spifflog:
I never claimed to be a War Powers Act authority, you did by stating you could quote sections from memory.
You can’t get all indignant over someone pointing out the War Power Act after you post this:
How can you state that you’re an expert on this, and yet seem to think that it can’t be used by the President. The two don’t mesh.
Well, if you actually took time to read what I wrote – same as in the battleship thread, in which this same problem popped up – you would likely realize your error. I’m saying the President SHOULD NOT start a new war without Congress’ consent. This should have been abundantly clear from my earliest post on this topic. I have no idea why this position is so difficult to make clear.
Are you going to answer my earlier question. Have you opposed every military action taken since, say, 1950, by both Republican and Democratic Presidents that involved military action but didn’t involve a declaration of war? Or are you just picking your spots.
Every military action since 1950? No. There were quite a few that were legitimately taken in self-defense of our country, for example, and self-defense doesn’t require congressional authorization.
But you know what, I’ll play:
(a) Written report; time of submission; circumstances necessitating submission; information reported. In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced—
(1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;
(2) into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or
(3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation; the President shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth—
(A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces;
(B) the constitutional and legislative authority under which such introduction took place; and
(C) the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement."
Maybe you want to try again there, chief, because reporting requirements by definition don’t convey authority.
We’ll “chief,” you can continue to pretend the War Powers Act as it’s been implemented for the last 45 years is incorrect or illegal.
Let me know how that rewrite of history is working for ya.
spifflog:
We’ll “chief,” you can continue to pretend the War Powers Act as it’s been implemented for the last 45 years is incorrect or illegal.
Let me know how that rewrite of history is working for ya.
I will just find a reporting requirement somewhere in US law and pretend it proves my point.