Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10
And if they did they'd be a disgrace. But that's neither here nor there. Fact of the matter is Obama doesn't need Congressional approval on this because the US isn't declaring war on another nation state. He doesn't need congressional approval for military action against terrorists.
|
He was trying to get congressional approval for military action against Syria. Assad used chemical weapons on August 21, 2013. Less than 10 days later, Pres Obama sent his AUMF to congress re Assad and Syria. Republican controlled congress never voted on it or come up w their own proposal.
No way the Pres could have used the 9/11 AUMF to justify averting the US Constitution mandated congressional approval for a declaration of war and unilaterally authorize military action against the country of Syria.
Maybe he could have played word games and called syria terrorists and missile attacks on another country's army not a "declaration of war" (even though the AUMF allowed for boots on the ground) ... imagine how well that would have gone over w the o'reilly and cruz' of the world.
With the current political climate and the grid lock of a dem Pres and a repub congress ... damned if you, damned if you dont for both sides.
eff it - trump2016