Abraham Lincoln Says:

[Frackal]

"Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose -- and you allow him to make war at pleasure. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after you have given him so much … [power]. If, today, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, 'I see no probability of the British invading us' but he will say to you, 'Be silent; I see it, if you don't.'

 

[Bigsatan13]

Didn't President Lincoln also say ," Relax. What could possibly happen here?" as he took his seat at the theater?


BTW, the Prez does not have that kind of power Frack.

 

[skaman607]

Well he is commander in chief of the army.

 

[bullett]

Well he is commander in chief of the army.

Great Comeback.....NOT

The President does not have the absolute power to declare war, and to send troops. The declaration of war is a much more elaborate process.

 

[Y_lifter]

Who says we must Declare WAR to invade bomb and Kick Ass ?

 

[Testosterone boy]

Didn't President Lincoln also say ," Relax. What could possibly happen here?" as he took his seat at the theater?


BTW, the Prez does not have that kind of power Frack.

Frackal has forgotten more about presidential powers than you know Bs.

 

[muscle_geek]

"Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose -- and you allow him to make war at pleasure. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after you have given him so much … [power]. If, today, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, 'I see no probability of the British invading us' but he will say to you, 'Be silent; I see it, if you don't.'

Abraham Lincoln's words are not like the bible. They do not stand the test of time. We are in a completely different world and our founding father and popular presidents that came later never had to deal with terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. Everything that we are doing boils down to our attemtps to stop one solitary man from delivering a biological plague or nuclear bomb on our soil. I don't know if we can stop this from happening, but I feel we must apply constant pressure and instill fear in them.

 

[Testosterone boy]

You think we are going to instill fear in terrorists? Gezus.....we are still wetting our beds and shitting our britches from 9/11.

 

[skaman607]

We never declared war in Bosnia.

 

[muscle_geek]

You think we are going to instill fear in terrorists? Gezus.....we are still wetting our beds and shitting our britches from 9/11.

I've actually fought against these "terrorist types." They are extreme cowards. Example: I've been watching these demonstrations by the Iraq's where they're marching and shooting guns in the air and threatening to fight to the death. In the first war with Iraq it lasted three days and I was one of the people escorting all the desserters to our camps. Believe me, there is no bravery among them. I still maintain the point that terrorists are at there most dangerous in when America or the world is indecisive. When we attack them, they never do anything.

 

[Baby Gorilla]

Hmmm....

The power of the President as Commander-in-Chief contradicts the Declaration of War power of Congress.

The idea was that the President must be able to act as he deems good for the nation when it must be done. Congress must debate and pass bills which takes time.

The marriage of the two is that anything more than a 2-week skirmish (for example) would require Congress make a Declaration of War or give similar authorization for the President to do what he's doing or the troops must come out.

Sadly, the Founding Fathers didn't consider the complexity of the world. Korea is the largest "cease fire" in history, and we were never at war over there....it was a "police action" through the UN, circumventing the power of Congress because we sent troops to do our share of the UN mandate. Even our continued presence over there is not considered a "war" activity even though the troops are always at a state of war readiness.

Using Iraq as an example, it's gotten very muddy. We've been building up to invade for MONTHS. There's been plenty of time to declare a state of war between the USA and Iraq. It hasn't happened, but we're going to commit an act of war (even if 100% justified for preemptive protection of other and ourselves) without Congress giving a specific OK for it?

Okay, Congress has supported the "war on terrorism" in general, but is that what the Constitution calls for? Unlikely. If I remember correctly, in WWII, we declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbor. We were already at war with Germany. Why not just add Japan to the existing list? They were following the Constitution back then (if I remember correctly).

Lately, there's been a lot of erosion of the Constitution in favor of a very, very powerful executive branch. FEMA is a blatantly unconstitutional construct (read what they are authorized to do by executive order only), but they've done nothing but good work in the past so everyone thinks it's okay.

 

[Testosterone boy]

I've actually fought against these "terrorist types." They are extreme cowards. Example: I've been watching these demonstrations by the Iraq's where they're marching and shooting guns in the air and threatening to fight to the death. In the first war with Iraq it lasted three days and I was one of the people escorting all the desserters to our camps. Believe me, there is no bravery among them. I still maintain the point that terrorists are at there most dangerous in when America or the world is indecisive. When we attack them, they never do anything.

Those were soldiers who lacked conviction about the invasion of Kuwait.

It took balls to fly into the WTC. I suspect terrorists may have some sack.

 

[AAP]

It took balls to fly into the WTC. I suspect terrorists may have some sack.

Not balls. Just stupidity. Like the notion you get 70 virgins in your afterlife. Just like the dumbasses who followed Atta. what was that man going to do with 70 virgins? He was gay. And documented being seen in gay strip clubs.

 

[Testosterone boy]

Not balls. Just stupidity. Like the notion you get 70 virgins in your afterlife. Just like the dumbasses who followed Atta. what was that man going to do with 70 virgins? He was gay. And documented being seen in gay strip clubs.

Good point.


Hell....I've thought about venturing into a gay bar out of curiousity plus the fact that gays dig me. Why do most women ignore me unless they are beautiful while gay men always check me out? You're the expert.

 

[muscle_geek]

Those were soldiers who lacked conviction about the invasion of Kuwait.

It took balls to fly into the WTC. I suspect terrorists may have some sack.

It took no sack for the terrorist that bombed the building. They are trained their whole life to believe that death as a martyr is going to give them a life of paradise and virgins. They were looking forward to this. They are stupid idots, not brave. Challenge them to a fist fight and they would run and cower.

 

[musclebrains]

It took no sack for the terrorist that bombed the building. They are trained their whole life to believe that death as a martyr is going to give them a life of paradise and virgins. They were looking forward to this. They are stupid idots, not brave. Challenge them to a fist fight and they would run and cower.

Perhaps you should consult the thread in which Chesty and a few others advocate a similar position regarding self-sacrifice and attacking Iraq. Is there any real difference in sacrificing yourself for the Allah or for country? We often put the two together ourselves.

In any case the attack of Iraq will not weaken Al Qaeda one iota. If anything, it will increase their resolve.

 

[muscle_geek]

Perhaps you should consult the thread in which Chesty and a few others advocate a similar position regarding self-sacrifice and attacking Iraq. Is there any real difference in sacrificing yourself for the Allah or for country? We often put the two together ourselves.

In any case the attack of Iraq will not weaken Al Qaeda one iota. If anything, it will increase their resolve.

I firmly disagree that we will increase their resolve by attacking Iraq. Al Qaeda and other fundamentalist will scatter like mice when attacked. The only time they plan attacks is when we take the pressure off. Hate is hate. They hate us now and will not hate us more if we invade Iraq. We need to stop talking about going after Al Qaeda. We're going after terrorists. Iraq is a country with tons of money, nasty weapons of mass destruction and they are sympathetic to terrorists. They have to go. We're in the situation that we're in now because we've not used our strong hand nearly enough. Both republicans ans democrats are responsible for this. Instead of taking care of business ourselves like we're doing right now in Iraq, we relied of throwing money at countries and asking them to play nice. Or building up an opposing country to take care of a problem for us. Then the country that we helped becomes an issue. Its a new world and Bush is handling this correctly. Although I think we should quit putting around with a UN that means nothing. Nato should be upheld but the UN and World Courts got to go.

 

[manny78]

Lincoln was also the same who was considering to send back all the blacks to Liberia in order to solve the problem....

 

[collegiateLifter]

regardless, i think lincoln was far ahead of his time in many areas. for starters he was very anti-prohibition-- said it was unamerican and he predicted the 1900s to be ruled by massive corporations, creating todays megastate

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

We never declared war in Bosnia.

nor korea nor vietnam

not since ww2

 

[atlantabiolab]

nor korea nor vietnam

not since ww2

Men learned how to skirt the law the day after the Constitution was ratified.

 

[Testosterone boy]

Men learned how to skirt the law the day after the Constitution was ratified.

And I thought they skirted the law before the Constitution got written up.

 

[atlantabiolab]

And I thought they skirted the law before the Constitution got written up.

They did, but I didn't live under the rule of the Articles of Confederation, the Magna Carta, any of the royal families of England, France, etc., etc.

 

[Testosterone boy]

They did, but I didn't live under the rule of the Articles of Confederation, the Magna Carta, any of the royal families of England, France, etc., etc.

What the hell are you? Some sort of carbon based encyclopedia?