yes yes, I posted it here days ago and several have been posting it constantly since.... It makes him a flip flopper on opinion but from what i understand, he's legal in what he's doing.
That is debatable:
From Article I section 8
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress
The POTUS may be CIC, but where is the immanent threat to America or its assets?
241 Marines lost their lives in '82. that was a direct attack/immanent threat to a US asset
This is a link the War Powers Act of 1975 not going to post the whole thing because of the length
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/warpower.aspSEC. 3. The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.
Now that seems clear and concise
