Should the House of Representatives stay out of military business?

Question

war is ugly set and look pretty and let the military do there job

Answer 1

Seeing as how Congress has the sole authority to declare war...I'm gonna say no.

Answer 2

President - Commander In Chief of the armed forces.

Do I remember something in school about Balance of Power among the three branches of government?

Isn't that where Congress comes in, to keep a President from assuming total control of the country through the military?

Isn't that why Public Law 107-23, Authorization To Use Military Force in Iraq, was necessary before the President could proceed?

And isn't that what Congress was empowered to do, rescind any authorization that is not in the best interests of the U.S.?

Perhaps, for all their blustering and big talk, Congress really IS staying out of the military business, even though they have a Democrat majority in both Houses to oppose the President.

Answer 3

Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution gives to the Congress the power to declare war, to raise and support armies and to provide and maintain a Navy. So, they do have the right to look at military operations and ask for a proper accounting. They have absolutely no role in deciding the strategy and tactics to be used by the commanders in the field.

Answer 4

Yes the house should not be involved if the military is abroad fighting a war. However, there should be a pre-requisite where every member of the house should have their own child/children in the military or they themselves should have served if they were incapable of bearing them. Many would say that this is unconstitutional, but be aware of everything unconstitutional this government has done over the last 8 years.

Answer 5

I think we should abolish the house of representatives think
of the money we'd save..

It's obvious also, given the events of the last few years and months, that the generals really know best at times of war,
and with the GWOT poised and predicted to last decades on end, so, we don't really need a president either.

We could save the US tax payers a lot of dough, by getting rid of congress, the senate and the presidency.

Ask yourself honestly if you'd really notice much difference,
since 9-11 ?

Would you ?

LuvUall, ba-bye.

Answer 6

Well, no -- because the military isn't a branch of government. If it were, we would hardly be a republic, now would we? We'd be under martial law.

The Congress's power of the purse - which can be used, if they want, to defund war at any time - is an important "check and balance" in the Constitutional government of the United States. To suggest otherwise is, in my opinion, un-American.

Answer 7

No. Since our reps are the voice of each individual communtiy throughout the country they need to be apart of all our countries military decisions. Checks and balances on EVERY level are needed to keep the "powers that be" from running completely amok.

Answer 8

Are they just supposed to give Bush every cent he wants to make war?

Answer 9

Only if the USA is under Martial Law.

Answer 10

We would be better off if they stayed out of Washington.