To understand why the Founders put war powers in the hands of the Presidency, look no further than the current spectacle in Congress on Iraq. What we are witnessing is a Federalist Papers illustration of criticism and micromanagement without responsibility.

Continue reading

29 Responses to “Senators-in-Chief? Congress has no Constitutional power to micromanage a war.”

1. stageleft
   January 25, 2007 - 12:12 PM on January 25th, 2007

   But they do have the power to introduce resolutions stating their opinion about anything they want.

2. PCD
   January 25, 2007 - 12:14 PM on January 25th, 2007

   1, yes, the Democrats can bring aid and comfort to Al Qaeda and any other enemy of the US, and they constantly do so.

3. BonBon
   January 25, 2007 - 12:34 PM on January 25th, 2007

   stageleft….have you ever even stopped to consider some basic facts in all this? 1. The dems have offered NO PLAN; just criticism; 2. The dems themselves have advocated troop surges only to backtrack now; 3. Is losing this war really the objective of the left? More and more it does so seem.

   What a freaking pity that would be for America and we would have people just like you to blame.

4. stageleft
   January 25, 2007 - 06:03 PM on January 25th, 2007

   Sorry PCD, that’s an argument that lost traction in the early years of the war, it’s old, it’s tired, and nobody believes it anymore. Here’s a question for ya though…. what does not criticizing bad policy, or not questioning bad decisions, give aid and comfort to?

   The anti-war on Iraq people (which includes some Dem’s) do have a plan BonBon, they call it addressing failed policy and bad decision making by not doing that same thing over and over again and hoping for a different outcome. Their plan is to quit repeating mistakes and pull the troops out.

   That is a plan, the Bush administration simply refuses to acknowledge it because they do not agree with it, and while that sort strategy makes for good rhetoric that’s about all it accomplishes.

   Regardless of whether or not the US sets and reaches some arbitrary benchmark, declares victory because of it, and then goes home, they cannot, and will not win the war in Iraq. It was lost long ago, and that’s just a simple fact that is better admitted and dealt with as sooner rather than later.

   At one point (possibly) the Bush administration could have pulled this off, but bad policies and stupid decisions derailed that chance every bit as much as the current insurgency.

   It is now too late.

   It cannot be fixed.

   Any plan that does not include getting US troops out of the Iraq now and letting the civil war the American government bears responsibility for play out, and then, with great humility in the face of the aftermath, offer both apologies and assistance to the government that emerges, is doomed to failure.

   Impeaching Bush and his administration would not only be a nice touch but go a long way towards recovering some US government credibility, but we all know that ain’t gonna happen – more’s the pity

5. Super Lib
   January 25, 2007 - 07:04 PM on January 25th, 2007

   You tell ‘em stageleft!!! That nonsense about giving aid and comfort is nonsense! Why, Ted Kennedy promoting the Abu Ghraib scandal actually demoralized Al Qaeda fighters! When they saw how bad things at Abu Ghraib actually were now that Bush was in Charge, many deserted their posts and went home! And who could blame them? Would you want some ugly white trash female smoking a cigarette while pointing at your genitals? Of course they’re going to desert! So no way did that give aid and comfort!

   And John Kerry revealing the truth about American troops terrorizing women and children in the middle of the night, plus Jack Murtha accusing Marines of being cold-blooded killers? The horror of those revelations no doubt took the fight right out of many Al Qaeda fighters, yes indeed!

   And all the focus on the atrocities at Guantanamo struck fear and terror into the heart of the enemy!

   So you see my Liberal friends, our Leftist heros, like Dick Durbin and the heros at the New York Times, have done everything to help us in the WOT!!! And all the undercutting of the Bush administration, why, that was to hopefully prevent obviously bad policies (which the Democrats could see from the beginning were wrong) from being acted on! Now how do I know that the Democrats were so wise and perceptive to know which policies would not work? Because they have been working to undercut the Bush admin from the day Bush took office! They knew in advance everything Bush would do was wrong!

   So you’re sooo right stageleft, and so smart too! But then you’re a liberal, so you can be presumed to be smarter than anyone else!!!

6. FrmrArtyOffcr
   January 26, 2007 - 12:37 AM on January 26th, 2007

   I do have to say that had the current group of liberals been in charge during WWII, all of Europe and the Eastern United States would be speaking German while the west coast would be speaking Japanese. The sheer lack of historical reference is pathetic. If there were anyone I’d want to get into a bar room brawl with, it’s this bunch of panty wastes. We lost 6800 Marines on Iwo Jima in 36 days, and over 2500 on D-day alone. We haven’t even begun to actually fight this as a !@#$%^& war. We’ve been too concerned with collateral damage to actually fight it. To hell with this losing the war @#$%^&. Last time I checked, we haven’t surrendered. Maybe the liberals have, but thankfully, the Army isn’t made up of liberals. Honestly if we had, I’m certain it would’ve made the front page of every newspaper. Of course the resulting obituary page would include the obits for most of the most loud mouth of liberals in the US as the Islamofascists don’t have too high a regard for anyone but nice compliant Muslims. A German general said that he KNEW WWI was lost when the Americas arrived because while the British and French would fire 10 volleys of artillery and lose 1000 men charging the enemy lines, the Americans would fire 1000 volleys in order to only lose 10 men charging the enemy lines. It’s time to actually stop fighting this as a PC war and start REALLY BREAKING THINGS AND KILLING PEOPLE. OOOOh the US army has caused some collateral damage. We haven’t caused @#$%^& in Iraq compared to Germany or Japan. Want to stop the terrorists from using a town as a base? Introduce them to the concept of being “Dresdenized” for our safety. For the liberals who lack a reasonable historical education, Dresden was a German city that was burnt to the ground from multiple days of firebombing. The next thing to do is to follow Black Jack Pershing’s example on how to deal with Islamofascist psychopaths. Legend has it that after capturing a large number of Islamic lunatics during the Phillipine uprising, Pershing fed them nothing but pork, then forced them to dig a trench, backed every other one up to the edge and had his men bayonet them with bayonets dipped in pig’s blood. The remaining blood was dumped into the trench with the bodies. The remaining Islamic lunatics were made to fill in the grave and were released to warn their cohorts what happens when you screw with the US. The rebellion came to a screeching halt soon thereafter. As for the detainees at Gitmo getting Habeus Corpus, they are not entitled to it. The are not criminals. Likewise they are not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions because they are NOT uniformed soldiers. The best description for them would be international war criminals. They violated the Geneva conventions by not wearing uniforms, not carrying appropriate ID, not carrying their weapons openly and by targeting civilian rather than military targets. The proscribed punishment for these crimes is execution, not 3 culturally sensitive hots and a nice jail cell.

7. Gensor
   January 26, 2007 - 03:10 AM on January 26th, 2007

   Wow,

   The right sure loves to talk about Vietnam and WWII. Maybe if they thought a little more about Iraq rather than whining about surrender and traitors (or, if you’re frmranalofficr, raving about pigs’ blood) we wouldn’t have lost the current war so miserably.

   Let’s here from people with real military experience:

   A panel of retired generals told a United States Senate committee today that sending 21,500 additional troops to Iraq will do little to solve the underlying political problems in the country.

   “Too little and too late,”is the way Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, a former chief of the Central Command, described the effort to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The additional troops are intended to help pacify Baghdad and a restive province, but General Hoar said American leaders had failed to understand the political forces at work in the country. “The solution is political, not military,”he said.

   “A fool’s errand,”was the judgment of Gen. Barry McGaffrey, who commanded troops in the first Gulf War. He said other countries had concluded that the effort in Iraq was not succeeding, noting that “our allies are leaving us and will be gone by summer.”

   Maybe tomorrow, Bush will go live and admit that his goal in Iraq was to create a mess of the region and the ultimate breeding ground for terrorists:

   We won!! Mission Accomplished!

8. stageleft
   January 26, 2007 - 05:58 AM on January 26th, 2007

   Nice to meet you FrmrArtyOffcr, I’m a former artillery gunner, and a former artillery command post technician (regimental level) – I’m sort of confused as to just what bearing our respective former military duties may have on this particular discussion but it’s nice to run into others who have worked on the guns….. I have fond memories.

   I do have to say that had the current group of liberals been in charge during WWII, all of Europe and the Eastern United States would be speaking German while the west coast would be speaking Japanese.

   Apples and oranges FrmrArtyOffcr, apples and oranges, WWII and the invasion and ongoing occupation of Iraq are completely different situations. I’m sure you know that so why did you bother bringing it up? WWII was necessary, there was a military aggressor (I wasn’t blogging then but if I had been I would have said that and supported the governments decisions), the first Gulf War was necessary (I wasn’t blogging then but if I had been I would have said so and supported the US governments decisions), Afghanistan was necessary, and I have blogged that fact, as well as discussed it with those in various other places who think differently.

   Every heard of Godwins Law FrmrArtyOffcr? It generally means you’ve run out of legitimate arguments and had to fall back to the Nazis in the hopes of muddying the water or deflecting the discussion.

   The sheer lack of historical reference is pathetic.

   Indeed it is FrmrArtyOffcr, indeed it is.

   BTW, do you have an answer to “What does not criticizing bad policy, or not questioning bad decisions, give aid and comfort to?”

9. Matthias Roggenbuck
   January 26, 2007 - 07:14 AM on January 26th, 2007

   3- “3. Is losing this war really the objective of the left?”

   Bonbon,
   this term about winning/losing the war suggests, that there is a well defined enemy- something like the Nazis or the Japanese in WW2…
   But who is the enemy in the gulf region? Is it every party that isn’t compliant with the US governments opinion? The curds who want independence? The sunnites who felt better under Saddam? The shiites who are flirting with Iran? Al Quaeda who abuse the mess for their purposes?

   I think, it does not make sense to assume that there is a clear enemy that simply has to be violently defeated, because in that are there will always be somebody complaining about the neighbour’s gras being a little bit greener. The US government should concentrate on protecting the borders so that no external forces from Syria or Iran or the curdish area north from the Turkish border can interfere.

   Don’t assume there will ever be an Iwo Jima/Berlin victory moment!

10. Matthias Roggenbuck
    January 26, 2007 - 07:18 AM on January 26th, 2007

    6 -” Introduce them to the concept of being “Dresdenized”for our safety. For the liberals who lack a reasonable historical education, Dresden was a German city that was burnt to the ground from multiple days of firebombing.”

    We should add this perfect display of lacking respect towards human life at some encyclopedia both at the words “Terrorism” and “Disgust”!!!

    FrmrArtyOffcr, you should go and see a doctor asap…

11. Matthias Roggenbuck
    January 26, 2007 - 07:21 AM on January 26th, 2007

    PS:
    I think it was in “Apocalypse Now” where the insane Col. Kurtz had written to the wall

    “Drop the bomb, exterminate them all”

12. Peejz
    January 26, 2007 - 09:15 AM on January 26th, 2007

    4- Surrender is not a plan and that is exactly what the plan is stageleft..you can try to dress it up any way you want, but buss words such as re-deployment are nothing but surrender. The comparison to the Nazis is not ridiculous, although I am sure it is to you..you don’t want it to be true. Most intelligent people would consider a radical muslim group, that declared war on the US in 1998, to be an agressor. In WWII, we did have one good advantage that today’s soldier doesn’t and that is that our enemy wore a uniform. Today, we have a radical muslim faction that is, again, hell bent on wiping the Jews out of existance..we have a radical Muslim faction of society that would love to destroy the Western culture.

    Your support of any war is just your opinion, so why bring it up in the conversation?

13. JohnGalt
    January 26, 2007 - 10:50 AM on January 26th, 2007

    Being a Company Commander (MP) currently in the area of your concern now I must say that the situation is not good. However, there is more good that bad happening here. It is my opinion, as a CO on the ground, that we have PC’d this war. The US can easily turn this into an offensive. Give an American NCO (the most professional NCO in any army) a mission to clear a village, you can consider it done. But we have allowed the media and the liberals with their recycled communism destroy what we are fighting for in the name of their god (their own political gain). Congratulations. I and many other soldiers will forever see the left as traitors. You might as well spit on us as we arrive back home.

    I don’t believe the LEFT has any core beliefs. Against the death penalty, but all for killing the unborn. All for a war, if Democrats are in power, but will subvert the effort if it might, i say might get their Socialist elected. Congratulations!

14. stageleft
    January 26, 2007 - 11:00 AM on January 26th, 2007

    “Surrender is not a plan and that is exactly what the plan is stageleft..”

    Call it whatever you want Peejz, but withdrawal (plus the apology and the assistance) is a plan, heck, you can call it surrender if you want and it would still be a plan, just one that you don’t happen like.

    Bush has made a couple of statements on his plans, the consistent one is ‘no withdrawal without victory’, a more recent one is ‘our patience is not unending’. We’re not gonna leave until we win, but we better win quickly because we’re running out of patience – this is a plan?

    What if the new Iraqi government either does not, or cannot, live up to Bushs expectations or criteria for a win before patience runs out – does the US just take over?

    – there’s a real good plan.

    “The comparison to the Nazis is not ridiculous, although I am sure it is to you..you don’t want it to be true.”

    It’s simply not a valid comparison Peejz, other than there are people shooting at each other it’s a discussion about two entirely different conflicts – you may want them to be the same, but they are not.

    “Your support of any war is just your opinion, so why bring it up in the conversation?”

    As is yours, and everyone else’s. I brought up other wars because far too often I see opposition to this war as being equated with opposition to the (unfortunate) necessity for all wars.

    The US can leave Iraq now without winning, or they can leave in 10 years without winning – the only difference is the number of dead bodies.

15. Peejz
    January 26, 2007 - 11:29 AM on January 26th, 2007

    14- So we need to withdraw and appologise? Oh please..So based on what you said, the plan is surrender..just as we have been saying since day one..

    Of course it is your opinion, just as FAO was offering his opinion, so why not just worry about your opinion and stop questioning why others offer theirs..

    The Nazis is a valid arguement, but you would need to be intelligent enough to be able to see it.

16. Peejz
    January 26, 2007 - 11:33 AM on January 26th, 2007

    13- Hey John..how goes the battle? Most of us realize that there is much good happening..most of us realize that there is one key area that needs to be sealed off and brought to order, but there are those that refuse to see it because it doesn’t fit their agenda.

    They already are pushing their socialist agenda..problem is, it is their monied base that protested the last time they tried to push this, look what happened there? They stay in office because of money, not poverty…

17. Robert
    January 26, 2007 - 12:20 PM on January 26th, 2007

    I agree 100% with CPT John Galt’s asessment. The fundamental problem with this war so far is our armed forces have been shackled by political correctness. There is only one way to fighr a war, and that is to WIN. We used to do that, pre-Korea. The results speak for themselves.

    So we have the Left, the Socialists, anti-war Libs, and the Eurosocialists declaring long ago that we’ve lost. They are the same ones who obstructed, undermined, lied, mischaracterized, and propagandized every way they could to try to make us fail, to make Bush fail. And now the same a-holes are pointing and saying “see, see!”.

    I agree, John. The Left is once again on the side of the enemy.

18. Matthias Roggenbuck
    January 26, 2007 - 01:40 PM on January 26th, 2007

    17- “There is only one way to fighr a war, and that is to WIN.”

    Wow! What a stupid sentence!?
    GW since when do you use the pseudonym “Robert”???

19. Matthias Roggenbuck
    January 26, 2007 - 01:42 PM on January 26th, 2007

    13- “I and many other soldiers will forever see the left as traitors.”

    John, whom do you and your men serve and protect?

20. JohnGalt
    January 26, 2007 - 02:27 PM on January 26th, 2007

    The Constitution of the United States. Peddle your recycled communism with someone else.

21. Robert
    January 26, 2007 - 03:01 PM on January 26th, 2007

    18 what is stupid about it? The only “stupid” is those who seem to have forgotten that simple, logical truth.

22. JohnGalt
    January 26, 2007 - 04:02 PM on January 26th, 2007

    Peejz, I am doing fine. I for one have lost much over the course of this war. I still do my duty and call those who derail the effort for political gain want us to loose for selfish reasons and they are traitors.

23. stageleft
    January 26, 2007 - 09:00 PM on January 26th, 2007

    So we need to withdraw and appologise? Oh please..

    Actually yeah. That is, I think, the appropriate response for something that the US government has balled up as badly as it has.

    So based on what you said, the plan is surrender..just as we have been saying since day one..

    Call it what you will, I see it as common sense. Once the horse is dead beating it with more and bigger sticks will not force it to get up and run again.

    The Nazis is a valid arguement, but you would need to be intelligent enough to be able to see it.

    Sorry dude, any argument that begins with “If the left had it’s way we’d all be speaking German or Japanese” is, quite frankly, not valid.

    You don’t seem to have given any sort of thought to what happens if the Iraqi government does not, or is not able to, look after things to the satisfaction of the Bush administration before their patience runs out, what happens then?

    – or is that we don’t have unending patience line just something he talks about to keep the electorate happy?

24. Matthias Roggenbuck
    January 27, 2007 - 05:39 AM on January 27th, 2007

    21-
    Robert, please apologize my direct expression, but saying “The only way to fight a war is to win!” sounds like the kind of propaganda the nobody on this site needs, because the one side shares your view anyway and the other side won’t be impressed by such unsubstantial statements.
    My advice, read/learn from people like Clausewitz or Sun Tsu who made useful statements like “avoid a battle if you don’t expect to win it”, etc.

    20-
    John, it is quite frightening that somebody with your level of education/knowledge has be become a Captain, has the command over (I would guess) one hundred men and perhaps equipment for around a two-digit million dollars…
    A constitution is the base for the law. It is (together with all other laws) given/maintained by your elected government. Your goverment is elected by the citizens of your country. And you serve the decision that have been made by your government, who represent the will of the citizens of your country.

    John: You serve and protect your fellow countrymen- not an ancient piece of paper! This has got nothing to do with left or right- this has to do with democracy. Look it up in wikipedia. It’s greek for “rule by the people”…

25. Peejz
    January 27, 2007 - 08:50 AM on January 27th, 2007

    23- Thank god you aren’t in the military any longer.

26. AKD
    January 27, 2007 - 04:11 PM on January 27th, 2007

    The American people are speaking. Will the current administration listen??

27. AKD
    January 27, 2007 - 04:13 PM on January 27th, 2007

    My favorite quote: Air Force Staff Sgt. Tassi McKee, 26, an intelligence specialist at Fort Meade, Md., said she joined the Air Force because of patriotism, travel and money for college. “After we went to Iraq, I began to see through the lies,” she said.

28. FrmrArtyOffcr
    January 29, 2007 - 12:36 AM on January 29th, 2007

    Wrong again Matthias. The members of the US Military swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. You’re entire comment was nonsense. You don’t know what you are talking about.

    You have insulted Cpt Gault and you owe him an apology. You are the one who is as usual incorrect and showing your lack of knowledge. Last I checked, Clausewitz and Sun Tzu were on the list of recommended reading for Army officers. I personally opted for “A Bridge Too Far” for the report I had to write. Operation Market Garden was a true example of a military operation gone awry from the very beginning. It was in fact a military operation that was wholly based on bad intelligence. However that intelligence failed to indicate exactly how strong a threat was present versus the current situation wherein intelligence indicated a stronger one than existed. I would still rather destroy a city to prevent nuclear or chemical weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists and be wrong than to not do so and have the terrorists end up with them due to my inaction.

29. Matthias Roggenbuck
    January 29, 2007 - 04:33 AM on January 29th, 2007

    28-
    Man, how I hate those Monday mornings without having sth. to laugh. I owe you one for that..

    So, now it is up to the army to determine the politics of a country and not the people- interesting. I guess Cpt Galt would be very welcome in countries like Cuba or North Corea…

    But serious, Article IV, Section 4:
    “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.”

    So, when did the Iraq invade the US- did I miss something?!

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Right Voices uses Gravatar to display individual comment author icons. If you'd like your own icon next to your name, then go to Gravatar.com and sign up - it's easy!

more »

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail