National voters' referendum needed for future pre-emptive wars

[savemefromdumbya]

If our leaders are to go around making wars around the globe for no apparent reason, then shouldn't there be a national refendum to vote whether we should go to war? It is bvious that Congress can't curtail the executive branch which is out of control. Is there anything in the constitution about national referenda? Harriet Harman MP had proposed something similar for the UK to keep Blair under control.

[Erika]

1. W and the GOP would outlaw such a move as a danger

to national security and that any republican president should have it as his call.

They're not exactly into letting the voice of the people be heard, are they?

[savemefromdumbya]

3. tyranny according to the founding fathers

[OneBlueSky]

2. a much better idea would be to simply abide by international law . . .

which prohibits "pre-emptive" attacks on sovereign nations . . .

it's only under BushCo that the nation has removed itself from respecting international law -- even that which is codified as U.S. law through treaties other presidents have signed (i.e. the Geneva Conventions) . . .

there's no reason not to rejoin the community of nations -- and every reason TO -- in acting legally and humanely AT ALL TIMES in our relations with other countries and peoples . . .

[savemefromdumbya]

4. how are other countries going to deal with the USA's stance

how is an international court going to punish this administration?