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.
CIA Director Leon Panetta, who President Barack Obama has nominated to be secretary of Defense, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday that he believes the president can unilaterally use military force, without congressional authorization to “protect our national interests.”
Panetta’s claim of broad unilateral presidential power to initiate U.S. military action absent an attack or imminent threat to the United States came in response to a question from Sen. John McCain—who said he agreed with Panetta.
“Does it worry you if the Congress begins to tell the commander in chief as to exactly … what the president can or cannot do in any conflict?” asked McCain.
“Senator, I believe very strongly that the president has the constitutional power as commander in chief to take steps that he believes are necessary to protect this country and protect our national interests,” said Panetta. “And obviously, I think it's important for presidents to consult, to have the advice of Congress. But in the end, I believe he has the constitutional power to do what he has to do to protect this country.”
Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution says Congress “shall have Power … to declare War, grant letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.” At the constitutional convention in 1787, James Madison of Virginia and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts proposed that the word “declare” war be inserted in place of “make” war in this passage so that it would leave the president the limited power to “repel sudden attacks.” Madison’s proposal was adopted.
Originally posted by Kali74
The reality here is, that our President does not have any more or any less access to this particular power than any other President has or will. Where Congress comes into play is funding. Congress has never had any power to stop a President from ordering the military to do anything, they do have the power to deny him access to the defense budget or any other American source of funding. Panetta is 100% correct, President Obama can unilaterally use the military to protect national intersts, just the same as any President can. I think the manner in which Obama is operating speaks far more to the current Congress than it does to himself. Think about it.
Originally posted by boondock-saint
Originally posted by Kali74
The reality here is, that our President does not have any more or any less access to this particular power than any other President has or will. Where Congress comes into play is funding. Congress has never had any power to stop a President from ordering the military to do anything, they do have the power to deny him access to the defense budget or any other American source of funding. Panetta is 100% correct, President Obama can unilaterally use the military to protect national intersts, just the same as any President can. I think the manner in which Obama is operating speaks far more to the current Congress than it does to himself. Think about it.
so just who is funding this world invasion
of Obamas ???
u know this is circumvention of the Constitution ...... right ??
no different than a loophole on a tax return.
I'm sorry, but Obama needs to face treason charges.
Originally posted by Signals
I can't believe we put these people in charge of the most powerful military ever on Planet Earth.
Please, somebody, wake me up.
Originally posted by boondock-saint
Originally posted by Kali74
The reality here is, that our President does not have any more or any less access to this particular power than any other President has or will. Where Congress comes into play is funding. Congress has never had any power to stop a President from ordering the military to do anything, they do have the power to deny him access to the defense budget or any other American source of funding. Panetta is 100% correct, President Obama can unilaterally use the military to protect national intersts, just the same as any President can. I think the manner in which Obama is operating speaks far more to the current Congress than it does to himself. Think about it.
so just who is funding this world invasion
of Obamas ???
u know this is circumvention of the Constitution ...... right ??
no different than a loophole on a tax return.
I'm sorry, but Obama needs to face treason charges.
Originally posted by boondock-saint
Originally posted by Kali74
The reality here is, that our President does not have any more or any less access to this particular power than any other President has or will. Where Congress comes into play is funding. Congress has never had any power to stop a President from ordering the military to do anything, they do have the power to deny him access to the defense budget or any other American source of funding. Panetta is 100% correct, President Obama can unilaterally use the military to protect national intersts, just the same as any President can. I think the manner in which Obama is operating speaks far more to the current Congress than it does to himself. Think about it.
so just who is funding this world invasion
of Obamas ???
u know this is circumvention of the Constitution ...... right ??
no different than a loophole on a tax return.
I'm sorry, but Obama needs to face treason charges.
Oh, so this is more of a rant. Not too interested in actual facts or the basic civics of how the government actually works. Gotcha. It's so much easier to drop words like treason amongst internet cronies than it is to write to your congressman and tell them how you want to be represented. You guys are the very disinfo agents you're all paranoid about.
to write to your congressman
Originally posted by RUSSO
reply to post by Kali74
Show me the birth certificate.