|
 mr freedom
enthusiast
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 232
Last seen: 19 years, 7 months
|
 Re: stopamerica.org  [Re: ]
#781597 - 07/28/02 07:29 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Yes, we have a formal declaration of war. This link further demonstrates the legal and historical precedents relating to how war is declared in todays political environ.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/background/wtc_usatwar.html
|
Anonymous
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: mr freedom]
#781626 - 07/28/02 07:52 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
My point is that the U.S. has not declared war according to it's own Constitution. The arguments presented in the article do not change nor contest this assertion, they bypass it. Just because the government has ignored the Constituion in the past does not mean it's current actions are any more legitimate.
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 10 months
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: ]
#781648 - 07/28/02 08:07 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Evolving writes:
Just because the government has ignored the Constituion in the past does not mean it's current actions are any more legitimate.
Correct. The US government is quite adept at ignoring the Constitution. They've had a lot of practice.
Witholding of federal income tax (and arguably income tax itself), Prohibition, the Viet Nam draft, the War on Drugs... these are the ones that pop into my head in the first fifteen seconds of thinking about it. I'm sure y'all can think of many others.
pinky
--------------------
|
mr freedom
enthusiast
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 232
Last seen: 19 years, 7 months
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: ]
#782195 - 07/28/02 12:57 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The article is substantialy lacking in detail; I'll fill you in.
The formal declaration of war can and has been declared by the president. As commander in chief and under the War Powers Act, the president may declare war WITHOUT congressional approval for 60 days. At such time, congress must pass authorize, in writing, any further involvment of the armed forces.
The power of congress to declare war, article 1 section 8 US constitution, is often misconstrued to mean that ONLY congress may declare war. This is erroneous, as commander in cheif the president may send soldiers wherever he desires, but only congress may extend hostilitys, even over the objections of the white house.
To wit, the joint resolution passed by congress authorizing the further use of armed forces:
Authorization for Use of Military Force (Enrolled Bill)
--S.J.Res.23--
S.J.Res.23
One Hundred Seventh Congress
of the
United States of America
AT THE FIRST SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
the third day of January, two thousand and one
Joint Resolution
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and
Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and
Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and
Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and
Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force'.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.
|
mr freedom
enthusiast
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 232
Last seen: 19 years, 7 months
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: ]
#782198 - 07/28/02 12:58 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The article is substantialy lacking in detail; I'll fill you in.
The formal declaration of war can and has been declared by the president. As commander in chief and under the War Powers Act, the president may declare war WITHOUT congressional approval for 60 days. At such time, congress must pass authorization, in writing, any further involvment of the armed forces. See, section 1544 of the War Powers Act.
The power of congress to declare war, article 1 section 8 US constitution, is often misconstrued to mean that ONLY congress may declare war. This is erroneous, as commander in chief the president may send soldiers wherever he desires, but only congress may extend hostilitys, even over the objections of the white house.
To wit, the joint resolution passed by congress authorizing the further use of armed forces:
Authorization for Use of Military Force (Enrolled Bill)
--S.J.Res.23--
S.J.Res.23
One Hundred Seventh Congress
of the
United States of America
AT THE FIRST SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
the third day of January, two thousand and one
Joint Resolution
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and
Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and
Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and
Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and
Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force'.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.
|
 luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,248
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: mr freedom]
#782365 - 07/28/02 02:30 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Very nice.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
zeronio
Stranger
Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 2 months, 7 days
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: mr freedom]
#783105 - 07/28/02 11:41 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Generally I think that making war and investion taxpayers money in weapons is like throwing money away. But... while 1WW and 2WW fucked up Europe and cold war destroyed Soviet economy - USA came out of these conflicts even stronger than before.
You can be optimistic about the war against terrorism, it's very likely that it will make you richer.
I just wonder what will happen to the rest of the world. 
|
mr freedom
enthusiast
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 232
Last seen: 19 years, 7 months
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: zeronio]
#783593 - 07/29/02 07:42 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I am neither "optomistic" nor am I going to "get richer' from said war.
As to the rest of the world, they will learn the same lesson that Japan learned.
Keep a watch though, I believe that our president is ready to write his own history by invading Iraq and removing Saddam. This would be a clearly immoral act and end, once and for all, ANY sympathy with the rest of the world. The U.S. would be seen as the single biggest threat to national soverienty since the USSR was dismantled.
Anyone ready for the U.S. vs. the rest of the world?
|
Rono
DSYSB since '01
Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: mr freedom]
#783654 - 07/29/02 08:18 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The U.S. war machine needs to stop...plain and simple. Get your noses out of everyone elses business and start fixing up your own backyard. Try joining the world community instead of running it....
--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"
|
Anonymous
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: Rono]
#783721 - 07/29/02 08:49 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Get your noses out of everyone elses business and start fixing up your own backyard.
Yes, the U.S. should go back to the policy of no entangling/permanent alliances and the government should quit being such a busybody in it's own citizen's lives as well.
Try joining the world community instead of running it....
There is no world community, unless you mean the den of statist vultures who make up the U.N.
|
mr freedom
enthusiast
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 232
Last seen: 19 years, 7 months
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: Rono]
#785270 - 07/29/02 09:00 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
No, the U.S. war machine does not need to stop. I have justified this, particular war, and have had no intelligent refutation to my arguments. Yes, the U.S. needs to eliminate ALL uses of force, against other nations, that have not directly threatend us. I also agree with Evolving on this issue; the U.S. government should also cease hostilitys to it's own citizens.
The U.S. should NOT, EVER, EVER, EVER join the "world community". Outside of the immoral WOD's and the IRS, the U.S. citizen has the freedoms to make their life what they like without too much interference; one could not say the same for the ridiculous referendums passed by the U.N.
|
Rono
DSYSB since '01
Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: mr freedom]
#785612 - 07/30/02 04:49 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
one could not say the same for the ridiculous referendums passed by the U.N.
Which referendums would those be?...the ones that don't benefit the U.S.?
--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"
|
Phenix
Stranger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 19
Last seen: 21 years, 5 months
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: mr freedom]
#797978 - 08/05/02 12:47 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
As to the rest of the world, they will learn the same lesson that Japan learned.
what does that mean?
|
shroomerylurker
lurker
Registered: 06/23/02
Posts: 408
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: mr freedom]
#798101 - 08/05/02 02:21 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The reason's behind our use of nukes in WWll were and are justifiable, we were at war, a declared war. The bombing of civilians, mistaken or not, in *Afghanistan*, is justifiable, we have declared war.
So because we say it's war, it matters, when they say it is war, we don't care, they are still 'terrorist' or what ever name we want to give them at the time. Maybe others feel the same way that are not in America...
I have no sympathy for those killed; other than the children. citizens of a country bear some responsibility for the actions of their government.
Maybe the people that took down the towers felt the same way.
I mean think about it, here is this country, the richest one, with the strongest military. Hell we trained a lot of the people we are fighting against, they know how strong we are. And I really don't think an organization like this is all idiots and people that are crazy, there has to be some level headed people. People that for some reason, hate us so much that they will work for years, just to let us know they don't like us. Give up there lives. Move away from there families, to places that are a lot different then theirs, to die. I just don't see them putting names of countries in a hat and picking one. There has to be some reason...
>>>I am not saying that we are not justified in our attacks, that's not what I am talking about at all. What I am talking about is our tendency to polarize things, everyone on our side as being just and good, and on the other side being horrible. I think there a quite a few more shades of gray. And after this has been resolved we might as a country need to look at how we treat people in other countries.
I can believe that we treat people in other counties bad, ever seen how bad a black guy that has a gram of crack is treated in this country???
|
mr freedom
enthusiast
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 232
Last seen: 19 years, 7 months
|
|
Believe it or not; on all of your points I agree with you completely. The only difference in "their actions" and ours is the initiation of violence. This is the only moral ground in our defense of this nation. Outside of that consideration, I also feel that the policies of this nation, both internaly, as in your crack analogy, and internationaly are abusive and immoral in the extreme.
I also bear some responsibility; at least in my mind. This is why I learn, this is why I protest, this is why I, uummm, well let's just say that this is why I "garden", this is why I vote and this is why I visit here and cannibis boards and philosophical boards. It is my intention to challenge the thought processes of the intellectual, those that engage in intellectual arguments. I engage them to attempt to support their moral stance against drugs. I do similar here but, honestly, I am just preaching to the choir here; for the most part anyway, there have been a couple of exceptions.
|
GabbaDj
BTH
Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,695
Loc: By The Lake
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: mr freedom]
#798221 - 08/05/02 03:27 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Killing innocent people is NEVER justified.
People have NO controll over their government so they should bear no responsibility for their governments actions.
Why is it better to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people just to remove a handfull of terrorists than it is to assinate key figures at the first given moment?
We knew exactly where Bin Ladin was the days following the attacks, we knew where many of his TOP officials were and we could have taken care of and dismantled AlQueida in two days if it werent for our anti-assination policy.
Instead we had to give them warning, give them time to escape and give us an opourtuity to flash our power all over the middle east.
--------------------
GabbaDj
FAMM.ORG
|
shroomerylurker
lurker
Registered: 06/23/02
Posts: 408
|
Re: stopamerica.org [Re: mr freedom]
#798310 - 08/05/02 04:19 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The only difference in "their actions" and ours is the initiation of violence.
The US and the USSR destroyed that whole country. Super power countries including the US created a war that killed and ravaged so many there. The US government and the government of the USSR trained them to kill with little money. Funned in weapons, and taught people to kill that, age wise, would still be playing Nintendo in the US. Two huge countries used them as living pawns, made a whole generation of people that knew nothing but war, in a part of the world that knows little else right now. I hardly see I they started off the violence. And if you don't think so, look at our tactics with how we fight Osma right now... If anything the US help make a bad situation worse. Not saying there actions are justified anywhere else but there own heads, but, to them where else does it matter? And if I grew up there, I don't honestly know how I would feel.
lurker.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder 
Red Vein Kratom
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
Evolving
Cornholio
psilo25
Phred
wingnutx
Jammer
EchoVortex