president of peace everybody
-
This post did not contain any content.
OMG that's hilarious. We haven't declared war since WWII. But how many presidents have done just that? Good luck with that argument.
-
Come on it is not a war, but a special military operation....
A "Police Action."
-
Yeah unfortunately that is not actually the way the law is written Bernie. Wish it was.
Short version, the president gets to deploy the military where ever he wishes (outside the US, posse comitatus etc). That includes invading a sovereign nation or raining missiles down on one.
Only congress has the power to declare a war, but the Potus gets to defacto kick off the war and then dare congress not to back him.
After it was either 60 or 90 days, I forget, congress gets to "review" the decision, the problem is they have no power other than financial if they wish to stop the war. So the only thing they can do is turn off the finances to the military, and wait for the money to run out - which is generally up to a year. They have no way of forcing the president to desist other than impeachment or cutting off the funds.
They can pass a motion, or even legislation, which the Prez can then veto, pointless. If they can muster the 2/3rds of congress they can remove him via impeachment.
Edit, spelling correction and to note that I can pull out the full details if needed - was discussed heavily on reddit a while ago
This is how we ended up with the Iran-Contra Scandal. The Reagan administration wanted to fight the growing communist forces in Nicaragua, but Congress forbid them, and denied them funding.
They decided to find the money by selling highly inflated arms to our bitterest enemy at the time, IRAN, only a few short years after they had held our Embassy officials hostage for over a year.
They took the profits of those illegal arms sales, and used it to finance their illegal war on Central America.
So these traitors don't even take no for an answer when Congress shuts off the money tap.
-
This post did not contain any content.
“I don’t care what that old paper says” -Trump
-
Yeah unfortunately that is not actually the way the law is written Bernie. Wish it was.
Short version, the president gets to deploy the military where ever he wishes (outside the US, posse comitatus etc). That includes invading a sovereign nation or raining missiles down on one.
Only congress has the power to declare a war, but the Potus gets to defacto kick off the war and then dare congress not to back him.
After it was either 60 or 90 days, I forget, congress gets to "review" the decision, the problem is they have no power other than financial if they wish to stop the war. So the only thing they can do is turn off the finances to the military, and wait for the money to run out - which is generally up to a year. They have no way of forcing the president to desist other than impeachment or cutting off the funds.
They can pass a motion, or even legislation, which the Prez can then veto, pointless. If they can muster the 2/3rds of congress they can remove him via impeachment.
Edit, spelling correction and to note that I can pull out the full details if needed - was discussed heavily on reddit a while ago
What congress can do is refuse to pay for the war/police action. They still need to write the checks. Wars don't last long with out money.
-
genocide was happening when you were 1 years old. You just only paid attention now because--and I gotta stress this--you were conned.
In 1982 Israel invaded Lebanon under false pretenses committing massacres and bombing towns and cities in the process. Ronald Reagan called Menachim Begin and demanded that he stop the invasion calling it a holocaust, and he did. With one phone call Reagan was able to put an end to Israel's aggression. At the same time, Joe Biden went to Israel and not only was supportive but told Menachim Begin that he would go even further even it meant killing women and children.
Sources:
Reagan Demands End to Attacks in a Blunt Telephone Call to Begin
In Private, Biden Supported Israel’s 1982 Invasion of Lebanon
I was conned when I voted for Biden thinking that he has evolved and he can be persuaded to be better.
-
Biden supported the invasion of Iraq. https://theintercept.com/2020/01/07/joe-biden-iraq-war-history/
He or Harris wouldn't have been any different. Proof: Biden bombed Yemen.
Trump’s Yemen bombings killed nearly as many civilians as 23 previous years of US attacks
Again, there is bad and there is worse. And your inability to differentiate between the two actively making things worse than worse.
-
In 1982 Israel invaded Lebanon under false pretenses committing massacres and bombing towns and cities in the process. Ronald Reagan called Menachim Begin and demanded that he stop the invasion calling it a holocaust, and he did. With one phone call Reagan was able to put an end to Israel's aggression. At the same time, Joe Biden went to Israel and not only was supportive but told Menachim Begin that he would go even further even it meant killing women and children.
Sources:
Reagan Demands End to Attacks in a Blunt Telephone Call to Begin
In Private, Biden Supported Israel’s 1982 Invasion of Lebanon
I was conned when I voted for Biden thinking that he has evolved and he can be persuaded to be better.
Oh yes, lets talk about reagan, the iran-contra goon who you all swoon for.
Lets talk about that shall we? what a peace maker he was! gosh gee golly!
you are conned. and conned by a man with orange makeup and fake hair who you think is manly. oh yeah and his wife doesnt even sleep in the same bedroom as him.
-
This post did not contain any content.
2/3 of Congress is owned by AIPAC so it wouldn't make a difference anyway.
-
Biden/Harris would have done something similar to defend Israel from the consequences of its actions. Biden did bomb Yemen after all when it tried to stop the genocide. Biden is a self admitted Zionist and defended Israel’s invasion of Lebanon and supported the invasion of Iraq. Harris did nothing to distance herself from him.
Trump killed more civilians in Yemen this one excursion than the US did in the previous 23 years.
There is bad, and there is this bad. And not differentiating between the two is criminal. -
Trump killed more civilians in Yemen this one excursion than the US did in the previous 23 years.
There is bad, and there is this bad. And not differentiating between the two is criminal.By the time Biden has left office he was already responsible for over 30,000 deaths in Palestine. They are all bad.
-
By the time Biden has left office he was already responsible for over 30,000 deaths in Palestine. They are all bad.
By this point, there are only two ways to not understand what the degrees of bad are. Either you really, deeply, powerfully don't give a flying fuck about people's lives, and you see people as numbers you want to use to own the libs or whatever, or you are are so disconnected from reality, you really don't understand what differentiate more suffering from less suffering.
I really don't know what's worse, but both of those possibilities are deeply disturbing. You might feel like you're a good person, but you really aren't. -
By this point, there are only two ways to not understand what the degrees of bad are. Either you really, deeply, powerfully don't give a flying fuck about people's lives, and you see people as numbers you want to use to own the libs or whatever, or you are are so disconnected from reality, you really don't understand what differentiate more suffering from less suffering.
I really don't know what's worse, but both of those possibilities are deeply disturbing. You might feel like you're a good person, but you really aren't.Do you deny that it was a genocide when Biden was president or do you deny his complicity? That's the only way your comment would make any sense.
-
Do you deny that it was a genocide when Biden was president or do you deny his complicity? That's the only way your comment would make any sense.
I am trying to convey you one very simple series of principles.
Two things can simultaneously be bad.
One of two things can be worse than another.
It is your moral duty and obligation to ensure that in situation where one or another thing will be chosen, you chose one that is less bad. -
Yeah, in most regards kamala would've been better, but this is Israel. She may have been less gung ho, which would be better for a handful of Iranians benefitting from slightly fewer bombs, but not better enough
Well, there is no real support for a war in the democratic party, democratic party is influencable to some extent, and leader of it has to listen to the party and to voters, at least somewhat. There is no dictator on day one bullshit.
not better enough
This is some prime disconnected bullshit. For people not murdered by bombs it's precisely better enough. This "who cares about handful of randos in some remote country" bullshit is only one click less evil than whatever the current US government is doing right now. -
This post did not contain any content.
In the case of war on Iran, Trump successfully ended it, or ended so far. Congress as part of the zionist first rule over America would definitely have authorized it, and may have been behind "discrediting the success" report leaks, in order to extend the war. Israel did fail to provide immunity from war crime repercussions, and so likely happy, at citizen level, with ceasefire. But congress is no threat to zionist supremacy, and a debate procedure, just legitimizes the illusion of non tyranny.
