f Ron "poop" Paul were President would he have authorized Leon Panetta, the Seal Teams and the Joint Special Operations Command into Pakistan without regard to their sovereignty to get Osama Bin Laden?
Based on everything he has said indicates that he wouldn`t.
Uniformed as usual I see.
Article I, Section 8, Clauses 10 and 11 of the U.S. Constitution grant Congress the power to offer a bounty and appoint stealth warriors, private companies and individuals, to capture or kill an enemy such as Osama bin Laden and his fellow terrorists, as well as seize their property.
In 2001 when Congressman Paul introduced his legislation to grant letters of marque and reprisal against Osama bin Laden, he said, "The founders and authors of our Constitution provided an answer for the difficult tasks that we now face. When a precise declaration of war was impossible due to the vagueness of our enemy, the Congress was expected to take it upon themselves to direct the reprisal against an enemy not recognized as a government."
Dr. Paul's marque and reprisal legislation did not pass in 2001. But Osama bin Laden is still at large. Therefore, Dr. Paul re-introduced his legislation a few days ago.
In a letter dated July 21, 2007, Dr. Paul states:
I opposed giving the president power to wage unlimited and unchecked aggression. However, I did vote to support the use of force in Afghanistan. I also authored H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. A letter of marque and reprisal is a constitutional tool specifically designed to give the president the authority to respond with appropriate force to those non-state actors who wage aggression against the United States while limiting his authority to only those responsible for the atrocities of that day. Such a limited authorization is consistent with the doctrine of just war and the practical aim of keeping Americans safe while minimizing the costs in blood and treasure of waging such an operation.
