Why isn't bush recieving an impeachment?

Voodoo Child:

Well done. I concede.

Petulant last lash at the victor: Despite the conceded ugliness of the means, I still think the people of Iraq are better off with their new lot in life. I still think that Saddam's removal was a worthwhile goal to persue. The insurgency will abate, or be beaten down. The people will have another election, this time without American support, and they'll decide then whether to stay the democratic course or revert to tyranny. Or perhaps they'll find some other governmental form that suits them. It's their decision to make now. Let's both hope America plays by the nicey-nicey rules you advocate next time. After our discussion, I'm keen to see what happens when a power-mad Middle Eastern dictator actually succeeds in getting ahold of a nuke, or financing a dirty bomb attack on a European capital.
 
BHS said:
Voodoo Child:

Well done. I concede.

Petulant last lash at the victor: Despite the conceded ugliness of the means, I still think the people of Iraq are better off with their new lot in life. I still think that Saddam's removal was a worthwhile goal to persue. The insurgency will abate, or be beaten down. The people will have another election, this time without American support, and they'll decide then whether to stay the democratic course or revert to tyranny. Or perhaps they'll find some other governmental form that suits them. It's their decision to make now. Let's both hope America plays by the nicey-nicey rules you advocate next time. After our discussion, I'm keen to see what happens when a power-mad Middle Eastern dictator actually succeeds in getting ahold of a nuke, or financing a dirty bomb attack on a European capital.
Click to expand...

Hopefully before that happens, the U.S. will have a far more competant and honest president with 'reliable' Intel in place to deal with it, before any decision 'by' the U.S. Congress (and not the president) is made to go in and destroy another Muslim country unless there is 'undisputable', 'undeniable' and 'verifiable' evidence that it poses a 'true' threat to the U.S. and it's neighbors. In the case of Iraq? Not so.

Okeydoke :D
 
Okeydoke said:
Hopefully before that happens, the U.S. will have a far more competant and honest president with 'reliable' Intel in place to deal with it, before any decision 'by' the U.S. Congress (and not the president) is made to go in and destroy another Muslim country unless there is 'undisputable', 'undeniable' and 'verifiable' evidence that it poses a 'true' threat to the U.S. and it's neighbors. In the case of Iraq? Not so.

Okeydoke :D
Click to expand...

So, the US should wait until the loonies all have nukes.

Congress doesn't make the decision to go to war. They can approve or disapprove as they see fit, but the Commander In Chief takes the armed forces into a war on his lone say-so. Congress has the ability to withold funding if they disagree with a war, which can kill a war effort at the get-go.
 
BHS, I'm not sure how you came to misunderstand the constitution to such a degree, but only congress has the power to declare war.
 
spidergoat said:
BHS, I'm not sure how you came to misunderstand the constitution to such a degree, but only congress has the power to declare war.
Click to expand...

My bad. I was working from memory and didn't look at the constitution specifically. Here's an article that spells out the current situation.
 
BHS said:
So, the US should wait until the loonies all have nukes.

Congress doesn't make the decision to go to war. They can approve or disapprove as they see fit, but the Commander In Chief takes the armed forces into a war on his lone say-so. Congress has the ability to withold funding if they disagree with a war, which can kill a war effort at the get-go.
Click to expand...

Broooooother........You're scaring me! You better go back and 'bone-up' on the U.S. Constitution before you give your sugar daddy U.S. President Bush 'free will' to go to war. He definetly 'will' do it again and for the very same reasons he took the U.S. and it's allies into war in Iraq 'and' without giving the U.S. Congress a chance to say 'no'.

Okeydoke :D
 
Mr.Jack4WAR said:
no... show no mercy towards canadians!!
Click to expand...
Spoken like a true Bush-fan. Canada is actually one of my favorite countries. I have yet to meet a mean Canadian.
 
Okeydoke said:
Broooooother........You're scaring me! You better go back and 'bone-up' on the U.S. Constitution before you give your sugar daddy U.S. President Bush 'free will' to go to war. He definetly 'will' do it again and for the very same reasons he took the U.S. and it's allies into war in Iraq 'and' without giving the U.S. Congress a chance to say 'no'.

Okeydoke :D
Click to expand...

Read the article. Congress has not declared war since WWII. Declarations of war are no longer the standard operating procedure. The new model is for the Commander in Chief to send in the troops whether Congress approves or not, within the limitations of Congress' willingness to spend money. Clinton sent the Armed Forces into Kosovo despite being forbidden to do so by the House. I had thought that this was above board, but it is not Constitutionally correct. The reason the two parties allow it to happen, is that they want to preserve the loophole for their own future presidents.
 
jlocke said:
Spoken like a true Bush-fan. Canada is actually one of my favorite countries. I have yet to meet a mean Canadian.
Click to expand...

It's one of my favourite fallacies that Americans are louder and meaner than Canadians. I've lived my entire lifetime in Canada, but I live near the border and I've spent quite a bit of time with Americans, both in Canada and in the US. From my experience, it's almost impossible to tell us apart based strictly on behavior. Believe me, there are plenty of loud assholes running around North of the border.

And for the record, Northern Ontario has inbreeders that would put the Appalachians to shame.
 
BHS said:
It's one of my favourite fallacies that Americans are louder and meaner than Canadians. I've lived my entire lifetime in Canada, but I live near the border and I've spent quite a bit of time with Americans, both in Canada and in the US. From my experience, it's almost impossible to tell us apart based strictly on behavior. Believe me, there are plenty of loud assholes running around North of the border.

And for the record, Northern Ontario has inbreeders that would put the Appalachians to shame.
Click to expand...

Haha, hey don't burst my bubble!!! I like believing in the 'nice northerners'. Of course, that shows that I have never been to Canada. It is one of the few places I would like to see that I have not yet. Although now I'm not so sure I want to.....lol. :D
 
jlocke said:
Haha, hey don't burst my bubble!!! I like believing in the 'nice northerners'. Of course, that shows that I have never been to Canada. It is one of the few places I would like to see that I have not yet. Although now I'm not so sure I want to.....lol. :D
Click to expand...

Well, if you've been to Northern Ohio you've pretty much seen Southern Ontario. Quebec is more of the same except they speak French occasionally, and they don't have cherry trees. (They do get testy about the fact that the French language is dying in Quebec, so you might want to avoid asking about it.) I can't speak for East of Quebec or West of Ontario because I've never been there, though I plan to. I imagine, based on what I see on the CBC, that those places are more of the same. I've heard BC is quite nice, climate wise.
 
BHS said:
Read the article. Congress has not declared war since WWII. Declarations of war are no longer the standard operating procedure. The new model is for the Commander in Chief to send in the troops whether Congress approves or not, within the limitations of Congress' willingness to spend money. Clinton sent the Armed Forces into Kosovo despite being forbidden to do so by the House. I had thought that this was above board, but it is not Constitutionally correct. The reason the two parties allow it to happen, is that they want to preserve the loophole for their own future presidents.
Click to expand...

You might want to check out some of the most recent polls about how the U.S. people think they were 'misled' by your sugar daddy U.S. President Bush in going to war in Iraq.

http//:www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8248969

Right now, it's 95% - 5% voting 'Yes' Bush 'Misled' the american public. You can take that to the bank.

Okeydoke :D
 
BHS said:
Read the article. Congress has not declared war since WWII. Declarations of war are no longer the standard operating procedure. The new model is for the Commander in Chief to send in the troops whether Congress approves or not, within the limitations of Congress' willingness to spend money. Clinton sent the Armed Forces into Kosovo despite being forbidden to do so by the House. I had thought that this was above board, but it is not Constitutionally correct. The reason the two parties allow it to happen, is that they want to preserve the loophole for their own future presidents.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that the U.S. 'do-away' with the Consititution? It is no longer useful for governing for U.S. people to use? I think now the U.S. Congress will now use and follow it (the Consititution) 'more' closely, thanks to your 'sugar daddy' President Bush's 'Dragging the U.S and it's allies into to war in Iraq' misuse of it.

Okeydoke :D
 
Okeydoke said:
Are you suggesting that the U.S. 'do-away' with the Consititution? It is no longer useful for governing for U.S. people to use? I think now the U.S. Congress will now use and follow it (the Consititution) 'more' closely, thanks to your 'sugar daddy' President Bush's 'Dragging the U.S and it's allies into to war in Iraq' misuse of it.

Okeydoke :D
Click to expand...

Hardly. I now understand that the Clinton/Bush situations are non consistent with the seperation of powers as spelled out in the constitution. Again, I'm sorry for making statements based on actual history rather than theory. I would never advocate throwing the constitution out - I think a lot of other countries in the world would be better off if they used it as a model for recreating their own systems of government.
 
btw ljocke i was being sarcastic wen i said show no mercy towards canadians.... jesus, u no i have been taking side with BHS this whole time. why would i hate him? haha use ur head lock
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top