PANETTA: International permission trumps Congressional permission for military actions.

PANETTA: 'INTERNATIONAL PERMISSION’ TRUMPS CONGRESSIONAL PERMISSION FOR MILITARY ACTIONS

www.breitbart.com

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta appeared at a Senate Armed Services Committee congressional hearing, where he said “legal basis” was needed to initiate a no-fly zone over Syria.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Leon Panetta Says Obama Admin Will Seek "International Permission" To Attack Syria, not Congressional permission. And they will "inform" Congress what their plans are.

This guy should be resigning immediately.

The Constitution clearly states what needs to be done, he swore in oath to uphold it; and he is breaking that oath.

This country is absolutely trashed by corruption, and they are so open about it now that it's arrogant.

I'd like to say, everyone write your legislative leaders and demand his resignation, but chances are; they trashed the Constitution long ago themselves.

www.breitbart.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by xstealth


And if that happens the Congress better damn well draft articles if impeachment against Obama. Along with Panetta for going along with it. Holder for being the one who most likely approved this further shredding of the Constitution.

Im starting to seriously reconsider my position on the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

There was a time, not long ago, that I would see news like this and it would enrage me. Now, I wake up each day and just wonder what news I am going to come across on how THEY are destroying the country and freedom. I realized that getting mad only causes personal health problems and discomfort. It's not like there is anything we can honestly do.

I had predicted back before Obama came into office, that they would muddy the waters of clandestine and military action in the world to get away with interfering in foreign nation affairs and creating 'situations.' Then General Petraeus retires, becomes the new CIA director, and the old CIA director becomes the head of the DOD. Checkmate.

reply to post by xstealth
What the. . . ?

Try it. Just bloody well try it. This is so wrong on so many levels that I am near speechless.

Originally posted by Wolf321

If more people were actually intelligent and didn't wonder through life like zombies for drama then we could do something about it.

If they asked about this on the street 90% of people wouldn't know that military actions require congressional approval, then most of the rest would agree that international permission is a good thing because Obama is doing a good job . The people that are actually informed are few and far between.

Who needs congress when you're the king?



Not that congress these days is interested in anything more than padding their bank accounts.

Of course McCains name comes up again. Could he or his friends benefit from intervention?

Swirling in the background are allegations from a congressional leader that the $2.7 billion in fuel contracts the two are fighting over constituted war profiteering. In a 2008 letter to then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates, U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., accused Sargeant of bilking taxpayers out of $180 million in a series of contracts his companies were awarded to provide fuel to troops in Iraq. A partial audit by the Defense Department, released in March, concluded that the United States paid Sargeant's companies up to $204 million more than it should have.

And then this

Adding further drama is Sargeant's political past. A formidable GOP fund-raiser, he became finance chairman of the Florida Republican Party in 2006 when Charlie Crist, his Florida State University fraternity brother, became governor. Sargeant stepped down in 2009 after GOP presidential hopeful U.S. Sen. John McCain returned $50,000 in contributions linked to Sargeant. The Washington Post and The New York Times suggested the contributions were illegal because the donors were foreign nationals and they may have been reimbursed.

www.palmbeachpost.com...Awe he had to give the money back after his criminal buddy got caught. Now who is John McCain really looking out for?

reply to post by xstealth



Okay, I was around to hear the Democrats say that George H.W. Bush's Presidency would "die in the sands of Kuwait" if he crossed the border without Congressional consent in advance. Err.... Something about the war powers act as I recall. Then I heard the Republicans make similar threats back toward Clinton, albeit without the same volume in his misadventures. Baby Bush was definitely aware of his Presidential duty to get the consent of Congress and, in theory, the consent of the people in the process, before going to war. Both times.

If Obama truly does deem himself above the War Powers act and blows Congress off as if they were spectators to his big show, then they need to bring the curtains down on it. Maybe this is where King type attitude meets political self interesting among Congress. If they don't stand here, now, they may not get another opportunity to regain what they lose for THEIR OWN Branch of the U.S. Government.

I'd say Congress could get him in the Budget by 0'ing out his personal Presidential type costs, but it seems we've been operating without a formal and properly passed budget for a few years now, Fine.. Ompeachment it is. It WOULD have been for both Bush's or Clinton. What makes Obama so much different and/or special in any way at all? Even HE has some laws he must follow.

Let me get this straight.

If Congress okays a military action, but the international community says no; then we DON'T go???

reply to post by xstealth


Even if half of the population were both educated and informed, it wouldn't matter. The whole system, on every level, is corrupt. Even if the elections weren't rigged, even if TPTB didn't preselect who they want, 98% of of politicians are corrupt, 1% get corrupted, and the last percent either gets attacked and discredited or made politically impotent.

Not to mention the corporate corruption and its role in the whole thing.

It's all quid pro quo, good ole' boys, back scratching, nepotistic, fraternal, dynastic or cronyism. And no one has the least bit of interest or concern for freedom, what America is about or for, or anyone outside their inner circles.

We have no choice, we have no control, we have no way to resolve it. All we can do is ride the wave till it crashes on the shore.

In another time, an informed people would have been able to revolt and reclaim liberty. That is completely impossible and improbable today.

And yet the double standard continues, as do the steps to NWO under the power of the UN.

All the screaming they did about Bush and his illegal wars....

now I know what they meant...

They didn't mean illegal because of the Congressional approval, which he had,

they mean illegal because we didn't get permission from the UN!!!!

That is who they turn to, and the liberally educated dolts who know nothing of our laws agree with them.

reply to post by Wolf321


I don't want to decry violence...

but I do believe the time for a revolution against our illegal king and his puppets has come.

reply to post by timetothink


We have more than enough moral and legal justification for it. However, as I have stated, it is impossible. Because of the technology involved, the imbalance of resources and the epic mastery of propaganda they have over people, it would only further their goals.

At best, we can only hope that either the system as it is collapses, or some outside natural force brings humanity and society to its knees and we are reduced to small pockets of local government and control. From their, liberty has a small chance of being cultivated and growing into nationhood again.

Oh, HELL NO!

Chalk up another FU to the Constitution. That settles it; I'm going to run for Congress.










*Irony is sometimes a cruel mistress.

War Powers Act - “requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war.”

As long as he notifies Congress, the President has the legal ability to engage in pretty much any military action. if the "kinetic force" is still going after 90 days, then Congress is left with the option of cutting off funding to troops in the field after they’ve already been committed. Who exactly would cut off funding for the troops that he deployed? You kill U.S Military personnel and abandon them to the enemy.

Congress shot themselves in the foot with this one. The U.S president can go to war whether we like it or not , thanks to congress.

Congress is complicit in this crap. They did nothing when he sent troops to Libya. Ron Paul and a few others filed a law suite but have not heard the status of that. The America we once knew is gone dead finito. This idiot just acknowledged that the World government has authority over congress and they did nothing. Yet idiots continue to vote for these treasonous crooks.

reply to post by hawkiye


Filed a law suit for what exactly? He had the legal Authority to do what he did in Libya. Congress permitted this. Only thing congress could do to punish the president is to cut off funding for the soldiers deployed and deny them supplies.

Congress did this to themselves and to the American people. You should be upset with Congress because in all accounts .. the president had legal authority and Congress did not cut funding for the troops , so the kinetic action was "sanctioned" by congress.

Obama can commence with military action for up to 60 days without congressional approval under The Warpowers Act but after that if congress hasn't approved it then its done. However in no way are we bound to "international approval" before congressional or the absence there of.

This man should not resign, he should be thrown out on his ass into the streets for a lynching. This entire administration is so corrupt it is sickening and we are well headed the way of Rome.

All i can say is hold on to your hats, the # is about to get rough. What we really need in this country isn't another war, its another revolution and hopefully it will soon happen.

reply to post by Nucleardiver


Again , let me state this. People have a mis-conception about the war act. The military action (after 90 days) is not done if the president wishes the troops to stay longer. The only way congress can appeal his action is by cutting supplies and funding to the soldiers deployed. Congress would most likely not do this to military personnel and would either have to get popular public opinion (voice) or to bring him before a court (which will cut all funding and supplies to the military personnel deployed while the court is in session) and the court will have a final ruling stating the action is unconstitutional blah blah while soldiers are dying , who would do that?

Again , Congress would most likely not do that and would have to follow along with the president and make due face or they could simply not say they are for or against the action and leave it be , such as Libya.