Gen Dempsy and Leon Paneta commits treason

I guess the UN gives the military the justification to go to war.
Well I thought all along that it was congress.
Not the president. Congress.



More treason is to be commited by Prince Obama.

I dont think Panetta is grasping the point here.

He thinks he is saying that the US military would seek permission from NATO or the UN if there was a coalition of countries involved, but he is wrong.

Each countries heads of state would make the determination if they want to get involved in that coalition for whatever reasons are being applied.

-Either that- or he is dancing around the issue for some other 'sinister' reason- as if he believes we would need permission from anyone besides our own congress.

Would we want to make sure we outline our strategic reasons and purposes for getting involved? YES-of course- but as far as getting permission from someone other than our own elected represenatives-NO.

The UN isn't giving authorization to anything, that I last heard...unless something has changed in the last couple hours?

Obama's wonder-girl of an Ambassador to the UN was too busy on a personal trip, no one seems to want to talk about, to bother attending the Security Council meeting that dealt with this. Russia and China as 2/5th's of the Security Council vote have made it clear there won't be authorization coming from there.

Congress isn't being asked and legally..won't need to if Obama can justify it under short term action by War Powers authorization. I'd love to hear how this is justified as urgent or responding to attack against us, though.

I think the Military almost does have the right to wonder just where, if anywhere, their authorization is really coming from. Obama is Commander and Chief, indeed ...but he's still ONE part of a 3 in an equal part Government. He seems to be a party of one when it comes to wanting this among those with power to do it.

reply to post by wrabbit2000


Didn't Obama violate the war powers act by not returning to congress within a specified timetable?

reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman


He's technically in violation, by claiming he can go to war at his leisure and personal timetable like it's a round of Golf. My understanding of the logic behind the War Powers Act was so Vietnam could never happen again....as Obama is shaping up to give us right here.

The problem is... it does give that "free" 60 days of engaged combat with US forces before Obama has more than technical violation here and it's outright breaking black letter law.