Chaos45 second Veto on bill to cut off U.S. support to Saudi campaign in Yemen

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by PracticalMac, Apr 17, 2019.

  1. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #1
    Chaos45 second Veto on resolution cut off U.S. support to Saudi campaign in Yemen

    Article from The Hill
    (note another part: congressmen appealed to Trump's distaste for U.S. military entanglements in the Middle East to approve resolution)

    Also see article from Vox


    As expected Chaos45 vetoed it, but this is the part of his statement that caught my eye.

    Trump said in a memo to the Senate signaling his veto.

    The power is of the President, so is should say "weaken the Presidents constitutional authorities".

    Also, "The Constitution, of course, gives war declaration powers to Congress, not the president."
    So what power is Chaos45 talking about?
     
  2. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #2
    I think he thought they were going to take away his ability to tweet........
    I do wonder what our worthless congress is up to. War powers act is too much power for the president no matter what letter is next to his/her name
     
  3. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    Sounds like “worthless” Congress did a good.
     
  4. DearthnVader macrumors 6502a

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
  5. Huntn, Apr 18, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2019

    Huntn macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #5
    He’s a freak with terrible judgement who does not even understand his role in our government other than chaos to fill his pockets. . Btw, love the Chaos45 moniker. Do you take credit for it? :)
     
  6. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502a

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #6
    It's 2019, House&Senate voted to end it->

    Trump's war
     
  7. DearthnVader macrumors 6502a

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #7
    I think that's fair, now, however where was the outrage when it was Obama's war?
     
  8. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502a

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #8
    Dunno, I certainly always saw of that war as even more stupid than most other wars and that any western government lending support was bordering on being criminals.
     
  9. DearthnVader macrumors 6502a

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #9
    We, and when I say we, I mean all of us, support these wars because the Saudis price oil only in $USD$, and they make sure OPEC does as well.

    If you truly want these wars to stop, that has to change, but it won't be a change without a price to you and I.
     
  10. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502a

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #10
    OPEC/Saudis selling oil in anything but $ would mostly affect the US as it could start the end of the $ being the world reserve currency and being valued at actual value (50% of what it is now I'd guess).

    Would be quite painful if you had to start paying real prices for goods and would stop endless borrowing without inflation.

    Which also meanw that the US might actually be able to come close to balanced trade, which off course would finally hit hard on the current net exporters.

    But since that adaption will come at some time in this century anyways I'll say better now than later.
     
  11. DearthnVader macrumors 6502a

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #11
    It's silly really, we are fighting to maintain the way thing are, and how people make profit from it now.

    Our money has value because it is born of debt, and we need it to repay the debt that created it. We just don't want to upset the old world order, because we fear the disruption to economic growth.

    We have to transcend that fear, but the first step is realizing that we have a problem.
     
  12. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #12
    TRUMP gets to continue what obama started, to quote Obama's favorite word "inherited"......
    but to be fair, it IS trumps war NOW, just like it was Obamas complete middle east mess when he was in power for a full 8 years.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 18, 2019 ---
    not bordering, being criminals for sure, our FP sucks.:(
     
  13. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #13
    I think @jkcerda has persuaded people to change their minds.

    Obama was wrong to support the war.
     
  14. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #14
    Remember the Maine Cole!!!
    Remember the Embassy!!!

    (Yeah, no reason to be there at all)

    Damm proxy wars....
     
  15. DearthnVader macrumors 6502a

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #15
    Ron Paul ran a few times on ending our military excursionism and overall militarism. To a lesser degree his son has also run on this platform.

    However, they get called everything from loon to isolationist, and they can't get out of the primaries.

    So, it's not that we don't have other choices, we simply refuse to exercise they choice we do have.

    For these reasons, I don't lay these wars to propitiate the petrodollar at the feet of Obama or Trump, I lay them at the feet of the all, the voters that continue to back wars in far off lands, so long as we can have cheap gas and oil.
     
  16. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502a

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #16
    Their platform includes plenty looney stuff outside foreign politics, and the US voters are just not dumb enough to fall for those in sufficient quantities:rolleyes:
     
  17. DearthnVader macrumors 6502a

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #17
    So given the choice you'd rather have President Trump than President Rand Paul?
     
  18. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #18
    Aiding the enemy. Nice. SA is the largest sponsor of global terrorism. Their own actions have resulted in American and other western lives ending. That entire country needs to be glassed over. Incompetent leadership, useless military that needs hand-holding guidance by western nations just to do the simplest of things.
     
  19. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502a

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #19
    I don't really have a choice, but I'd say Rand's ideas would have a less negative effect on the global scale then Trumps nonsense.

    His interior politics? Well just a different version of totally_nuts_you_will_feel_the_pain_in_20_years, so I don't really care.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    Depending on how you define that it might just be No2 (after the US).
     
  20. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #20
    Fair enough. Ours seems to be state executed. Our homegrown domestic terrorists often seem to be missing several chromosomes.
     
  21. jerwin macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #21
    That's the position of the New Republic, too.

    https://newrepublic.com/article/153639/add-trumps-yemen-veto-obamas-spotty-war-legacy
     
  22. Solomani macrumors 68040

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #22
    Chaos45. I like it! It's like Orange Mussolini now has a secret agent name. Reminds me of Get Smart.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 21, 2019 ---
    Which part(s) of his interior politics do you disagree with?

    And yes, I tend to support Rand Paul's foreign policy of "stop meddling in the Middle East, stop taking sides, not even Israel".
     
  23. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502a

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #23
    Not following him closely, but AFAIR it goes something like this:

    "It's o.k. for that fertilizer plant to open next to your kid's school cos you will be able to sue them for a quadrillion after things went wrong"

    (simplified)
     
  24. Huntn, Apr 21, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2019

    Huntn macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #24
    I support this sentiment to some degree, while acknowledging that we don’t live in a vacuum and we have to get smarter about what wars we want to jump into. In WWII growing fascism was a real threat in Europe. Neighboring countries fought back and finally the US who felt far removed got involved. But you could ask yourself, what would we have done with a Third Reich that had conquered all of Europe? The Russian style of Communism was also a real threat. At some point, you have to get involved, so the options are policies that discourage expansionism, fight later, or fight now.

    The US is involved in a strong block of Nations that make up NATO, at least it was stronger organization before Trump. It may be fractured now. My goal would be for the US to stop leading NATO into war, but act as a real equal partner and make decisions about war as a group.

    On good thing about Trump is that before him, it seemed like NATO was our surrogate, agreeing with most things we wanted, like invading IRAQ after a bunch of terrorists from Saudi Arabia attacked us on 9-11. :oops:
    Hopefully now, in this new landscape they’ll not be so agreeable with a lame brain idea we come up with like invading a country who had not attacked us based on a manufactured lie. That happened under W, a Republican.

    Now I’m waiting for the little Obama and Clinton squeaking in response... not from you. :rolleyes::oops:

    On a separate note, let’s look at GOP contributions to the country:
    • Nixon: Watergate
    • Reagan: Iran Contra
    • W: Invade a country who had not attacked us.
    • Trump: Conman, Liar, Scam Artist, appears to be mental, a jerk who refuse to acknowledge an attack on this country by Russia.
     
  25. DearthnVader macrumors 6502a

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #25
    Pretty much all Presidents in the post WWII era have embraced the role of the US military as the "police of the world", tho it's been very selective.

    I get it, we took a more isolationist stand after WWI, we appeased Hitler, then waited too long to enter WWII. I mean, at the point we entered the war, the world was down to a handful of functioning free State democracies.

    What is the proper time and place for us to use force of arms?

    That's a question that will linger, long after our militarism has run us broke.
     

Share This Page

31 April 17, 2019