Pres Bush is the SOLE DECIDER? Doesn't he mean DICTATOR?

Question

Admittedly, I am not a fan of President Bush, NOT because I do not like the man, personally I do, but professionally I think he is a scarey dude. Mixing religion with politics often = death and war and I think he should be held accountable for blaming Iraq for 9/11 and leading us into war without substatiated PROOF, but we are there now.

And honestly I might even be OK with him wanting to send more troops to Iraq. I think its imperative that we stabelize that region, HOWEVER....

It worries me that this one stubborn man, thinks he is the SOLE DECIDER in sending men to war and possible death. That sounds a lot like a dictatorship and less like a democracy. Seriously look up "dictator", it describes one person with absolute power.

Is Presdient Bush really our dictator now? What do you think?

Ok... I didn't mean to open this discussion up for abuse and for some folks to show how pompous they are, or to try to make themselves feel superior.

"Dictator" in the dictionary, does not say that this person with "sole power" has unlimited time, nor that they are not a dictator if they are given that power by Congress... or whomever. It states a dictator is a person with absoulte power, period.

Answer 1

Excellent point. I hadn't thought about the idea that someone who claims that he is THE Decider is really claiming that no one else gets any say in the decision which essentially makes Bush a dictator. At least in Bush's mind. Thank goodness the Dems won in 2006 making it much more hard for Bush to act like a dictator!

Answer 2

The Constitution gives the power of Commander in Chief to the President. This is one area where he is somewhat of a dictator. Only Congress can declare war. The last declared war was WW II. The president can't raise or cut taxes even though he may suggest Congress do this. He also can't overturn a Supreme Court decision by decree and he can't make laws even though he must sign or veto them. If you don't think that Dick Cheney and Condy Rice have major influence with the President, you are mistaken. This advice from these 2 and others led us into Iraq. He may make the final decision, but he is influenced greatly by his advisers, so sole decider is a bit off base.

Answer 3

When it comes to military decisions, the President IS the sole decider [Constitution, Article II, Section 2]. And, it is all too easy to forget that the US incursion into Iraq was NOT because Iraq was involved in the 9/11 affair -- neither Bush, nor anyone else in a position of authority, ever alleged that it was. The invasion arose because Iraq had WMD (it used them), was required by the 1991 truce agreement to get rid of them in an accountable manner (it didn't), and after 9/11 Bush concluded (quite reasonably) that having WMD in unstable hands was a threat that could not be tolerated. Suppose that Iraq had produced thirty pounds of enriched uranium. What are the odds that it could be kept out of the hands of al Qaeda types, who would happily use it to blow up most of New York City? (It is trivially easy to build an atomic bomb with U-235; I designed one when I was in seventh grade.) Should the US choose to lose in Iraq, it is a good bet that al Qaeda would take over some or all of the country, recover the WMD materials from Syria (where they now are), and raise all sorts of hell.

Answer 4

"Article 2, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution reads: "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States." It guarantees that the President is empowered to act as the "first general" over America's fighting forces. In so doing, the Framers both provided for American civilian control over the U.S. military, and designated a single commander ultimately responsible for the deployment of these forces. "

Answer 5

I think you need a lesson in civics and government to overcome your ignorance as to how our government works. President Bush is the de facto Commander In Chief of our military. That means that it is his decision alone to use military force... not the congress or senate.

AND... our form of government is NOT a democracy, as you have stated. Our government is a REPUBLIC... a nation of laws, with a constitution to guarantee those laws are enforced.

If you don't know the difference, I suggest you study some more, before you rattle off statements for which you are ignorant of the facts. OR better yet, do what arcticchick suggested, move to a communist country, protest THEIR government openly, and see what happens!!

Answer 6

Yes, he wants to be your dictator...

The quote he made about the US Constitution around November/December of 2005... "“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!” Also he made another quote on May 22, 1999: "I think there ought to be limits to our freedom." Another quote on December 19, 2000: "If this were a Dictatorship, it would be a Heck of a Lot Easier, Just So Long as I'm the Dictator."

Answer 7

No. He does not have absolute power. He is however Commander in Chief of our military, so that decision is ultimately his for the time being. He did have to get the permission of Congress initially before undertaking this endeavor. In addition, regardless of the control he has now, that runs out in 2008, so to say this is just ridiculous. Now Hugo Chavez down in Venezuela, who is working to abolish his term limits and socialize all he can....THAT is a dictator.

Answer 8

Bush is useing the powers granted to him by our constitution in as he is the commander in chief of our military. Any delusions as to him being a dictator will be put to rest when he leaves office in Jan 09. Congress can defund the Iraq war at thier descresion the fact that they don't says more about them than it does about Bush

Answer 9

Do you think that statement was more of a political statement? Shouldering the blame and by taking full responsibility for the decisions allow Republicans to distance themselves from him back to the middle for the elections in 08. Just a thought.

Answer 10

He's the Commander in Chief. So, in that respect, it's his job to decide troop levels.

No, the media doesn't get to decide it, sorry.

I guess that there will be an election in 2008 answers your dictator question. No, he isn't. There's no 'rule by popular decree' edict, like Mr. Chavez just pulled in Venezuela.