Bernie Sanders
Related: About this forumOn Foreign Policy, Bernie Sanders Is the Democrat and Hillary Clinton Is a Republican
by H. A. Goodman
When evaluating the two choices for Democratic nominee, it's important to emphasize that voters will decide upon the next Commander in Chief. I state exactly why I'm only voting for Bernie Sanders in this YouTube segment, primarily because the next president will have monumental choices to make in terms of foreign policy. Because the presidency in this era of American history has more power to wage war than ever before, it's imperative that our Democratic nominee act more like a Democrat, than a Republican, on the topic of foreign policy.
The last time Congress declared war was in 1942. Bloomberg writes that nowadays, "Presidents cite unconventional threats and the need for flexibility and speed to deploy military force, sometimes with Congressional approval, sometimes without."
Although the Constitution states that only Congress can declare war, the War Powers Act of 1973 gives the President 60 days to send troops into battle without Congressional approval. Congress must vote to prolong a president's decision with funding or a resolution thereafter. According to Cornell University Law School, new legislation was needed after "the Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon Administrations had spent nearly a decade committing U.S. troops to Southeast Asia without Congressional approval."
After 9/11, Bush expanded the war powers of the presidency with the Authorization for Use of Military Force against al-Qaeda. Today, President Obama is using the AUMF to fight ISIS and other terrorists, primarily in the Middle East.
Essentially, a president doesn't need Congressional approval to wage limited wars, or airstrikes and special operations missions. With prolonged wars like the fight against ISIS, President Obama has simply used Bush's AUMF, and the next president can do the same thing, with little obstruction from Congress.
more
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/on-foreign-policy-bernie-sanders-is-the-democrat-_b_8430036.html
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)and on the death penalty...
and on civil rights...
and on government surveillance...
...
...
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)and on Social Security ..
and on climate change ..
and on TPP ...
and on campaign finance reforms ...
and on free public universities ..
and on (fill in the blank) ...
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)And on Wall Street reform
And on Fracking
And on Keystone XL
And on Gay rights
And on Immigration policy
And on and on and on
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)extra judicial murder and endless war. Now we are looking at the last of Democracy with Bernie being to ONLY one with a chance to reverse some of the controls the oligarchy has over us.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)imho
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)tick, tick, tick ...
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)especially on foreign policy, you don't pay attention to history.
But one historical fact, if our Democratic candidate appears weak on defense and crime, gets real beatable.
More like a Democrat? Like FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Clinton, Obama... all doves?
Response to n2doc (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)Don't get me wrong. Hillary will get my vote if nominated. Sanders though, is the real Democrat.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Hillary follows rhetorically with caveats.
Response to n2doc (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Why do we give to shits what Paulites think of the Democrats?
Flying Phoenix
(114 posts)From H.A. Goodman's article:
Remember that article on Rand Paul I wrote? Of course I never wanted to vote for a Republican, but I didnt want another president willing to engage in perpetual wars. Clintons review of a book by Henry Kissinger as well as articles in The New York Times, Vox, and other publications illustrate she might be willing to continue Bushs quagmires. In 2014, even I thought that Clintons nomination was an eventuality, therefore I searched for an alternative to a hawkish Democrat.
I always believed progressives should oppose Republicans on matters of war and national security, not simply claim a devastating Iraq vote was a mistake.
Ive been a registered Democrat all my life (voting for Gore, Kerry, and Obama twice), but when President Obama was sending Americans back to Iraq in 2014, I searched desperately for an alternative to Clintons neocon foreign policy. Im not a Facebook Liberal and when Im on Ring of Fire correlating Dick Cheney to the chaos in the Middle East, I also know that Hillary Clinton could have offered a powerful voice of protest.
So please dispense with that accusation and meme please.
cprise
(8,445 posts)Clinton says Saddam Hussein is once again a threat to the world! This is less than a year after PNAC signed their paranoid manifesto calling for war, and the Clintons just swallow the neocon shit and regurgitate it to the public!
And yes, the poster is a winger using this to bash liberals. Does it bother you he can do this and have a "point" that Bush was .... "correct"?
Oh, but the poor, poor Clintons! Two right-wing factions in government turn into a melee and no one else can get a word in edge-wise... so let's be happy the Clintons handed BushCo a seal of approval on a false war.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)I lived in South America part of the time through the decades of the 1940s and the 1950s and saw foreign policy up close even under liberal and moderate governments in Washington, D. C.. Back then we bribed with "foreign aid" the dictators who were friendly to us and allowed us to plunder their nations without restraint or remorse. Then when the Republicans came into power with Nixon we ratcheted it up to the true Roman model, of invade, plunder and colonize with our legions of military bases throughout the world. When in control we continued the practice of installing our usual friendly dictators and enablers in power with the backing of our military, which we now see happening in the Middle East and Africa.
Our foreign policy needs a total rehaul. We need to start with scraping the Monroe Doctrine which has shaped much of our present policy with something not "Roman".
MisterP
(23,730 posts)cprise
(8,445 posts)What's most striking about it is how an empire with over 800 military bases on all populated continents reacts so hysterically to *any* projection of power by anyone else.
There is also a kind of Anglo-supremacy built into it. Within the NATO empire, the 'five eyes' US, Canada, Australia, UK, New Zealand act as if spying on all their other allies is their prerogative. Its Anglo Uber Alles and knowledge is indeed power.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)rid ourselves of this.