Posted on 09/10/2014 7:07:44 AM PDT by Olog-hai
US President Barack Obama says he has the “legal authority” to order US airstrikes on Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) forces in Syria, according to sources present at a dinner with foreign policy experts at the White House on Monday.
Obama “thinks he has the legal authority he needs” to expand action in Iraq and Syria under the War Powers Act, according to Jane Harman, the president of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, who told the Washington Post about the dinner.
Another attendee of the dinner, former undersecretary of defense for policy Michèle Flournoy, told the paper Obama said he is committed to striking IS “wherever their strategic targets are.” …
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
Another RED LINE in the sand!!!!!!!!!!!
You see, if you’re a Bush, seventeen or eighteen UN Resolutions are not enough. If you’re Obama, however, you have all the authority you need.
If Obama defines his legal authority as what Eric Holder tells him there are no limits to what he can do.
With a moron like Holder running the DOJ, Barry has “the legal authority” to do whatever he wants to do. Who’s going to stop him?
He does as long as the bonehead is speaker and Reid leads the senate
I don’t think so. Even Iraq bothers me. The folks in Syria will be using the weapons that we gave them to strike back at us...same as in Iraq.
I hereby bequeath to sir zero, the legal authority to turn the sky pink
Thanx, bro.
Hey yo, zero ...
ya ?
It won't work y'know
Yeah .. I know ... just needed legal authority
go in (TRO) peacr
Funny that the Syrians think Obama is behind ISIS just as a lot of us do.
Really?
And, pray tell, under what reading of US Law does this reside?
*ugh*
I truly detest this POS masquerading as a president.
The war powers act does give the President the authority to act without approval of congress, but it does have stipulations around it.. and I am sure Obama/Holder will make sure they invent some excuse that they claim meets them. They will be complete bullshit, but that won’t stop them.
Reagan used this authority to invade Grenada.
Like it or not folks, the war powers act grants some pretty wide authority to the President... ANd its been used by Presidents in both partys to engage in military action without Congressional approval.
The War Powers Act.... I agree that this guys is terrible, but congress granted the president wide authority to engage in military action without their approval first when they passed this law, and presidents of both sides have used it.
Obama is not lying when he says what he says on this matter.
ONLY if there is an imminent threat.
This dork dithered for quite some time, hence no imminent threat.
If it were so danged important, he’d have acted long before now.
The Obama company wants regime change in Syria. They created a resistance, ISIS, to create civil war. They were supplied weapons from Libya through Turkey. The company tried to change public opinion in this country by accusing the Assad regime of using chemical weapons. The problem was the country didn’t buy it. ISIS has been allowed to grow into a regional problem. They will now be used as an excuse to begin operations against Syria, which has been the game plan all along.
Wow, Mr. Nobel Peace prize has become a little war monger!
Just play golf and vacay, Barry. You’re just a big mistake.
Seig Heil!
No, the War Powers Resolution of 1973 does not give the POTUS any such authority.
And the Constitution is yet another mattter, unless you do not regard it as legitimate?
Trust me they will trump up a rationale for it...
Do you feel there was an imminent threat when Reagan invaded Grenada?
Obama will not be setting any precedent if he bombs syria and cites the war powers act... Reagan did the same thing to Libya.
The reality is that this law has been used to justify all sorts of questionable actions... Like it or not, Obama would not be doing anything previous presidents of both parties have done if he does act without congressional approval.
Sorry, but Congress passed and granted the power to the president, you need to blame congress.. they are the ones who did this.
Many Presidents have used it to engage in actions that are dubious at best of both parties.
You can’t argue the Constitution when CONGRESS who has the authority willingly passed the buck to the executive branch. If the executive branch is or has abused it, it is up to congress to put a stop to it, which it has never done.
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.