested in checking the president when it comes to war powers... In the context of rising tensions with Iran, this position has Democrats incredibly concerned.


    It seems clear who the party of peace and following the constitution is. Whereas the Republicans seem happy for America to enter unconstitutionally into a war against a country that didn't attack them. Peace and compliance with the law vs war and breaking the law, seem to be becoming big differences between the two parties and seem split down party lines. Only 4 Republican senators had morals to vote for peace and for following the constitution in June, lets hope more can find some morals this time round.

  • #2
    Just political virtue-signaling because A) they know it'll get shot down so it's essentially pointless, and B) I doubt Lee did anything like this when Obama reeked havoc in Libya, Syria and was killing folks with drone strikes, including American citizens.
    "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by seanD View Post
      Just political virtue-signaling because A) they know it'll get shot down so it's essentially pointless
      I don't think taking a stand for what's right is ever pointless. You might succeed, and if you don't you inspire others. It's also obviously worth making clear to voters what the different parties stand for, because next election the voters will be able to choose between the politicians that vote for peace and those who vote for war.

      B) I doubt Lee did anything like this when Obama reeked havoc in Libya, Syria and was killing folks with drone strikes, including American citizens.
      ???

      2011: Barbara Lee of California appeared on MSNBC’s NewsNation... it was a big deal that she called [Obama] out for engaging in military action in Libya without consulting the full Congress.


      NYT 2011: Democratic lawmakers — including Representatives Jerrold Nadler of New York, Barbara Lee of California and Michael E. Capuano of Massachusetts — complained in a House Democratic Caucus conference call as the bombing began that Mr. Obama had exceeded his constitutional authority by authorizing the attack without Congressional permission.


      Barbara Lee 2011: "I maintain my belief that an increased U.S. military presence in Libya could inflame the situation and, ultimately, prove counterproductive to the end goal of sustainable peace... a more thorough discussion about the ramifications of U.S. military engagement in Libya should have occurred before the recent action was taken. Congress must have an opportunity for a robust debate on the risks associated with committing our military resources to Libya"


      Barbara Lee 2013: Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee of California and 53 other Democrats sent their own letter to Obama regarding intervention in Syria:

      "...Congress has the constitutional obligation and power to approve military force... As such, we strongly urge you to seek an affirmative decision of Congress prior to committing any U.S. military engagement to this complex crisis... [Events] should not draw us into an unwise war—especially without adhering to our own constitutional requirements... As elected officials, we have a duty to represent the will and priorities of our constituents consistent with the Constitution we all swore to uphold and defend. Before weighing the use of military force, Congress must fully debate and consider the facts and every alternative, as well as determine how best to end the violence and protect civilians.


      The Atlantic 2013: Inside Congress, [Barbara Lee] has helped spearhead the lobbying effort against a Syria strike...

      The story of how Lee emerged as one of Congress's most powerful antiwar voices on Syria is one that's well told by numbers. In 2001 when she voted against the use of force in Afghanistan, she acted alone. In 2003, when she sponsored legislation to repeal the congressional authorization of war in Iraq, her legislation received 72 votes. In August of 2013, a demand that Obama seek authorization from Congress before taking any action against Syria garnered the support of more than 150 lawmakers and from both sides of the political aisle.

      That most recent push on Syria consisted of two letters sent to Obama last month. One was authored by Lee; the other was authored by Republican Rep. Scott Rigell


      The Hill 2014: A growing chorus of liberal Democrats is pushing President Obama to get Congress's explicit approval before launching missile strikes into Syria...

      “Congress must weigh in when it comes to confronting ISIL through military action,” Reps. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) said in a joint statement


      Barbara Lee has been consistent, principled, and outspoken for years in her views that military action must be authorized by the constitution, and that any military action must be a last resort not a first resort.

      Comment


      • #4
        Okay, well, then I stand corrected. Good for her.
        "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Dimbulb View Post
          It seems clear who the party of peace and following the constitution is.
          Translation: "I'm not a constitutional scholar; I just play one on the internet."

          In fact, the Constitution gives the President of the United States the authority to use military action without informing Congress and without formally declaring war. Just because the Democrats call it "an act of war" because one of their terrorist buddies was taken out doesn't make it so.

          https://thefederalist.com/2017/05/04...king-congress/
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • #6
            Sound and fury signifying nothing... And BTW Trump made it clear that he does not want war with Iran....
            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

            Comment


            • #7
              Starlight in 2017:

              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              Seems like things are heating up with regard to North Korea. Is Trump going to bungle things and get South Korea nuked? I would be very worried if I lived in South Korea right now.

              The background, of course, is that North Korea got nuclear weapons during the presidency of Bush, when he was asleep on his watch. Since then the US has largely followed the strategy of "let's just leave well enough alone and let the mad dictator take photos of himself in the ruins of his own country, and not in any way provoke him into doing anything precipitous like nuking South Korea."

              But now, because Trump is incompetent and isn't just content to leave it alone, he's now sending forces to the region and there's talk about striking North Korea. Apparently the war-mongering cheer-leading from the corporate media that came when he did his symbolic strike against Syria seems to have gone to his head, and he isn't content with simply adding an 8th country to the number of Middle Eastern countries the US is conducting operations in, he now wants to bring war to an entirely new region of the world...



              Which part of the mad dictator has nuclear weapons and keeps threatening to use them doesn't Trump understand? After all, that apples to himself too.

              I get that Trump is incompetent and senile and wants to look strong... but getting South Korea nuked is not the correct way to do that.
              Has that nuclear war with North Korea started yet? It’s funny how liberals present this as a binary ‘appeasement’ or ‘war’ option and ignore the options between (likely because it would expose the massive lie the Iran deal was). Considering the failed 2017 prediction, I predict this whole latest liberal freak out will fail just as badly. Iran nor North Korea want an all out war with the US because they would all end up dead or living in a hole somewhere.
              Last edited by lilpixieofterror; 01-06-2020, 08:06 AM.
              "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
              GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
                Starlight in 2017:



                Has that nuclear war with North Korea started yet? It’s funny how liberals present this as a binary ‘appeasement’ or ‘war’ option and ignore the options between (likely because it would expose the massive lie the Iran deal was). Considering the failed 2017 prediction, I predict this whole latest liberal freak out will fail just as badly. Iran nor North Korea want an all out war with the US because they would all end up dead or living in a hole somewhere.
                I often get the impression that liberals aren't afraid Trump will start a war, they're hopeful that he will.
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by seanD View Post
                  Just political virtue-signaling because A) they know it'll get shot down so it's essentially pointless, and B) I doubt Lee did anything like this when Obama reeked havoc in Libya, Syria and was killing folks with drone strikes, including American citizens.
                  You are also leaving out the fact that the program, curtailed by Obama, has been expanded under Trump.

                  https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/09/w...-military.html

                  The issue here is that Trump has carried out the targeted assassination of a military leader of another country. That is in a different class than military strikes against terrorists which typically do not have a direct association with a government.

                  I have been watching the various reports on this and don't have a solid opinion on if this fellow rose to the level of terrorist in a way that overrides the fact he was an official military leader, but I am keenly aware of the problem with what Trump has done. Beyond possibly starting a war with Iran w/o Congressional authorization, he has opened to door to officially sanctioned governmental assassinations of government leaders, and he has entered this realm carrying his 'hit back 10 times harder' business/personal way of dealing with the world into a military playing field and a potential for global conflict. And that just is a very, very bad Idea. Superficially, this is a response to our embassy being attacked. And his response was - for that act - way over the top. Further, he is threatening Iran that if they retaliate, He'll respond with what many agree is a war crime.

                  This man has no filter, no capacity to reason about consequences, and he is wholly incompetent to be making command decisions for the most powerful military on the planet. He is heading for war without the capacity to understand what war means.
                  He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                  "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                    It seems clear who the party of peace and following the constitution is.
                    Yeah, Libertarians. Obama (the Democrat) was too busy droning innocent civilians out of existence and supporting rebellions to be bothered with "peace" (despite his honorary Peace Prize).

                    Whereas the Republicans seem happy for America to enter unconstitutionally into a war against a country that didn't attack them. Peace and compliance with the law vs war and breaking the law, seem to be becoming big differences between the two parties and seem split down party lines. Only 4 Republican senators had morals to vote for peace and for following the constitution in June, lets hope more can find some morals this time round.
                    War hawks exist in both major parties. To think that Democrats are flower children and aren't just playing partisan politics is unrealistic.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                      I often get the impression that liberals aren't afraid Trump will start a war, they're hopeful that he will.
                      I get that impression too. The last time Iran acted up, half of it’s navy ended up on the bottom of the ocean. Iran is no match for the US and I’m sure (despite all the saber rattling) they know this too. It’s why Iran uses proxy’s and cyber war to achieve its aims because there is no contest, on the military stage and it’s harder for them to reach out and touch US allies than it is for North Korea.
                      "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                      GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                        You are also leaving out the fact that the program, curtailed by Obama, has been expanded under Trump.

                        https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/09/w...-military.html

                        The issue here is that Trump has carried out the targeted assassination of a military leader of another country. That is in a different class than military strikes against terrorists which typically do not have a direct association with a government.

                        I have been watching the various reports on this and don't have a solid opinion on if this fellow rose to the level of terrorist in a way that overrides the fact he was an official military leader, but I am keenly aware of the problem with what Trump has done. Beyond possibly starting a war with Iran w/o Congressional authorization, he has opened to door to officially sanctioned governmental assassinations of government leaders, and he has entered this realm carrying his 'hit back 10 times harder' business/personal way of dealing with the world into a military playing field and a potential for global conflict. And that just is a very, very bad Idea. Superficially, this is a response to our embassy being attacked. And his response was - for that act - way over the top. Further, he is threatening Iran that if they retaliate, He'll respond with what many agree is a war crime.

                        This man has no filter, no capacity to reason about consequences, and he is wholly incompetent to be making command decisions for the most powerful military on the planet. He is heading for war without the capacity to understand what war means.
                        Despite your freak out, it’s highly doubtful Iran will engage in an all out war with the US. This would be signing their death warrants and I’m sure they know this. Remember, we sent half their fleet to the bottom with a hand full of our ships last time they played this game.
                        "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                        GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                          Yeah, Libertarians. Obama (the Democrat) was too busy droning innocent civilians out of existence and supporting rebellions to be bothered with "peace" (despite his honorary Peace Prize).



                          War hawks exist in both major parties. To think that Democrats are flower children and aren't just playing partisan politics is unrealistic.
                          Democrats were beating the war drum months ago, willing to fight a war against Turkey (which according to the GFP listing, is the 9th most powerful military, in the world, quite a bit stronger than Iran and does have 50 of our nuclear weapons).
                          Last edited by lilpixieofterror; 01-06-2020, 09:15 AM.
                          "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                          GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Since the United States carried out an airstrike last week that killed Iranian terrorist Qasem Soleimani, Democrats have repeatedly taken issue with the fact that the Trump administration didn't ask for Congressional approval. President Barack Obama's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Jeh Johnson completely debunked that notion during a Sunday morning interview with MSNBC's Chuck Todd on "Meet the Press."

                            "If you believe everything our government is saying about General Soleimani, he was a lawful military objective and the president, under his Constitutional authority as commander-in-chief, had ample domestic legal authority to take him out without additional Congressional authorization," Johnson explained. "Whether he was a terrorist or a general in a military force that was engaged in armed attacks against our people, he was a lawful military objective."

                            https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethba...lling-n2558967
                            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                            Than a fool in the eyes of God


                            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
                              Starlight in 2017:



                              Has that nuclear war with North Korea started yet? It’s funny how liberals present this as a binary ‘appeasement’ or ‘war’ option and ignore the options between (likely because it would expose the massive lie the Iran deal was). Considering the failed 2017 prediction, I predict this whole latest liberal freak out will fail just as badly. Iran nor North Korea want an all out war with the US because they would all end up dead or living in a hole somewhere.
                              I noted recently that this all sounds very familiar with similar complaints when Trump started negotiating with North Korea
                              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                              Considering how the left responded when Trump opened up talks with North Korea (swinging wildly between proclaiming he would start WWIII to incompetently giving everything away while getting nothing back -- sorta like Obama and Iran), I think it is more than reasonable to say that if Trump didn't do anything the same folks now saying he wants to start a war would be lambasting him for the missed opportunity.

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Sparko, Today, 09:35 AM
                              1 response
                              9 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 06:39 PM
                              15 responses
                              93 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by seer, Yesterday, 02:30 PM
                              6 responses
                              43 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Started by whag, Yesterday, 02:17 PM
                              2 responses
                              26 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 01:58 PM
                              19 responses
                              66 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Mountain Man  
                              Working...
                              X