Page 8 of 14

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2020 4:34 pm
by philip964
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... ghdad.html

Three rockets score a direct hit on US Iraq Embassy.

No report of casualties.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Tue Feb 04, 2020 6:48 pm
by The Annoyed Man

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:22 pm
by philip964
https://news.yahoo.com/eight-republican ... 53726.html

Eight Republicans join Democrats to pass in Senate a resolution limiting Trump’s war powers.




https://news.usni.org/2020/02/13/video- ... rabian-sea

USS Normandy seizes cache of Iranian made weapons in Arabian Sea.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:17 pm
by PriestTheRunner
philip964 wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:22 pm Eight Republicans join Democrats to pass in Senate a resolution limiting Trump’s war powers.
Great! The unconstitutional state of American Warfare for Profit needs to stop.

Constitutional process for a declaration of war is outlined in Article II Section 8 where Congress must declare war.

Declarations of War have historically always included (and LEGALLY must include) (1) The Parties between which the conflict exists, (2) that the President is authorized to act.

As an EXAMPLE: The War of 1812
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That war be and is hereby declared to exist between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the dependencies thereof, and the United States of America and their territories; and that the President of the United States is hereby authorized to use the whole land and naval force of the United States to carry the same into effect, and to issue to private armed vessels of the United States commissions or letters of marque and general reprisal, in such form as he shall think proper, and under the seal of the United States, against the vessels, goods, and effects of the government of the said United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the subjects thereof.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ed_Kingdom

As a general rule, neither (1) nor (2) may be properly passed unless the parties are identified. It is logical that there must be some way to win against the stated enemy, and that the enemy must actually exist.

Now looking at the 2001 bill passed on September 18th:
Preamble

Joint Resolution

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and

Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and

Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and

Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and

Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

Section 1 – Short Title

This joint resolution may be cited as the 'Authorization for Use of Military Force'.

Section 2 – Authorization For Use of United States Armed Forces

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoriza ... ce_of_2001

We see (1) The Parties in which the conflict exists, (2) that the President is authorized to act. Except the parties aren't explicitly named... And after significant evidence that Pakistan as well as Saudi Arabia were heavily involved in protecting and enabling the attackers, we went after Iraq...

We have ourselves in an unwinnable situation because the first time we stepped aside from chasing down the attackers and those that enabled them, we abandoned any final pretense that this was a constitutional declaration of war and instead pursued the politically convenient rather than the militarily necessary.

Explain to me how this war authorization allows us to act in Africa? To quote a filthy rag: "Osama bin Laden is dead. Saddam Hussein is dead. 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is standing trial. Afghanistan is holding democratic elections later this month. We have pummeled Al Qaeda and kept attacks away from American soil." If so, then how are we using the same bill almost 19 years later to carry out activities in Africa and Eurasia? Not to mention the (arguably) dozens of black raids that occur in other places such as Central America or Europe. If there is any chance of identification, then we an just point back to this laughable excuse for a declaration of war and say "Congress Authorized"...

Its time for us to stop. It didn't work in Vietnam despite the great men that were sent there and it won't work in the middle east or anywhere else. If you invade another country and leave their people alive, you will always be the enemy. It just psychology. And the only way to stop is is to get the hell out.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2020 12:22 am
by philip964
https://www.foxnews.com/media/chris-mur ... n-minister

Dem Senator meets with Iran foreign minister.

Sure why not. Be Jane Fonda.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 6:50 pm
by philip964
https://news.yahoo.com/iran-general-vis ... 47742.html

Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus Iranian General visits Baghdad, Iraq (a different general) Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus
Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-threatens- ... 46521.html

Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus
Trump threatens Iran again if Iraq interests attacked Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus Coronavirus

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:40 pm
by philip964
https://news.yahoo.com/iran-warns-us-pa ... 46861.html

Iran warns deployment of patriot defensive missels to Iraq would be a bad thing.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2020 2:11 pm
by philip964
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/large ... ard-635131

Iran has been rocked by lots of fires and explosions recently, this is just the latest. WaPo is blaming Israel and the US.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:21 pm
by flechero
Israel's defense minister said on July 5 his country was not "necessarily" behind every mysterious incident in Iran.
That's a great response by the Defense Minister :lol:

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:43 pm
by Charles L. Cotton
Grayling813 wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 2:56 pm Oh good, let’s get another war started spilling Americans’ blood and spending taxpayers’ money. Has not 20 years, thousands of lives lost, 10’s of thousands wounded and 2 trillion dollars spent taught the war hawks anything?
The "why can't we all just get along" doesn't work with Iran. Yes, war is sometimes necessary if we are to continue to exist as a country.

Chas.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2020 7:41 pm
by srothstein
flechero wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:21 pm
Israel's defense minister said on July 5 his country was not "necessarily" behind every mysterious incident in Iran.
That's a great response by the Defense Minister :lol:
I agree. That is a fantastic response.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2020 7:56 pm
by philip964
https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/ira ... ort-650457

Iran top nuke scientist assassinated.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2020 8:58 pm
by philip964
https://dailycaller.com/2020/11/27/john ... -mahabadi/

How far the alphabet boys have fallen.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Sun May 02, 2021 10:48 am
by philip964
US denies report of Iran prisoner swap deal, release of $7B in frozen funds

https://www.foxnews.com/world/us-denies ... -7-billion

7 billion dollars to the Iranians for 4 stupid people who just had to go to Iran for a visit.

Appears Iran is winning this war now.

Re: The war with Iran

Posted: Tue May 04, 2021 8:42 pm
by philip964
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-ea ... 021-05-04/

Note to self: if your ever a Swiss diplomat stationed in Iran, don’t live in a 20 story high rise apartment with a balcony.