Visit the Ironworks Gaming Website Email the Webmaster Graphics Library Rules and Regulations Help Support Ironworks Forum with a Donation to Keep us Online - We rely totally on Donations from members Donation goal Meter

Ironworks Gaming Radio

Ironworks Gaming Forum

Go Back   Ironworks Gaming Forum > Ironworks Gaming Forums > General Discussion > General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-06-2004, 02:22 PM   #41
Cerek
Registered Member
Iron Throne Cult
 

Join Date: August 27, 2004
Location: North Carolina
Age: 61
Posts: 4,888
Quote:
Originally posted by Donut:
quote:
Originally posted by Cerek:
Which is why our government system has a series of "checks and balances" to prevent that from happening - or to at least control it. The President can NOT go to war without the approval of Congress.
Obviously US history isn't my strong point but I do believe that Presidents CAN go to war without the approval of the Congress.

Basically leaders will do whatever they think they can get away with. Bush consulted Congress because he was sure of their support on this occasion.

But didn't Truman go to war in Korea without approval of Congress? He got a UN resolution to support action against North Korea, bypassing Congress. Only when he needed more troops because the war was going badly did he get Congressional support.

Lincoln commenced the American Civil War whilst congress was in recess.

The original Gulf War and the war in Kosovo were both "undeclared" wars, started without Congressional permission.

In fact the President can go to war for 60 days without permission. [/QUOTE]I readily admit that Political Science is one of my weakest areas, so my info could very well be wrong. I suppose there are loopholes available that would allow a POTUS to "go off on a rampage" for a short while, but it wouldn't take very long before our own government either curtailed his efforts or replaced him completely.

I'm not certain about Gulf War I being started without Congressional permission. It was well known that we were going to attack. Of course, we were acting on behalf of the U.N. again at that time, so maybe U.N. support does offer a loophole to bypass Congressional permission - at least temporarily.

Still, Congress is going to have to be "brought on board" and the POTUS will have to gain their approval to continue any aggression sooner or later. But I suppose it would be possible for the POTUS to act without their permission and launch a war on his own. But it would still just be a temporary act and Congress would either have to approve more funding for continued attacks or the POTUS would be forced to either "stand down" or get thrown out of office.
__________________
Cerek the Calmth
Cerek is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 02:42 PM   #42
Dron_Cah
Horus - Egyptian Sky God
 
Defend Your Castle Champion Frogger Champion Monkey Diving Champion Summer Games Champion Donkey Kong Champion
Moon Lander Champion Space Invaders Champion
Join Date: March 2, 2003
Location: Kentucky
Age: 37
Posts: 2,637
Mrs. Bush. [img]tongue.gif[/img]
Edit: Also, Cerek, I understand whast you're saying, but as far as pure potential, I think the POTUS (or she who controls him!) is the most dangerous. As was said, 60 days, man. That's plenty of time. Do you have any idea how many ICBMs he has control of? How many times could we potentially blow up the world, now? 35? [img]graemlins/uhoh1.gif[/img]

[ 09-06-2004, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: Dron_Cah ]
Dron_Cah is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 04:46 PM   #43
Bozos of Bones
Apophis
 

Join Date: July 29, 2003
Location: The Underdark cavern of Zagreb
Age: 37
Posts: 4,679
Quote:
Originally posted by Cerek:

You say that the President of the U.S. has the potential to do the most damage. Maybe, maybe not. But show me an actual example of ANY President exercising this "potential" to the fullest extent.
Well, I don't remember anyone in the congress saying 'We should throw a nuke at Hiroshima'. I don't know if the congressmembers have little red buttons that have a 'Use only when in need of obliteration' labels. Now, I agree with the rest of your post, Cerek, it's a good run-down of the situation, but at this point I disagree. The US president can decimate a country in 60 days, and wether the congrees likes it or not, shoot the president in the head or not, but if the country bombed is by any chance Russia, or China, bang, WWIII, no stopping the chain of events now. I say yup, the US president is the biggest threat to world peace on the planet. And the most powerful man on the planet, with the second most powerfull being the pilot of a B2 with 18 2-megatonne nukes. But thank God, there's three of them in the plane.
__________________
MAKE LOVE, NOT SPAM!
Bozos of Bones is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 05:36 PM   #44
Dirty Meg
Baaz Draconian
 

Join Date: May 21, 2004
Location: Here, or there abouts.
Age: 78
Posts: 703
Quote:
Originally posted by Cerek:
Impossible to answer.

Professional assasins rarely reveal their real identity - even to clients. They would use codenames and middle men to maintain several degrees of seperation.

Every major city in the U.S. has a proliferation of gang members who will kill you for looking at them the wrong way (literally). That's pretty dangerous in itself, but then consider these gang members usually follow a leader that had to earn the respect (and fear) of the gang members because he is even more ruthless and deadly than they are. These guys don't have to do anytning more than point at somebody and their "homeboys" will happily blow them away.

Then there is the Mob or Mafia. Even more dangerous than gang members because these fellows have been at it a lot longer and - as their name suggests - they are "Organized" about their crime. Crossing a mafia boss for any reason is an automatic death sentence - one that is usually carried out in a very sadistic and brutal fashion. As with gang members, mafia bosses can literally have somebody killed with a snap of their fingers.

Then there are the Columbian drug lords and their private armies. These fellows make HUGE money off the drugs they sell and they protect their way of life ruthlessly.

Then, on the side of the "good guys", you have military specialists that are trained to infiltrate an enemy zone and take out a target (or targets) and get back out - all with little or no backup. They get the best and most intense training available along with access to some heavy duty artillery.

In thier own ways, every one of these men would be extremely dangerous if you were their target - so it is impossible to narrow it down to just one.
Bollocks to all those people. Power obtained by threat of violence is nothing. In 1400s - 1500s Europe, the Duc de Urbino might have been a dangerous person to cross, but who cares about him now? We remember Leonardo Da Vinci, we remember Michaelangelo. Who affects more people now: King Herod, or Jesus H. Christ? True power comes from ideas. Governments can rise and fall because of ideas derived from art, literature and music hundreds of years old. The most dangerous person in the world is anyone with an idea and a pen.
__________________
A stitch in time is worth two in the bush.
Dirty Meg is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 05:39 PM   #45
Arledrian
Egyptian Goddess of the Dead
 

Join Date: July 12, 2001
Location: South Carolina
Age: 40
Posts: 3,771
Meg, do you have a fan club I can sign up for or anything?
Arledrian is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 05:42 PM   #46
Felix The Assassin
The Dreadnoks
 

Join Date: September 27, 2001
Location: Orlando, FL
Age: 61
Posts: 3,608
As Commander in Chief, the President of the United States, under The War Powers Resolution, can engage in hostilities for at least 60 days without violation of any laws. However, the Congress still controls the funding. Furthermore, and more importantly, only Congress can Decalre War.


Sidebar; a B2 with 18 2 megatonne nukes. OR, a Ohio-Class (SSBN) AKA 'Trident' submarine with (classified) ICBM @ 3.8 megatonne each?
__________________
The Lizzie Palmer Tribute



Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

John F. Kennedy
35th President of The United States

The Last Shot

Honor The Fallen

Jesus died for our sins, and American Soldiers died for our freedom.




If you don't stand behind our Soldiers, please feel free to stand in front of them.
Felix The Assassin is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 06:15 PM   #47
Stratos
Vampire
 

Join Date: January 29, 2003
Location: Sweden
Age: 43
Posts: 3,888
Most dangerous:

  • Any leader of a country with nuclear weapons, or other WoMD. This includes Bush, Putin and Jintao amongst others. These I only view as potential dangers as I don't believe neither of them are interrested in causing trouble.
  • bin Ladin. Fanatic troublemaking terrorist.
  • Kim Jong-Il. North Korea appears almost paranoid in my eyes, and if they have nukes too...
Being dangerous generally also mean that you have a certain power and influence (not neccessarily political power) so anyone who fits those criteria can be potentially dangerous.
__________________
Nothing is impossible, it's just a matter of probability.
Stratos is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 06:16 PM   #48
Stratos
Vampire
 

Join Date: January 29, 2003
Location: Sweden
Age: 43
Posts: 3,888
Quote:
Originally posted by LordKathen:
You guys are not reading me here. My son, Seth, is the most dangerous. I'm telling you from experience here, ok?
If he's so dangerous, how come you're still alive?
__________________
Nothing is impossible, it's just a matter of probability.
Stratos is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 07:17 PM   #49
Bozos of Bones
Apophis
 

Join Date: July 29, 2003
Location: The Underdark cavern of Zagreb
Age: 37
Posts: 4,679
Quote:
Originally posted by Felix The Assassin:
As Commander in Chief, the President of the United States, under The War Powers Resolution, can engage in hostilities for at least 60 days without violation of any laws. However, the Congress still controls the funding. Furthermore, and more importantly, only Congress can Decalre War.


Sidebar; a B2 with 18 2 megatonne nukes. OR, a Ohio-Class (SSBN) AKA 'Trident' submarine with (classified) ICBM @ 3.8 megatonne each?
I think that a nuclear sub holds some 36 nukes, with 8 launching tubes. Not sure tho. But it's much easier to kill two more crewmembers in a plane then the 160 on a sub. [img]smile.gif[/img]
__________________
MAKE LOVE, NOT SPAM!
Bozos of Bones is offline  
Old 09-07-2004, 02:20 PM   #50
Timber Loftis
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
Well, discussing ICBM, remember that each one has up to 50 individually-targeting warheads.

And R. Cheney gets my vote -- the brains behind the operation. Our very own Rasputin.
__________________
Timber Loftis is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bread is dangerous..... Hivetyrant General Discussion 1 06-07-2006 08:14 AM
Hidden & Dangerous 2 scratched CD help... cav_again Miscellaneous Games (RPG or not) 2 10-31-2005 03:30 AM
They're eating me alive! Alive I say! Norin Baldurs Gate & Tales of the Sword Coast 10 12-21-2003 09:50 AM
I Need Help ~ Hidden And Dangerous Beaumanoir General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 9 10-27-2001 08:49 AM
Your most dangerous spell? RAISTLIN Baldurs Gate II Archives 18 02-09-2001 03:17 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved