Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Paul says president needs to get congressional approval before attacking Iran
The Daily Caller ^ | November 12, 2011 | Will Rahn

Posted on 11/13/2011 5:15:53 AM PST by Colonel Kangaroo

Ron Paul, the outspoken libertarian congressman and Republican presidential candidate from Texas, disagreed with his fellow GOP hopefuls on the issue of Iranian nuclear weapons at the CBS/National Journal debate on Saturday.

While Paul refused to rule out the possibility of war with Iran, he insisted a war would not be worthwhile and that the president should go to Congress before launching any military action.

“The only way you would do that is you would have to go to the Congress,” he said. “We as commander in chief aren’t making the decision to go to war. The old fashioned way, the Constitution, you go to the Congress and find out if our national security is threatened and I’m afraid what’s going on right now is similar to the war propaganda that went on against Iraq.”

Paul went on to say that he considered the Iraq War a “tragedy.”

Both former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich were far more hawkish in their assessments of the threat posed by Iranian nuclear weapons program. Romney said “crippling sanctions” should be put into effect. If those fail to halt the nation’s weapons progress, however, Romney said military action should be considered because the idea of a nuclear-armed Iran was “unacceptable.”

“We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon,” he said.

Gingrich said would adopt an “absolute strategic program comparable to what President Reagan, Pope John Paul II and Margaret Thatcher did to the Soviet Union” utilizing every “possible aspect short of war of breaking the [Iranian] regime and bringing it down.” He said the U.S. should also embrace covert operations “to block and disrupt the Iranian program, including taking out their scientists, including breaking up their systems, all of it covertly, all of it deniable.”

Should covert operations and other activities fail, Gingrich said that military action should be considered. “I agree with Governor Romney,” he said. “If in the end despite all of those things, the dictatorship persists, you have to take whatever steps are necessary to break the capacity to have a nuclear weapon.”


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: hardliners; iran; nukes; paul; warmongering
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-112 next last
How come Paul seems to be the only candidate who stresses that it is Congress which declares war. I thought conservatives were supposed to respect the Constitution. In the old days they did.
1 posted on 11/13/2011 5:15:54 AM PST by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

congress declares it. but the commander and chief can start it.

See the war powers act.


2 posted on 11/13/2011 5:20:40 AM PST by cableguymn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

I agree with Paul on this one. We’ve had to many presidents sending too many troops to war without a declarationn.


3 posted on 11/13/2011 5:22:03 AM PST by Scotsman will be Free (11C - Indirect fire, infantry - High angle hell - We will bring you, FIRE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
How come Paul seems to be the only candidate who stresses that it is Congress which declares war. I thought conservatives were supposed to respect the Constitution. In the old days they did.

Ron Paul is crazy. Period.
4 posted on 11/13/2011 5:22:54 AM PST by Tzfat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scotsman will be Free

I agree with paul 100 percent on this. Let all the people go on record before we attack anyone.


5 posted on 11/13/2011 5:23:34 AM PST by GlockThe Vote (The Obama Adminstration: 2nd wave of attacks on America after 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

“How come Paul seems to be the only candidate who stresses that it is Congress which declares war. I thought conservatives were supposed to respect the Constitution. In the old days they did. “
************************

The way things are...we can count ourselves fortunate we have one!

Semper Watching!
*****


6 posted on 11/13/2011 5:23:50 AM PST by gunnyg ("A Constitution changed from Freedom, can never be restored; Liberty, once lost, is lost forever...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tzfat

Following the USC is crazy?


7 posted on 11/13/2011 5:24:05 AM PST by GlockThe Vote (The Obama Adminstration: 2nd wave of attacks on America after 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Scotsman will be Free

The president has the power to strike. After so many days, he must cease military action unless congress declares war.

Constitutionally speaking, how things actually happen are another matter all together.


8 posted on 11/13/2011 5:25:29 AM PST by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cableguymn

Why should we worry. Obama is presidential and he will never attack Iran.

I will see pigs fly first


9 posted on 11/13/2011 5:25:52 AM PST by South Dakota (shut up and drill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
Earlier presidential "liberties" that run against the letter of the law:

The Constitution is not a suicide pact

10 posted on 11/13/2011 5:26:41 AM PST by nonsporting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777

I know about the War Powers act and all of the twisting and turning that has been done since in order to give the president the power of an emperor. I do not agree with it as it is usually employed. Like Libya, for instance.


11 posted on 11/13/2011 5:30:14 AM PST by Scotsman will be Free (11C - Indirect fire, infantry - High angle hell - We will bring you, FIRE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cableguymn

The idea that the President can begin a war without the Congress first declaring one is a perversion of the US Constitution.


12 posted on 11/13/2011 5:32:09 AM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777

Constitutionally speaking, how things actually happen are another matter all together.

Any act that isn’t authorized by the Constitution is illegal and the actor is a criminal.


13 posted on 11/13/2011 5:34:17 AM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

I don’t think war with Iran should be decided by one person.

There are some things Paul is right on.


14 posted on 11/13/2011 5:35:02 AM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

I guess it won’t be a sneak attack, then. What the good doctor doesn’t understand or recognize is that a pre-emptive defensive attack on Achmendidahanjob’s ILLEGAL nuclear arms program is not the same as declaring war on Iran. The president can legally act in this way to protect our nation and it’s strategic interests. He or She can only do it for a short period without congressional approval, however, unlike Barry’s outrageously illegal action in Libya, for which he should be prosecuted. Save the flame, folks, Reagan backed the War Powers Act.


15 posted on 11/13/2011 5:35:19 AM PST by thatdewd (Palin - Cain 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

I agree, but we all know that the constitution has been pushed to the side, now don’t we?


16 posted on 11/13/2011 5:38:28 AM PST by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Ron Paul focused on the procedure, not the policy.

Of course Congress has to approve military action. That wasn’t the point of the question. Any POTUS can and will make his case for war in front of Congress before going to war. But Ron Paul made it a point to focus on the procedure.

Sort of like your wife asking you if you plan to go to the store on your way home from work, and you replying, “I plan to make a full stop at the stop sign at the corner of Main and Maple before proceeding through the intersection!”


17 posted on 11/13/2011 5:39:53 AM PST by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

The U.S. Constitution has been perverted so many times by this occupier of the Whate House that one more or less won’t matter.


18 posted on 11/13/2011 5:40:47 AM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
Iran is not the Soviet Union. "Covert" ops won't be sufficient in Iran either. Iran also is not Iraq for Israel to bomb as they did w/ Osirak, and be done with it. Besides, since Gingrich has already put the "covertly" on the table, it won't be "covert", will it... Gingrich should also remember that Iranian authorities will blame the US & Israel for anything that goes wrong or threatens their regime, as they've always done. Funnily, the mullahs blaming Israel & US for all that goes wrong in Iran has often meant that the other side takes the credit for it. So, it ends up reinforcing the Mullahs' rhetoric on US/Israel being the all powerful, bad guys.

End of the day, one must do what must be done. Glad the lead up to any upcoming events is not in the name of democracy, humanitarian aid, or similar nonsense we heard regarding Libya, for example. We are all paying for Carter et al's myopic & dumb decisions of supporting the 'revolution' & Khomeini 32 yrs ago in Iran. Learning from history & not replacing the current regime in Iran w/ an "Islamic-lite" one, hopefully, will be part of the lesson. But, somehow, I don't think so.

19 posted on 11/13/2011 5:45:18 AM PST by odds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

The concept has a major fallacy. It assumes the President will make war with Iran. Since he will do nothing, the whine is irrelevant on it’s face


20 posted on 11/13/2011 5:46:31 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 ..... Crucifixion is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-112 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson