The President has the authority to order US troops into a combat setting for not more than 60 days under the authority granted him in the War Powers Act of 1974. After 60 days, Congress must approve the action or the troops must be brought home.
And just in case you didn't know, Congress approved the deployment of troops to Iraq in 2002. As much as all you Bush-haters despise hearing this because it blows your reasoning right out of the water, it's true.
2007-01-21 11:06:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by Team Chief 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Although this is in the constitution; congress has yet to enforce this power. From the very beginning, starting with G. Washington & thru the ages, each President has taken this power from congress without so much as a peep from those serving, supposably, the public interest. Some Presidents have sought approval from congress after the fact, most do not. Neither a Republican nor a Democratic congress has tried to empose this power so each is lacking in duty to the American people. This power was declared so what has happened in Korea, Vietnam & Iraq would have only happened had the representitives of the people exercised this Article as the true voice of the people. The people were against all of these wars or Police actions, as Korea was called. So, no, it is not an impeachable offense. Nor would we have been involved in these conflicts.
2007-01-21 10:38:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by geegee 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Congress has not exercised its Power to "declare war" since Dec 8, 1941. Has that stopped any president since then from using the US military?
In regards to Iran, I predict that if it does not start following the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which it signed, and does not allow inspectors in to ensure compliance with the Treaty, it will get hit with some B61-11 bunker busters between NOV 08 and JAN 09. (The upcoming clue that I am on the right track is the Devine Strake test will be done in 2007 in Nevada.)
2007-01-21 09:58:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by forgivebutdonotforget911 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
that's a diffused own attack. Clinton is completely attentive to what Obama did bearing on Libya. feedback like those are own assaults. Biden did no longer something with Bush using fact he had pastimes interior the oil that we've been taking. you could examine this out your self, as Biden struck up bargains after the certainty. additionally, study which you would be able to purely have faith a million/2 of what you spot and not something which you pay attention.
2016-10-31 22:35:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If he attacks Iran by himself? With his sword, wearing only his underwear and a helmet? Go for it, George!!!
Keep in mind we were already involved in Iraq, enforcing the no-fly zones to keep the Kurds alive etc. Attacking Iran is a whole different scenario (and very unlikely at this point, since it would destroy any support for the US among the moderates and reformers in Iran)
2007-01-21 09:10:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by C-Man 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Congress hasn't accepted that responsibilty since 1941. The Prersident can actually attack whoever he wants. Congress is a bunch of wienies
2007-01-21 09:39:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by reaganontherock 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
You think he cares??????????? He has committed so many impeachable offenses, it's all just a game to him. What a pathetic excuse for a president. remove him immediatiely.
2007-01-21 09:14:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by protocols 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
It may be but do we really want Dick Cheney for a year or so?
2007-01-21 09:04:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by barfield4ny 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
probably.
2007-01-21 09:53:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋