Home | About | Donate

As Mission Creeps in Iraq and Syria, US Lawmakers Ask: Will We Ever Vote on War?


#1


#2

"'The question now,'" Naiman added, [']is what else these members of Congress are willing to do to compel a vote—like invoke the War Powers Resolution to force one.'"

It's getting scarier and clearer by the minute that the US government, constituted under the US Constitution that I grew up with is no longer operative. The question isn't Mr Naiman's; it is rather: what difference would such a vote actually make?


#3

Politicians do not know how to stand up only how to cover up.


#4

The most efficient way to eradicate the populace's trust in government is having a leader consistently say one thing while setting policy that's diametrically opposed to those stated intentions. Some would say the result is cognitive dissonance... at minimum, it's highly disorienting and confusing.

Obama talks a good game about doing something to offset climate change while opening fragile sea realms to oil drillers.

Obama talks about closing Guantanamo, but it still remains open.

He talks about "all lives mattering" while presiding over a nation torn morally apart by police (and military) brutality.

He has the nerve to pretend that the U.S. fosters the rule of law abroad as he chastises groups like ISIS... while it's the military under his hypothetical command that carries out FAR more destruction.

Congress should have already roped in any and every Unitary Executive cum King... since this Nation's Founders made it a point to design a government that did not allot to one flawed individual the right to "make war at his pleasure."

Nothing like an Inside Job to turn the clock back to the Feudal period where kings indeed did make war at their pleasure... as is now patently the case. Of course it doesn't hurt the M.I.C to know that--like retail shops awaiting projected Christmas sales--another war, and after it, yet another war (the product of spreading so much terror around WHILE supplying massive weapons) are inevitable.


#5

What a joke! Dim son was correct the Constitution is nothing but a damn piece of paper!

The Amerikan Empire and the US Government is a military dictatorship that claims it is a democracy. Congress has been circumvented ever since the Korean war that was euphemistically called a " POLICE ACTION ".

When Obama said: " we do not negotiate with terrorists " for once in his life he told the truth! Because the US military is the #1 terrorist organization in the world and Obama would have to negotiate with himself!


#6

Ask the members of the Reichstag after Hitler took over. They can tell you about voting and its difference.
* Can you say "Rubber-stamp?" I knew ya could.
;-})


#8

"War, huh, good God
What is it good for
Absolutely nothing"
--Edwin Starr

Would anyone vote for this on the record when it can be done by fiat?


#10

Remember, the Speaker determines if a bill reaches the House floor for a vote. Speaker Hastert would only bring a bill to the floor for a vote if it had a majority of the majority support. This was his informal rule, the Speaker is a very powerful person.


#16

Sadly the Democrats will not buck the President and the Republicans will not buck war.


#17

Jesse Ventura says:

Surprise, Surprise: GOP-Led House Approves $607 Billion Bill to Keep Guantanamo OPEN

http://www.ora.tv/offthegrid/article/2015/11/6/surprise-surprise-gop-led-house-approves-607billion-bill-keep-guantanamo-open


#18

And so it goes nature boy. Interesting reading by "progressives" who, silly me, I've always identified as a group as more thoughtful and personally caring about both their world and fellow inhabitants, but with some very hate filled comments in this discussion. 35 members of Congress will not accomplish the goal of forcing legislation to make this war, nor any other, "legitimate?." Nor has any Congress done so since WWII though some who remember the "conflict" in Vietnam would identify the military action in both Iraq and Syria definitely as "mission creep." Regardless the results of the election in 2016 for POTUS, it is extremely doubtful if the House will change control of the GOP and considering the results of Tuesday's off year elections the Senate is also highly questionable for a possible change. No matter how those posting here damn Obama it is after all the Congress who declares war and since 2010 there has been little, especially related to many election 'promises," accomplished by Obama other than those possible by executive action.


#19

Putin does.


#20

I agree that Obama was selected long before he was elected, but that is nothing new and is really the way that has been done for the POTUS in America's so called democracy. The only exception was JFK, who was selected like Nixon, but turned on his selectors. And that is why he had to be assassinated.

Do you have a link to the information on the Israeli jet?


#22

The " circle game " between the House and Senate is one big mess. The " circle game " between the now Republican led Senate and this President is another. The Senate wanted to give the President more " juice " to go deeper into the doo doo ( More $$$ ). Pretty much everywhere, too. And, he's shockingly not facing anymore elections, either. How convenient, that.The House isn't exactly reading from the same script and may just put timelines on any war authorization bill and actually pass it( Ohs Nos! ). Like the last time this came up! It's a circle, within a circle, for lots of 2016 election reasons, at this point. And, it won't be voted on until they're sure who is in and who is out. Just like last time and, the time before that and..... Nobody wants to be caught going through the front door of a whorehouse, but they sure like to sneak in the back for a free one, now and then. Possibly grab some of " the skim ", as well. The end game is the guns and butter; which one gets taken away first and which one do their constituents want to hear about next year? House Speaker Ryun sure wants to take a meat axe to something to prove his bona fides to the Crazy Conservatives. And, chopping is such a good photo-op ( Ronnie Raygun ) even if Paul & Co. are dicing up granny and the little children. Picture a Ward Cleaver/Stephan King combo package. Watch out, incoming axes in 2017! Let's take another poll next week, okay? Let's see what sticks. Yeah, that's sounds about right.


#23

Garrett you might want to check about those who have been 'invited." Or maybe you would prefer Obama just said, "Whatever Assad." Chemicals, barrel bombs are fine with us." Kill as many as you have to to keep your comfy seat in Damascus.


#24

Sure seems to me mrsannhitts you got it.


#25

An excellent post however it must be pointed out.

Thise founding Fathers designed a checks and balances on the "right" of the executive to wage war NOT because they were opposed to war but because wars as waged by the king tended to cost the wealthy more in the way of taxes. This an important distinction because when those that framed the Consititution could PROFIT individually from a war , they were all in, This was made evident in all of those wars the USA involved itself in from its founding , a nation that has been at war for about 90 percent of its history.

A true peoples consitution would not leave warmaking in the hands of those that are the Government else it becomes very much like a Criminal Justice system that has been privatized for profits sake.


#26

I prefer that the strongest nation ever seen becomes less involved in everybody's business


#27

I don't prefer Obama say anything about what the people of Syria decide of their own free will. Ask President Carter what to do. He has witnessed many elections and never given a $5,000 per minute luncheon talk. (I could be wrong).


#30

In the meantime, Anonymous or WikiLeaks or someone released this video of Ash Carter deep in a sub-basement of the Pentagon.

http://fortruss.blogspot.ca/2015/11/hitler-on-putin-and-syria-video.html