[mikemike]

The tea partiers aren't just the same old washington politicians and aren't just about money...

But Sen. Rand Paul told CNN congress should not let any president get away with launching military action without congressional approval, and that he and his colleagues may go to the Supreme Court and ask for a ruling on whether the president is in violation of the law.

"There is a law. It's on the books, and in plain reading of the War Powers Act, he appears to be in violation of the War Powers Act," said Paul.

Paul said they will also attempt to push "legislative remedies" on the Senate floor, but acknowledges that may be hard to accomplish since Democrats control the schedule.

"To me it's the most important debate we'll ever have up here. If we're going to send someone, your son or my son to war, its important that it be done properly, and its important that if there are constitutional restraints, we obey them," said Paul.

Republican senators press president on War Powers deadline – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

[skyredoubt]

Good. I completely agree.

[skyredoubt]

But then we have this...

[Wheatfield]

Let's make sure we have this straight.
A Republican president starts an illegal war of aggression, and it's the fault of a Democrat President?
These guys are even stupider than I thought.

[shooz]

War is peace, man.
Didn't you know?

What else is there? Diplomacy?
A bit late for that.

Besides, there's still all those contracts.

[skyredoubt]

Let's make sure we have this straight.
A Republican president starts an illegal war of aggression, and it's the fault of a Democrat President?
These guys are even stupider than I thought.

Woa, hold on there, Wheatfield, the Lybian operation was started by Obama. I am fully aware of the hypocrisy of many Republicans that seek any opportunity to bash Obama, but if you follow the Glenn Greenwald link I posted above you'll be helped to a healthy doze of Democratic hypocrisy as well. Things that the Democrats absolutely rightly decried when they happened under Bush, now are totally kosher all of a sudden. And even worse things.
The Republican senators in this case are totally correct to demand the President adheres to the law and gets a Congressional authorization.

[wildman]

To the best of my knowledge the first and only time war was declared under the war powers act was 1941?

[shooz]

Libya?
NATO

Afganistan, Iraq?
Bush.

[skyredoubt]

Libya?
NATO

Afganistan, Iraq?
Bush.

OK, so we're gonna make irrelevant distinctions for the sake of partisanship? Come on.
There s a reason they say the Republicans are afraid of their base while the Democrats despise theirs. We the liberals will follow our leaders like sheep just because we're scared shitless of the alternative. Obama knows very well that whatever he does, no matter how many campaign promises he breaks, no matter how many laws of decency he violates, you and I are going to vote for him. And no, I don't have a solution to that, but at least we can make our voice heard when we see wrong done in our name, don't you think?

[Ratmagiclady]

Let's make sure we have this straight.
A Republican president starts an illegal war of aggression, and it's the fault of a Democrat President?
These guys are even stupider than I thought.

Bingo. They're way too late to start crowing about the War Powers Act, especially in light of the so-called *Bush Doctrine?*

That said, strategic warfare ain't what it once was. If it *is* so, though, yeah. ideally that should be how it's done, if at all.

[reeftool]

One of the reasons the mainstream Republican party hate Rand Paul's father Ron Paul was because he refused to back Bush on starting his wars. He has consistently been at odds with Republican lawmakers through the years so it's no surprise the Rand Paul is picking up the torch.

[mikemike]

Woa, hold on there, Wheatfield, the Lybian operation was started by Obama. I am fully aware of the hypocrisy of many Republicans that seek any opportunity to bash Obama, but if you follow the Glenn Greenwald link I posted above you'll be helped to a healthy doze of Democratic hypocrisy as well. Things that the Democrats absolutely rightly decried when they happened under Bush, now are totally kosher all of a sudden. And even worse things.
The Republican senators in this case are totally correct to demand the President adheres to the law and gets a Congressional authorization.

Its okay, Sky, I can understand wheatfield's confusion. I myself find it hard to keep track of who our country is killing, why, and which president started which war.

Heres a handy crib sheet about US foreign policy that is usually valid no matter which party is in power:

Where do we have boots on the ground?
Anywhere we have ever invaded in the past 100 years (Germany, Japan, Korea, Iraq, Columbia, Cuba, Kuwait, and Afghanistan). Just in case they ever need a reminder of whose their daddy.

Where do we have spooks in sneakers on the ground and Predator Drones in the sky?
Anywhere they have oil in the ground (OPEC Nations, Russia, Borneo, Mexico, Brazil, and Alberta) or they grow drugs (Columbia, Bolivia, and Afghanistan). Just to keep the juice flowing.

Which hemispheres are we operating secret torture prison camps in?
Eastern, Western, and Northern Hemispheres. We still haven't found a nice country without any morals in the southern hemisphere yet.

Which laws, treaties, and conventions are we observing regarding warfare today?
Haha, very funny... None.

Who can we point our satellites at?
Anyone we damn well please.

Whose conversations can we listen into?
See previous answer.

Who can we track with the GPS on their cell phone?
See previous two answers.

-----------------------------------------------------

That should make it easier to keep track of American foreign policy... As far as who got us into which wars Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq were Bush and Libya was Obama although hes only had 2 and half years so far, so he is a little behind Bush but not by much... We could still invade someone else between now and next November (if its Alberta, I hope we do it during the summer while the weather is nice).

[Ratmagiclady]

One of the reasons the mainstream Republican party hate Rand Paul's father Ron Paul was because he refused to back Bush on starting his wars. He has consistently been at odds with Republican lawmakers through the years so it's no surprise the Rand Paul is picking up the torch.

The problem with Libertarians is that all they actually hold sacred is *property* ....which means no 'liberty' at all, come down to brass tacks.

[shooz]

It's not an irrelevant distinction, nor is it partisan.

Libya is a NATO action. Remember, even France is in on it.
I do believe we signed that treaty.

There are a certain level of NATO troops involved in Afganistan too.
Remember, we went there to "get" Osama?
Bush failed.

Iraq was started with Bush's "coalition of the willing."
That's just the facts.
I explained in another thread what these occupations are about.
Won't repeat it again.

Remember, we are under contract.

[shooz]

The problem with Libertarians is that all they actually hold sacred is *property* ....which means no 'liberty' at all, come down to brass tacks.

Don't forget the great and holy invisible hand.

The reason we are in these occupations.
Purely Libertarian. Too bad they don't notice.