It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pelosi to announce articles declaring Trump committed war crimes

page: 18
37
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Sadly, if there was no oil/lithium/uranium there- no-one would even give a # about the region.

But, they have stuff that everyone wants, and our global market dictates whoever has stuff will always have people fighting over it.




posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Nancy Pelosi would not even accept the phone call from vice president Mike Pence last night notifying her that Iran was striking American interests in Iraq.

mobile.twitter.com...

Instead, she went to the grand opening of a Washington DC restaurant.



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Nancy Pelosi would not even accept the phone call from vice president Mike Pence last night notifying her that Iran was striking American interests in Iraq.

mobile.twitter.com...

Instead, she went to the grand opening of a Washington DC restaurant.


Cut her some slack. She was probably still on the other line ordering the attack from IRAN



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Notoneofyou

I hear the Democrats lead by Omar held a fundraiser for Iran, put the cash on a pallet, wrapped it in plastic and sent it on over. They are trying to get one of the Mullahs to run for POTUS. (I know that is against the law but the law never stopped a DemonCrat)



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Salander

Under what conditions is the president allowed to be the CiC of the armed forces?

Are US forces only allowed to make a move with Congressional approval? If so, why is the president CiC of the US Armed Forces?

If someone lobs nukes at the country, does that mean we can only respond if Congress thoroughly debates a measure in committee, votes, and sends it to the Senates where similar measured debate takes place and then another vote so the president can take steps to defend the nation and its people?

If he can defend us in the continental US, what about our foreign bases and embassies? US embassies are sovereign soil and the ambassador is a proxy for the president in that country. Are you saying he is not allowed to take steps to defend them against clear and present threats without similar debate in both chambers of Congress?

No wonder Stevens died in Benghazi ...



If you take the time to read Article II Section 2 of the US Constitution you would find the answers to your questions. Maybe because I took the federal oath of office to protect and defend the USC from all enemies, foreign and domestic in 1969 I am more familiar with the document than you.

As FDR put it, POTUS can wage war, but only Congress can declare war. POTUS is C-in-C of the military. I thought everybody knew that, but I guess not.

Because the USC was written in 1787 before there were cars and airplanes, it took days or weeks to even convene the Congress. Had the new country been attacked, it was specifically understood that POTUS could do what was necessary, and then when Congress convened they could discuss the crisis.

So yes, POTUS can do as he pleases with the military, and then confer with Congress as time permits.

All the above is why the Authorization for the Use of Military Force is superfluous and unnecessary. It is pure legal sophistry, and has caused great harm to this country.



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: BastogneFoxHole
a reply to: Notoneofyou

I hear the Democrats lead by Omar held a fundraiser for Iran, put the cash on a pallet, wrapped it in plastic and sent it on over. They are trying to get one of the Mullahs to run for POTUS. (I know that is against the law but the law never stopped a DemonCrat)



What is this "law" you speak of?

Clearly that's a new concept to our fine D.C. rats...



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Notoneofyou

Yes, supply and demand are the colour of the day, no matter where you are on the planet.

Irans no different hence the reason why the World Bank and the corporations wish to get there mitts on it and completely under "there" control.

One way or another Iran will eventually fall just down to the numbers and odds being stacked against them.



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

We all will... one day.

Humans are great at many things, unfortunately working together towards a better future and better cared-for planet isn't a priority.



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Wardaddy454

And Trump's responsible for killing an Iranian and an Iraqie, you must see the circular nature of the predicament?

You don't kill the other side's leaders, it's just not the done thing.

All you are doing is creating a substantial martyr, a Hydra no less, cut off one head and two take its place.

Im glad to see the back of Soleimani myself but im not Iranian nor from the Middle East.

This was just madness for political kudos back home, not even a substantial reason offered as of yet for the assassination other than Trump mumbling unsubstantiated gibberish.


Evidently he was in the middle of planning attacks in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon against US personnel, on top of the previous attacks. Trump did warn anyone listening that unprovoked attacks against any American would be dealt with swiftly.

And you're seeing things where you want to see them. The man became unpopular with the Iranian people after he was involved with the killing and/or torture of some 1500 protestors a few months back. For the Iranian people, we lived up to our reputation for liberty.

So, no martyr there.

And, ww3 didn't happen. Iran was posturing. They warned Iraq, who then warned us, about the incoming missile two hours in advance for heaven's sake.

All you've got is bluster and fear.


edit on 8-1-2020 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Notoneofyou




stating President Trump's latest actions resulting in the death of a known terrorist was imprudent and provocative, usurping Congress ' right to tell him what he can or can not do.

It seems Soleimani was in Iraq to negotiate an easing of tensions in the region , not good for the warmongers who want conflict with Iran.
This hit smells but yeah keep buying into the terrorist narative , it's what they want you to think.

Qassem Soleimani, the Iranian Quds Force commander who was killed in a US drone attack in Baghdad on Friday, was in Iraq to negotiate a de-escalation in tensions with Saudi Arabia, according to the Iraqi prime minister.

Adel Abdul Mahdi, Iraq’s caretaker prime minister, told his parliament on Sunday that President Trump called him to ask for help in mediating with Iran after the American embassy in Baghdad was attacked.
www.dailymail.co.uk...


Trump's action was a criminal act , his extrajudicial hit against a high ranking military commander is an act of war and indeed a crime , it's the sort of thing rogue nations with no respect for international law do.
Trump's threat to hit Iranian cultural sites would also be a crime if he carries it out.

Making America great one bomb at a time.


So All of our Presidents going back to Bush Sr. are war criminals?



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Ahabstar
Time for an executive order.

From the Constitutionally elected Commander in Chief of all armed forces to every individual that has taken the oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution. It has come to my attention the United States has been infiltrated by a domestic enemy intent on usurping powers neither enumerated nor granted to them by undermining the US Constitution. It is with deep regret that no further negotiations are possible as all avenues of reason have been exhausted. Therefore all leave is cancelled, individuals are to grab their gear and go bags and report to superiors to await further orders and missions.

The mission will be complete and total in scope with a refined swiftness to return everyone to standard duties levels.


The Constitution grants the power to declare or initiate war, to Congress, not to the President.

The Constitution also places limitations upon military action by the President without Congressional assent.

The killing of Soleimani was not defending the US Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic, which is the role of the President as defined in the Constitution and the oath of office.

When a President overreaches the duties of his office, it is the duty of Congress under the Constitution to restore the balance of power by pursuing impeachment and potential removal of that corrupt President.


The claim was that Soleimani was planning attacks against U.S. assets. If that is actually true, the action taken by the President was justified by both the U.S. Constitution and the War Powers Act.
edit on 8-1-2020 by timequake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

I don't care one way or the other, from my perspective the dude was terrorist scum.

The guy is indeed a martyr to millions now, if you can't see that, they ones apt to ponder why?

As to bluster and fear, that's exactly what Trump just created, or at least reinforced, for the foreseeable future in the Middle East.



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

The world is better off without Osama bin Laden, al bagdhadi, and Solemeini, isn't it?



posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Notoneofyou

There is an old saying, if you are going to drown yourself, might as well do it in deep water.

All this talk of "war crimes" makes me think of this scene from the movie "Fat man and little boy". It totally applies to the present situation. I wonder if Nancy had a kid over there in harms way, how would she feel then?





posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 07:26 PM
link   
The do nothing good Democrats, led by the anti America Nancy Pelosi, now has the resolution to rein in President Trump, all cued up and ready for a vote on Thursday.

mobile.twitter.com...




posted on Jan, 8 2020 @ 10:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
The do nothing good Democrats, led by the anti America Nancy Pelosi, now has the resolution to rein in President Trump, all cued up and ready for a vote on Thursday.

mobile.twitter.com...



Well that will be struck down as overstepping their congressional bounds by the SUpreme court i am sure.



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 04:13 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Indeed it is.

Be better off without the likes of Trump also.



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 06:34 AM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

We shall see. Hopefully so, even though R.B.G. is somehow still going with all of her recent health prpblems.

That lady is like the energizer bunny.
edit on 9-1-2020 by Notoneofyou because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Notoneofyou

Is what you describe in the O.P. what the House passed today? I just heard that Nancy Pelosi rushed it through (sound familiar?), even though its just a toothless rebuke, like her Impeachment circus.



posted on Jan, 9 2020 @ 06:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Notoneofyou
a reply to: yuppa

We shall see. Hopefully so, even though R.B.G. is somehow still going with all of her recent health prpblems.

That lady is like the energizer bunny.


President Trump is partly responsible. She found superhuman determination to stay in office until Joe Biden is elected President.




top topics



 
37
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join