Trump: the Congress must formally declare "World War"

[Blue3]

Trump wants a formal declaration of "world war" from Congress


http://thinkprogress.org/world/2016/07/14/3798566/trump-muslim-blame-nice-france/

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Pyro]

Well there goes the "less interventionist" myth.

[Joe Biden is your president. Deal with it.]

Anddddd he puts his foot in his mouth again.

[Likely Voter]

Well Trump probably may have stumbled into an important legal point. After 9/11 Congress did essentially declare a "World War" with the "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists." However technically that was focused on Al Queda yet both the Bush and Obama admin have extended it to mean pretty much any terrorist group. In 2015 Obama tried to get Congress to pass a broader AUMF and to include ISIS but Congress stalled because both sides just didn't want to deal with it.

That being said, I seriously doubt Trump knows any of that.

[evergreenarbor]

Trump is just handing Hillary material for attack ads at this point.

[ProudModerate2]

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

He has to be a Democratic plant.

[ProudModerate2]

He has to be a Democratic plant.

Have any of you that believe in the "Democratic plant" theory, thought that maybe trump is slightly (or moderately) mentally unstable ?
That maybe that is why he says/does all these strange things, day after day after day ?

[Santander]

Good. I would use different language than he did, but I won't say what that is because it would distract from the point of the thread.

[Xing]

[Anna Komnene]

I doubt he actually knows it, but there's a yuge difference between a formal declaration of war and an authorization of military force!!

[Figueira]

He has to be a Democratic plant.

I don't think he's a Democratic plant, but he might be a Democrat.

[Seriously?]

I doubt he actually knows it, but there's a yuge difference between a formal declaration of war and an authorization of military force!!

I am sure he knows exactly what he's talking about. He wants a declaration of war against the terrorists. An unambiguous grant from Congress, unlike what the past two POTUSes have had. This use of force legislation is really semantics.

[Wells]

He has to be a Democratic plant.

^^^^^^^^^^This is what I've been saying. At this point, he's giving Clinton care packages.

[ProudModerate2]

If congress did, would we officially call it World War III ?

[Anna Komnene]

I doubt he actually knows it, but there's a yuge difference between a formal declaration of war and an authorization of military force!!

I am sure he knows exactly what he's talking about. He wants a declaration of war against the terrorists. An unambiguous grant from Congress, unlike what the past two POTUSes have had. This use of force legislation is really semantics.

No, it is most definitely not semantics.  A formal declaration of war hasn't been done since the 1940s.  It triggers a large number of special executive powers with respect to the military, the economy, selective service, and many other aspects of normal civilian life.  It also has a lot of implications for international law.  That any candidate for president would even consider such a thing is massively unprecedented in the past several decades.

[Seriously?]

I doubt he actually knows it, but there's a yuge difference between a formal declaration of war and an authorization of military force!!

I am sure he knows exactly what he's talking about. He wants a declaration of war against the terrorists. An unambiguous grant from Congress, unlike what the past two POTUSes have had. This use of force legislation is really semantics.

No, it is most definitely not semantics.  A formal declaration of war hasn't been done since the 1940s.  It triggers a large number of special executive powers with respect to the military, the economy, selective service, and many other aspects of normal civilian life.  It also has a lot of implications for international law.  That any candidate for president would even consider such a thing is massively unprecedented in the past several decades.

Please. Congress has been farming out war and ceding authority to the President on these matters since the Korean "Conflict."

There was a draft in the 60s and 70s during the Vietnam "Conflict." The War Powers Act more or less gives the President certain rights to engage in a war without actually technically declaring one via use of force resolutions, etc.

I am not sure what implications you will have for international law when you are basically fighting people without a country.

You have a "War on Terrorism" right now in everything but name only. It's been going on since 9/11/2001. Americans are too afraid to call a spade a spade since WWII.

[Beet]

A "war on terrorism" is like a war on drugs or a war on poverty, more so than WWII. The enemy is not a group of people or entity that can be defeated, but a concept or tactic, and it could go on forever. Basically a permanent state of war. Personally, I still think of conflicts against non-state actors as essentially policing, but that's just me. No matter how much the guys in Orlando and Nice may have thought of themselves as soldiers, at the end of the day they were just common criminals.

[HAnnA MArin County]

..and Hillary is the warmongerer? Someone needs to go wake up jfern and tell him this latest tidbit of "news."

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Well there goes the "less interventionist" myth.

Yep. Anyone trying to back Trump using the "he's less of a warmonger than Clinton" excuse deserves nothing but scornful laughter.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Well there goes the "less interventionist" myth.

Yep. Anyone trying to back Trump using the "he's less of a warmonger than Clinton" excuse deserves nothing but scornful laughter.

We need to get Susan Sarandon's take on this.

[Leinad]

Oh yeah, Trump is SO non-interventionist!

Really, he's a rambling maniac who never has a clue what he's talking about, and when he does, it's mostly statist across the board. He never, EVER, displays an understanding of the proper, constitutional role of government either, which is my main objection to the Donald as President.

[Mike Thick]

Goat politician

Inclined to agree

[Dr. Arch]

Goat politician

Inclined to agree

Can someone elaborate on this term? I'm afraid I'm not privy as to what it means and google is not being particularly helpful, at least immediately.

[Badger]

Well there goes the "less interventionist" myth.

But Hillary! Iraq! NEO-CONS!!!!