Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If we have troops in Iran at this moment, is it illegal ?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 10:54 AM
Original message
If we have troops in Iran at this moment, is it illegal ?
Would it be without Congressional approval, much like Nixon in Cambodia in 1968-69? Or does it even matter? Who will hold the "decider" responsible?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. We are on the verge of nuclear war, and Congress will NOT
bother to cut their vacation short. They would for Terri Shiavo's family but not for the American Sheeple. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
2. Of Course It's Illegal
Not that it matters to any policitian in this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sinti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
3. You say that as if we respect laws, international or otherwise :) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmejack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
4. "Laws are for little people"
-Leona Helmsley
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raccoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Well, at least she was honest. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hosnon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
5. Probably legal (Com.-in-Chief). Prez doesn't have to wait for Congress
Edited on Tue Apr-18-06 11:46 AM by MJDuncan1982
to act to "defend" the nation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. So Nixon didn't really need anyone's approval to go into Cambodia?
Because he was the CIC and he can do whatever he wants without any advice from the people or the people's representatives because it "might" say that in the Constitution? It doesn't say that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hosnon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. If there is a circumstance that invokes the CiC status the President can
act - Constitution is silent as to who determines such a circumstance.

Congress enacted the War Powers Resolution to try to curb this but pretty much made things worse because it left most of the determinations up to the President as well.

And the President acts as CiC alone - if invoked (properly) s/he does not need advice from people or their reps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NativeTexan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
9. It does matter and he will be held accountable by the.......
...next Congress with a Dem majority.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hosnon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. I agree - #1 reason Dems need to win in Nov. I want to see about 10
investigations opened immediately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NativeTexan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. You betcha! And although I really don't mean it as retribution...
....the big double standard that they use after IMPEACHING President Clinton for lying under oath about a sexual encounter, is beyond ridiculous!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheBaldyMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-18-06 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
12. No, it is an act of aggression against another sovereign nation.
Iran could quite legitimately consider it an act of war and take action to defend itself against foreign aggression.

Thankfully Iran's leadership isn't as artless as the bunch of idiots in the WH. They'd use diplomatic channels either directly or via the UN as a first step.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC