SENATE BILL: Emergency Resolution to Authorize Force in Iraq (Withdrawn)

[President Tyrion]

What you recommend then, Tyrion?

Well, I feel encouraged at seeing Tyrion agreeing in some regards to this approach. I wonder if by setting more specific goals (I admit mine are vague in comparison to what we want to do) we could get the support we need from a majority of Senators.

Sorry, didn't see this until now.

If drone strikes are what's necessary (and I wouldn't be able to say for certain, but I'm not a huge fan of them in theory), then the President can do what he likes, anyway. He doesn't need our permission.

I'm totally fine with making explicit what the President is doing, but I'm not sure what our role (meaning the Senate's role) in it would be. As I see it, we can lay sanctions, we can declare war, but we can't really legislate a quasi-war with a terrorist group, at least from the perspective of drone strikes.

I understand that ISIS is...undesireable, but I'm not particularly sure I have a concrete solution at this time.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

How much would this war add to our deficit?

[Oakvale]

How much would this war add to our deficit?

Yes, won't someone think of our wallets! That's the real issue here.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

How much would this war add to our deficit?

Yes, won't someone think of our wallets! That's the real issue here.

Doesn't answer my question.

[Oakvale]

How much would this war add to our deficit?

Yes, won't someone think of our wallets! That's the real issue here.

Doesn't answer my question.

Your question is unimportant. The day when something as mundane as the impact of limited military action to, you know, attempt to preserve democracy and end a bloody civil war, on our budget balance overrides the humanitarian, geopolitical, and ethical concerns Iraq is facing is the day Atlasia loses any right to the title of a 'great country'.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

How much would this war add to our deficit?

Yes, won't someone think of our wallets! That's the real issue here.

Doesn't answer my question.

Your question is unimportant. The day when something as mundane as the impact of limited military action to, you know, attempt to preserve democracy and end a bloody civil war, on our budget balance overrides the humanitarian, geopolitical, and ethical concerns Iraq is facing is the day Atlasia loses any right to the title of a 'great country'.

The amount of money we spend on sending brave men and women in uniform to fight a third all-out war in these territories is most definitely not unimportant, especially if we already have the means to restore balance in the country with drones.  I asked a valid question.  Don't get butthurt.

[Deus Naturae]

What you recommend then, Tyrion?

Well, I feel encouraged at seeing Tyrion agreeing in some regards to this approach. I wonder if by setting more specific goals (I admit mine are vague in comparison to what we want to do) we could get the support we need from a majority of Senators.

Sorry, didn't see this until now.

If drone strikes are what's necessary (and I wouldn't be able to say for certain, but I'm not a huge fan of them in theory), then the President can do what he likes, anyway. He doesn't need our permission.

Yes, he does. Only the Senate may declare war.

[Oakvale]

What you recommend then, Tyrion?

Well, I feel encouraged at seeing Tyrion agreeing in some regards to this approach. I wonder if by setting more specific goals (I admit mine are vague in comparison to what we want to do) we could get the support we need from a majority of Senators.

Sorry, didn't see this until now.

If drone strikes are what's necessary (and I wouldn't be able to say for certain, but I'm not a huge fan of them in theory), then the President can do what he likes, anyway. He doesn't need our permission.

Yes, he does. Only the Senate may declare war.

It makes no sense that this is being cast as a declaration of war. I can only assume that there's been some kind of severe miscommunication.

Where has the idea that either this administration or the next are considering sending in ground troops (at least in numbers greater than necessary for the protection of diplomatic staff) come from?

[Deus Naturae]

What you recommend then, Tyrion?

Well, I feel encouraged at seeing Tyrion agreeing in some regards to this approach. I wonder if by setting more specific goals (I admit mine are vague in comparison to what we want to do) we could get the support we need from a majority of Senators.

Sorry, didn't see this until now.

If drone strikes are what's necessary (and I wouldn't be able to say for certain, but I'm not a huge fan of them in theory), then the President can do what he likes, anyway. He doesn't need our permission.

Yes, he does. Only the Senate may declare war.

It makes no sense that this is being cast as a declaration of war. I can only assume that there's been some kind of severe miscommunication.

Where has the idea that either this administration or the next are considering sending in ground troops (at least in numbers greater than necessary for the protection of diplomatic staff) come from?

If it isn't a declaration of war, what is it? What authority does the Senate have to "authorize force" without declaring war? What authority does the President have to launch drone attacks without Senatorial approval?

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

The Secretary of External Affairs has recommended that this bill be amended to declare war.  Since this is apparently on the table, I thought I should raise the question of how much a war would cost.

But, since we apparently don't have any clear goals or ideas on the table yet, I suppose this conversation is moot.  I apologize for any misunderstandings on my part.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I recommend reading the recent ruling by the Supreme Court regarding healthcare regarding the interaction of these clauses. Nothing in the Constitution says a Declaration of War has to be given before action can be taken, just that any declaration of war must be approved by the Senate. The Senate has an enumerated power to raise and support armed forces, provide for the common defense, to engage with other nations in operations of "mutual benefit", to provide relief from disasters both natural and man made, and finally the ability to pass all necessary and proper laws to carry out the aforementioned enumerated powers. Even if we are operating under the auspices of the authortization to declare war, nothing in the Constitution requires us to title it that or to use that format just that the power is tied to SEnate approval and thus it doesn't have to be in X form, all that matters is that the threshold is met (Senate Approval). I would arge tht 20, 22 and 32 allow us to do this even with touching the clause on declarations of War.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The ability to command the Army by the President is unlimited save where otherwise stated by the Constitution. The biggest limit would be the power of the purse since only the Senate can raise and support those Armies. The "Authorization to use Force" is I believe an entirely legislative construct utilizing the Legislative branch'es power of the purse to limit further the President's ability as Commander and Chief of the Armed forces and provide a method of Senate approval for actions in support of another c**ntry without declaring war on them. I am not 100% sure on this though, but I am pretty sure this was how it was concieved initially.

[Deus Naturae]

So, hypothetically, the President could launch a full-scale invasion of Iraq without Senatorial approval? Would that not also be justified under your interpretation of Article II, Section 1, Clause 3?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So, hypothetically, the President could launch a full-scale invasion of Iraq without Senatorial approval? Would that not also be justified under your interpretation of Article II, Section 1, Clause 3?

No,

The ability to command the Army by the President is unlimited save where otherwise stated by the Constitution. The biggest limit would be the power of the purse since only the Senate can raise and support those Armies.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Under Article 1, Section 5, Clause 20, I think the Senate can lend assistance to a country in the form of military support without declaring war on them.

Clause 22 gives us the power to raise the support in question and

Clause 32, the ability to pass the laws necessary to raise and send such support.

And to answer the question you asked of the Irish gentleman, who probably will decline on the grounds of the fact that he might have to rule on this matter, you need look no further than the denial of cert to the healthcare case regarding the overlap of these clauses and how they interact.

[Deus Naturae]

So, hypothetically, the President could launch a full-scale invasion of Iraq without Senatorial approval? Would that not also be justified under your interpretation of Article II, Section 1, Clause 3?

No,

The ability to command the Army by the President is unlimited save where otherwise stated by the Constitution. The biggest limit would be the power of the purse since only the Senate can raise and support those Armies.

Drone attacks would also have to be funded, no?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I don't recall saying they didn't. But of course any drones presently owned by the Army would already be funded.

[Oakvale]

What you recommend then, Tyrion?

Well, I feel encouraged at seeing Tyrion agreeing in some regards to this approach. I wonder if by setting more specific goals (I admit mine are vague in comparison to what we want to do) we could get the support we need from a majority of Senators.

Sorry, didn't see this until now.

If drone strikes are what's necessary (and I wouldn't be able to say for certain, but I'm not a huge fan of them in theory), then the President can do what he likes, anyway. He doesn't need our permission.

Yes, he does. Only the Senate may declare war.

It makes no sense that this is being cast as a declaration of war. I can only assume that there's been some kind of severe miscommunication.

Where has the idea that either this administration or the next are considering sending in ground troops (at least in numbers greater than necessary for the protection of diplomatic staff) come from?

If it isn't a declaration of war, what is it? What authority does the Senate have to "authorize force" without declaring war? What authority does the President have to launch drone attacks without Senatorial approval?

I'm sorry, I can't really comment any more than I already have since this is obviously something that could potentially come up in Court. I was confused as to why this is being talked about as a declaration of war but I understand there's some potential ambiguity.

Senator Yankee is correct - while I obviously reserve the right to my - strongly expressed! - personal opinions on this matter, talking about the actual legality of this debate is something that would be improper for me to do.

[Deus Naturae]

I don't recall saying they didn't. But of course any drones presently owned by the Army would already be funded.

What limitation on the Presidential power to command the Armed Forces were you referring to?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Oakvale without his strongly expressed personal opinions that would be, that would be, what would that be like Geoff?

Geoff: That would be like LA without their plastic surgery.

GEOFF! How dare you insult this great city?!!!!

Geoff: Ewwwww I am so terrible ewww ewwww

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I don't recall saying they didn't. But of course any drones presently owned by the Army would already be funded.

What limitation on the Presidential power to command the Armed Forces were you referring to?

The SEnate has the power to withdraw such funding as a means to deny the PResident ability to engage in a conflict. An authorization works as a reverse of that I would think but acknowledges the Senate's authority to stop it as well if it wants to at a later date.

[Deus Naturae]

I don't recall saying they didn't. But of course any drones presently owned by the Army would already be funded.

What limitation on the Presidential power to command the Armed Forces were you referring to?

The SEnate has the power to withdraw such funding as a means to deny the PResident ability to engage in a conflict. An authorization works as a reverse of that I would think but acknowledges the Senate's authority to stop it as well if it wants to at a later date.

So, hypothetically, under your interpretation of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3, the President could launch a full-scale invasion of Iraq without Senatorial approval provided that he only used existing military resources and the Senate did not revoke any current military funding?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I don't recall saying they didn't. But of course any drones presently owned by the Army would already be funded.

What limitation on the Presidential power to command the Armed Forces were you referring to?

The SEnate has the power to withdraw such funding as a means to deny the PResident ability to engage in a conflict. An authorization works as a reverse of that I would think but acknowledges the Senate's authority to stop it as well if it wants to at a later date.

So, hypothetically, under your interpretation of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3, the President could launch a full-scale invasion of Iraq without Senatorial approval provided that he only used existing military resources and the Senate did not revoke any current military funding?

Define full scale invasion.
 
Speaking strictly of the Constitution, he could send in resources for some purpose that the Senate could later bar yes. A war with a sovereign nation would by definition require a declaration though, but we are not talking about war with a soveriegn nation but war in support of a sovereign nation, support that is requested by them.

Unless legislatively, the Senate has required pre-approval through some kind of War Powers Act that operates constitutionally by dening said funding ahead of time and requiring the President to get it before going in.

[Deus Naturae]

I don't recall saying they didn't. But of course any drones presently owned by the Army would already be funded.

What limitation on the Presidential power to command the Armed Forces were you referring to?

The SEnate has the power to withdraw such funding as a means to deny the PResident ability to engage in a conflict. An authorization works as a reverse of that I would think but acknowledges the Senate's authority to stop it as well if it wants to at a later date.

So, hypothetically, under your interpretation of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3, the President could launch a full-scale invasion of Iraq without Senatorial approval provided that he only used existing military resources and the Senate did not revoke any current military funding?

Define full scale invasion.
 
Speaking strictly of the Constitution, he could send in resources for some purpose that the Senate could later bar yes. A war with a sovereign nation would by definition require a declaration though, but we are not talking about war with a soveriegn nation but war in support of a sovereign nation, support that is requested by them.

Unless legislatively, the Senate has required pre-approval through some kind of War Powers Act that operates constitutionally by dening said funding ahead of time and requiring the President to get it before going in.

Alright, so you're saying that the President can take any military action whatsoever against an enemy that is not a sovereign nation, but the Senate can retroactively stop him by revoking military funding? If that's the case, why does the President even need Senatorial authorization to combat ISIS in any manner whatsoever? Is there any precedent for such a wide interpretation of Article II, Section 1, Clause 3?

[Sec. of State Superique]

Maybe I should have bombed Iraq without any sort of legal backing and just become Atlasia's First War Criminal

[Adam Griffin]

ITTIL: Apparently it's not war if we've already paid for it, if it's against an entity without sovereignty, if an already de-legitimized government wants us to bomb their territory, if the Senate hasn't explicitly said no, if you call it something else or if we send in 50,000 drones instead of 50,000 soldiers.