Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,558 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManassesMomma
I have yet to have anyone explain to me, where this was Constitutional?
Our nation is not in imminent danger. No one attacked us.
What the President has done, is an act of war.
Act of war =/= State of war.
The Constitution says the president of the united States is the Commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the United States and can send them anywhere he wants.
The Constitution only says that congress can declare war, but war is not simply a word, nor is it simply troops, it is a state of economic and infrastructural readiness. And congress has not done so since June 5, 1942.
The Constitution also says nothing about the US being threatened with imminent danger for us to use our armed forces. In fact, you could very well argue that many presidents have indeed used the Constitution to say that our defense of freedom and liberty in any sovereign nation is a good enough reason to send them.
Strange.... Bombing ISIS for what? Protecting people? What about all the other people not on the mountain? Who is going to protect them or the other females captured? Seems to me, he did it strictly for PR for the midterm elections...
Where did Isis get all the military equipment? I watched CNN this morning and Isis is heavily armed, saw them rolling around in tanks.
What is the Iraqi gvt and military doing?
I still think we should charge the Iraqi gvt for the money spent, if we are every ones military we should get paid.
US military equipment was sold to Iraq with the understanding that the Kurds would be recipients of some of the equipment. Maliki didn't comply with the understanding and gave little to the Kurds. When the Iraqi military fled, they left the equipment behind, some of which should have gone to the Kurds. Maliki wasn't about to give the Kurds any "power" by arming them.
Had our government bothered to monitor the distribution of equipment by the Iraqis to the Kurds, the Kurds would have had stronger weapons to take on IS. The Kurds had to pull back because IS had the weaponry that they should have been given.
Apparently the Kurds have a strong, disciplined, trained army.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
