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.

 

House Votes today to Tie Obama's Hands on Iran

page: 4
21
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
What a joke. You do realize Obama can veto anything that comes through congress.

And screw the people that want war. If they want war so bad, let's send them and see how quickly they jump at it. Effing cowards full of greed.




posted on May, 15 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Aipac is just a front for the money that ran the country and bought elections before Israel existed. One of many.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by BellaSabre

Originally posted by Jameela
let me understand clearly. The US is making a LAW making it illegal (?) to do diplomatic relations with Iran, and making it a LAW to go to war with Iran?


No. The republican party is. Maybe the President can veto it.

If it were to also pass the Senate in some form, it sounds like from the story that the support is so overwhelming that any veto would be overridden anyway. Vetoes are not final, a 2/3 super-majority in each house can put a bill into law without the President's signature.

I'm not certain I understand the maneuver Sen. Paul did to kill the bill, but I'm glad he did. Some sort of poison pill it sounds like. Generally not a fan of the guy, but on this I agree with him. My bet is Obama is glad he did too. I really don't think Obama wants to go to war if he can help it.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by pirhanna
What a joke. You do realize Obama can veto anything that comes through congress.

And screw the people that want war. If they want war so bad, let's send them and see how quickly they jump at it. Effing cowards full of greed.


Exactly what I popped in this thread to point out ... a bill has no teeth unless the president signs it .. he can veto it or he can sign it and add little signing statements that allow him to interpret the bill any way he sees fit.. ultimately I just see him vetoing it.. especially if congress does it in such a way that makes it look like they are trying to bully or force him.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Another thing to consider, if such a law went into effect, even of over a veto by Obama, just how such a policy is prosecuted is still completely up to the Commander In Chief.

Okay, so he's been shoved around by a hawkish Congress into a de facto war, even if undeclared. But Congress can't tell him how to deploy the armed forces to prosecute the war. Can't tell him he can't continue back-channel negotiations in some form.

On the other hand, if he then just sat on his hands and didn't actually follow the policy perscribed by congress in such an act, they might well have grounds to impeach him over it! Now I'm an Obama supporter and I'd hate to see that, but failing to follow through with acting on a law so overwhelmingly passed could, I think, be a real problem for him legally.

I have a question then for some on this board, admittedly at this point a very hypothetical one: I know a lot of people are both anti-Obama but also just as strongly anti-war with Iran. If Obama was suddenly the one person holding the anti-war line on this issue and Congress moved to impeach him over it, where would you come down on that issue? Would you support or oppose his removal from office for not following through with acting on the will of Congress on this matter?



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
Cowboy diplomacy.

Shoot first, and ask questions later...years later.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Germanicus
 


Too bad environmentalists on the Left who hate nuclear power plants because of what happens in places like Chernobyl and Fukushima also seem to be for Iran having nuclear capablilities. Is that some kind of bizarro schizoid thinking or can you make some sense out of it?


So you are for starting yet ANOTHER war? Because that seems to be the alternative and the
way to stop the Iranians. So you want to reduce government spending and the size of government,
but you also what to start a war that will cost more MONEY and require more resources diverted to
"national security".

That is Bizzaro



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by braindeadconservatives

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Germanicus
 


Too bad environmentalists on the Left who hate nuclear power plants because of what happens in places like Chernobyl and Fukushima also seem to be for Iran having nuclear capablilities. Is that some kind of bizarro schizoid thinking or can you make some sense out of it?


So you are for starting yet ANOTHER war? Because that seems to be the alternative and the
way to stop the Iranians. So you want to reduce government spending and the size of government,
but you also what to start a war that will cost more MONEY and require more resources diverted to
"national security".

That is Bizzaro


No, I am definitely NOT for war with Iran or any other wars. I have repeatedly criticized the administration for going into Libya. You are just reading your own ideas into my post. I do know that while the Left pretends to be against war when it suits them, they also will support leftist guerilla activities or any other war that will further their agenda. I am merely trying to show the hypocrisy of the far left.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Well, at least this would be a declared war.

Our problem for decades has been undeclared and unending wars.

Congress has the power to declare war. Then POTUS is the one who decides how to go about it.

In recent decades POTUS has been the one starting wars without a declaration by congress.

I say this is a improvement. This country is on its way back to a little law and order...



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by kawika
Well, at least this would be a declared war.

Our problem for decades has been undeclared and unending wars.

Congress has the power to declare war. Then POTUS is the one who decides how to go about it.

In recent decades POTUS has been the one starting wars without a declaration by congress.

I say this is a improvement. This country is on its way back to a little law and order...

It wouldn't really be a formal declaration of war, sort of a trick to back into a war-like conflict. I suppose it would actually be closer to a formal declaration of war than anything we've had since WWII, though.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
May have been said already, I haven't read all the pages yet, but hey, if the House wants to attack Iran, quit passing sissy little resolutions.

Declare War

That is actually how it is supposed to be done, if they actually followed or cared about the Constitution.

# or get off the pot sissies!

What a bunch of effing idiots.

Please join me in voting against everyone in office. I don't care if you think you are an R or a D, just vote against everyone!



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bakatono

Please join me in voting against everyone in office. I don't care if you think you are an R or a D, just vote against everyone!


I will say this does not sound like a very enlightened idea.. the reason behind my saying this is that in order to vote against someone you have to vote for someone else.

If you are not voting for someone else, you simply do not vote.

What you are suggesting is that no one in America places their vote.

I do not think every single person in the country would go along with this idea, or follow you down this path.

And if even one person voted, everyone they voted for would win.

I say much better decisions should be made concerning who runs for office and who you people vote for.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Will Iran become a major election issue? IMO the economy is more important and another war will make it worse.

I wish we would either s### or get off the pot.


Are all of you high? Another war will do wonders on the economy. I would know because my job in the military is moving cargo from point A to point B and I just witnessed a trucking company sell out. It was sold because the demand for cargo is dying down. I've seen millions of dollars come through my warehouse in the size of a computer monitor. That millions of dollars is going to the US government. So war helps because it helps fluctuate the piles of money the rich have laying around. Think about it. The wars are coming to a close and the economy is going to crap. Not a coincidence. Now all of you are going to call me a war monger and stupid because war has done nothing but hurt us. Well make sure you not so smart ones read to what is typed.

Wars are created. Rich spend money....in turn stimulates the economy. Jobs open up to join the military or work with the government. People join the military and die in the military. In turn continues to open jobs in the military because that slot still has to be filled. In turn...stimulating the economy again. None of you understand this because you are selfish.

Now I will show you what happens when the wars stop. Many military members are kicked out. Any where from 100,000 to 500,000 will be come unemployed and will not be considered part of the unemployment until they get the benefits. No jobs will become open and the jobs that were open will be taking away from all of you because most of the time a veteran will get the job.

WE are to dug in. Since World War 2 we have screwed ourselves over and over and over and over. The programs were only to last for a short amount of time but we kept the programs going and started giving money out to lazy people. Now we have too much printed money for any of it to have value because the rich have piles of it. The only way to recover from the position we are in...is to start over. We have too. Dump the crap that is allowing us to continue into this rut. If none of you can see this than you are the problem and not the solution and I pray that there is another war because thats the only thing that will allow most of us to keep our jobs.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Bull ,we can create plenty of wealth once they get off the hidden tech we have.We don't need conflict thats programming.Those thousands would be put to work on industry recovery and infrastructure reconstruction I read that Col as the military saying "watch it" The brass don't get involved openly in politics they just follow orders,unless they get stupid....again .In which case colonels warn them then ,behind the scenes Generals and admirals stop them by not giving the order.It has happened before and it will happen again.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 05:07 AM
link   
thehill.com...


The House on Tuesday evening debated two bills aimed at reinforcing U.S. policy to deny Iran nuclear weapons capability, and bolstering human rights in in North Korea.

Members debated H.Res. 568, which expresses the sense of the House about the importance of denying Iran nuclear weapons, and were poised to approve that resolution later in the week. House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) said the resolution helps draw attention to the fact that Iran continues to threaten peace in the Middle East.

"The Iranian regime continues to pose an immediate and growing threat to the United States, to our allies, and to the Iranian people," Ros-Lehtinen said.


A 'sense of the house' bill appears to be toothless!



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by braindeadconservatives

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Germanicus
 


Too bad environmentalists on the Left who hate nuclear power plants because of what happens in places like Chernobyl and Fukushima also seem to be for Iran having nuclear capablilities. Is that some kind of bizarro schizoid thinking or can you make some sense out of it?


So you are for starting yet ANOTHER war? Because that seems to be the alternative and the
way to stop the Iranians. So you want to reduce government spending and the size of government,
but you also what to start a war that will cost more MONEY and require more resources diverted to
"national security".

That is Bizzaro


No, I am definitely NOT for war with Iran or any other wars. I have repeatedly criticized the administration for going into Libya. You are just reading your own ideas into my post. I do know that while the Left pretends to be against war when it suits them, they also will support leftist guerilla activities or any other war that will further their agenda. I am merely trying to show the hypocrisy of the far left.


Speaking of Libya and just to get some honest feedback... does anyone feel that Ahmadinejad could end up like Gaddafi? Their scientists are already being eliminated...



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   
This is kind of insane....looks like Zionists are trying to downgrade their image even further (if that's possible) in the eyes of the Americans and the rest of their supporters....seems like they are intentionally doing that to make it so clear even to an overly exposed to MSM ten yrs old ,that they are pure EVIL and the world is much better off without them .... They themselves are so fed up with it!....I am sure this behavior is called something in criminology or psychology!.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by six67seven
 


No i dont think Ahmadinejad will end up like the colonel...Gaddafi was a long time supporter of the west and their policies...he wasn't democratically elected...he was kind of dictatorish a puppet,just like the west like him to be, much like his friend Mubarak. and he seemed on acid most of the times!...he was buddies with Sarkosy,Berlosconi and a bunch of other western leaders and did them financial personal favors in more than just one occasion.he was a multi billionaire and he was the ruler of Libya.which none of apply to Ahmadinejad.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by BellaSabre
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Oh yes I know. The implications are quite frightening. I don't want Iran to have that caliber of WMD's. ( Factually, I don't want anybody to have them.)
But nor do I want a group of warmongers on the ready to begin something most of us don't want. And it's Iran. They have a messed-up government like everybody else, but are mostly a wonderful, peaceful people. Nobody wants to think about all the innocent citizens who live in Iran.


Yes, I have nothing against Iran's people by any means. I just look at this from the geopolitical standpoint of how Iran lines up with China and Russia and I do not trust either of them. Even if we thought the Obama admin was courting Iran to be on the side of the US, Russia and China are not going to give up so easily. This all gets complicated by enmity between Israel and Islam, with Israel classically being an ally to the US and Iran being an ally to Russia. Obama has been going about alienating our biggest allies in that region. What reason can he have for that other than to be ummmmmm acting on the wrong side. ? We also know that Soros and the Unions were backing the Egyptian uprising and we know that is a strategic place. Why would Obama encourage an uprising which gives more power to the Muslim Brotherhood while taking down all the pro Western leaders? Is anybody thinking here? And again, why did he NOT support the student uprising in Iran, but instead supported leaving that regime in place? I think these questions need to be addressed.
What is the answer? To have a nuclear Iran? Will that make the whole world safer?

Also, I think TPTB are setting it all up for major destruction and loss of life.
edit on 15-5-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-5-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-5-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-5-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)


Probably cause most people dislike zionism more than islamic fanaticism. I don't see many fanatics in Wall Street trying to maximise profits at every opportunity, nor do I see them urging russia to go to war against america.

America attacked iraq TWICE! Was it for oil or to keep saudi arabia and israel safe? If it was for oil the republicans in office failed miserably cause the price has skyrocketed to $4.50 a barrel in the states and something like $10 a gallon in europe. Companies made a killing rebuilding iraq eventhough there was a mild terrorist threat from some extremists.

They attacked afghanistan supposedly to get rid of alqueda when 9-11 really was all about covering up the $2.3 trillion missing from the pentagon. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said one day prior to 9-11 that $2.3 were unnaccounted for and barely anyone paid attention. To this day hardely anyone mentions where did the money go: a)to israel or b)ufo projects or c)stolen by some person/group. Is this really not important for anyone?

So basically we still don't know WHO DID 9-11 and everything points to a monumental coverup of epic porportions. Then britain and france enrolled america for help to get rid of Quadafi in libya and considering action against syria.

Israel has a huge, powerful lobby in washington and europe. This is undeniable! Also jews control most of the oil, gold and currency speculation. They control the diamond trade. They have the rothschild family who always lends israel a helping hand.

On the other hand we have a modest iran, russia and china who never really threaten anyone. Sure the iranian and syrian dictators are assholes but they don't have the financial resources to do much other than bark, bark, bark and then bark some more.

I would be much more worried about Israel and America who DO have the financial resources and MOTIVE to create endless conflicts to profit from high weapon turnover and to create instability factors that cause concern which in turn causes prices to go up. If america would use a nuclear weapon on japan and not even help the japanese people today with the fukishima disaster, then I have no trouble believing they would start yet another pre-emptive war.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   
So GOP controlled Congress is effectively asking the President to declare war on Iran?

This is a flip from normal procedure. Normally, the President would be asking Congress for permission.




top topics



 
21
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join