1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Ron Paul's Constitutional Idiocy

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by 2 Timothy2:1-4, Sep 1, 2007.

Top Posters
  1. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0
    ........Today's Exhibit A is this article by Ron Paul in which he argues, amazingly, that the US Constitution does not put the executive branch in charge of determining how war is to be conducted! In fact, he goes even further and also states that "the notion that presidents should establish our broader foreign policy is dangerous and wrong." (emph added) These are truly remarkable assertions and deserve some examination.

    Concerning the first question, who should decide how to conduct a war, I would claim that I'm at least passingly familliar with the English language, enough to know that "executive" refers to the carrying out of things, sometimes functioning as a synonym of "conduct." So I naturally find it strange that Dr. Paul arrives at the conclusion that the Executive branch cannot Constitutionally decide how to execute (that is, conduct) a given war.
    Next, although I'm certainly no Constitutional expert, I have at least glanced at this document from time to time, and noted that it tells us "The President shall be Commander in Chief" of the armed forces. I also can't help but note that military officers make decisions about how to conduct wars and battles -- how then can we argue their Commander in Chief (the word "chief" meaning there is none above him) should not also have such power?......



    http://tim.2wgroup.com/blog/archives/001547.html
     
    #1 2 Timothy2:1-4, Sep 1, 2007
  2. saturneptune

    saturneptune New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    2
    The executive branch should control the conduct of the war. Of that there is no question. The problem is having someone in charge (or second) who knows how to conduct a war and win.
     
    #2 saturneptune, Sep 1, 2007
  3. Don

    Don Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    11,048
    Likes Received:
    321
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I read through the article, not the blog. Here's what Mr. Paul established:

    Mr. Paul acknowledges from the get-go that the President is the commander-in-chief.

    He then points out that it's Congress' responsibility to determin foreign policy, the president's responsibility to execute that policy.

    The article also goes on to say:
    Agreed. In many other countries, a single individual deciding when to send and employ troops is called "dictatorship."
     
    #3 Don, Sep 1, 2007
  4. saturneptune

    saturneptune New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    2
    What is amazing to me is the attacks those wanting to run for office that have a similance of honesty receive on this board. The same people turn right around and praise the politicians who anyone with half sense could see are in it for the power and self indulgence, not to serve the American people.
     
    #4 saturneptune, Sep 1, 2007
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...