We have a portion of the govt shutdown and they prioritize voting on **** like this? Along with the hundred other things they could take a look at? Our politicians are a complete waste of time.

4stringAg said:

---

So am I wrong that they are ignoring a law already on the books that gives Trump the authority to do this via the 1973 Act? What am I missing other than their TDS?

---

Their own idiocy, their own vanity, they are massive TDS, regardless of any logic and the fact that they can convince really stupid Democrats and liberals to believe they're bull*****

annie88 said:

---

4stringAg said:

---

So am I wrong that they are ignoring a law already on the books that gives Trump the authority to do this via the 1973 Act? What am I missing other than their TDS?

---

Their own idiocy, their own vanity, they are massive TDS, regardless of any logic and the fact that they can convince really stupid Democrats and liberals to believe they're bull*****

---

There is a widespread belief that a President can enter U.S. troops into war of choice for 60 days without congressional approval. This is wrong. It's based on a misreading of the War Powers Act of 1973. I set the record straight in my latest article, linked in next tweet. pic.twitter.com/JZ84bBUAW8

— Tim Carney (@TPCarney) March 3, 2026

This guy is far from a liberal, and he very simply lays out why this is incorrect in about 3 tweets. Once again, TDS seems to be stronger with the people who believe anything that comes out of his mouth and that of idiots like the Eric Daugherty and Benny Johnsons of the world, and then change their political ideology to match.

Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:

---

We have a portion of the govt shutdown and they prioritize voting on **** like this? Along with the hundred other things they could take a look at? Our politicians are a complete waste of time.

---

Republicans have done nothing since Trump took office. Thune is a joke

Because they have not done crap, the Rs will likely lose the house and will lose a couple seats in the senate, Rs will likely lose North Carolina and Maine in senate race

Midterms are basically won by which base turns out the most, right now Dems are more motivated, while the Rs are asking why should I bother when you do nothing to help the President

Waffledynamics said:

---

Pichael Thompson said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

The people against this military action are as foolish as those against helping Ukraine. Even dumber if they're pro-Ukraine war and anti-Iran war.

---

lol

Don't try to legimatize the uke-Russia theft & death joint venture by pairing it with what's going on in Iran



These are very different situations

---

I'm not. I'm legitimizing the strategic interest in both. Also, if one finds oneself pro-Ukraine and anti-intervention in Iran, it signals ignorance of the fact that thousands of Iranian-designed drones are hitting Ukrainian cities.

People are making democracy seem like a dumber and dumber idea every day.

---

Which is why you don't live in a democracy.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

annie88 said:

---

4stringAg said:

---

So am I wrong that they are ignoring a law already on the books that gives Trump the authority to do this via the 1973 Act? What am I missing other than their TDS?

---

Their own idiocy, their own vanity, they are massive TDS, regardless of any logic and the fact that they can convince really stupid Democrats and liberals to believe they're bull*****

---

There is a widespread belief that a President can enter U.S. troops into war of choice for 60 days without congressional approval. This is wrong. It's based on a misreading of the War Powers Act of 1973. I set the record straight in my latest article, linked in next tweet. pic.twitter.com/JZ84bBUAW8

— Tim Carney (@TPCarney) March 3, 2026

This guy is far from a liberal, and he very simply lays out why this is incorrect in about 3 tweets. Once again, TDS seems to be stronger with the people who believe anything that comes out of his mouth and that of idiots like the Eric Daugherty and Benny Johnsons of the world, and then change their political ideology to match.

---

What is his justification? I don't do twitter, and the story is behind a paywall.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

annie88 said:

---

4stringAg said:

---

So am I wrong that they are ignoring a law already on the books that gives Trump the authority to do this via the 1973 Act? What am I missing other than their TDS?

---

Their own idiocy, their own vanity, they are massive TDS, regardless of any logic and the fact that they can convince really stupid Democrats and liberals to believe they're bull*****

---

There is a widespread belief that a President can enter U.S. troops into war of choice for 60 days without congressional approval. This is wrong. It's based on a misreading of the War Powers Act of 1973. I set the record straight in my latest article, linked in next tweet. pic.twitter.com/JZ84bBUAW8

— Tim Carney (@TPCarney) March 3, 2026

This guy is far from a liberal, and he very simply lays out why this is incorrect in about 3 tweets. Once again, TDS seems to be stronger with the people who believe anything that comes out of his mouth and that of idiots like the Eric Daugherty and Benny Johnsons of the world, and then change their political ideology to match.

---

I base all of my important opinions on an unreviewed tweet.

Anti-taxxer said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

annie88 said:

---

4stringAg said:

---

So am I wrong that they are ignoring a law already on the books that gives Trump the authority to do this via the 1973 Act? What am I missing other than their TDS?

---

Their own idiocy, their own vanity, they are massive TDS, regardless of any logic and the fact that they can convince really stupid Democrats and liberals to believe they're bull*****

---

There is a widespread belief that a President can enter U.S. troops into war of choice for 60 days without congressional approval. This is wrong. It's based on a misreading of the War Powers Act of 1973. I set the record straight in my latest article, linked in next tweet. pic.twitter.com/JZ84bBUAW8

— Tim Carney (@TPCarney) March 3, 2026

This guy is far from a liberal, and he very simply lays out why this is incorrect in about 3 tweets. Once again, TDS seems to be stronger with the people who believe anything that comes out of his mouth and that of idiots like the Eric Daugherty and Benny Johnsons of the world, and then change their political ideology to match.

---

What is his justification? I don't do twitter, and the story is behind a paywall.

---

Quote:

---

The War Powers Act lays out the only three possible situations in which the president can introduce our troops into a new war. The first two situations involve explicit congressional approval. The third is an attack on the U.S."

The 60-day rule in the War Powers act kicks in if the president starts a war without Congress, but he is allowed to do that ONLY if we are attacked. Trump's war was not repelling an attack.

If you want to argue that Congress is to blame, I don't disagree. They should pass a declaration of war on Iran tomorrow.

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

The people against this military action are as foolish as those against helping Ukraine. Even dumber if they're pro-Ukraine war and anti-Iran war.

---

As one who is pro-Ukraine and pro-Iran operations, I couldn't agree more.

4stringAg said:

---

So am I wrong that they are ignoring a law already on the books that gives Trump the authority to do this via the 1973 Act? What am I missing other than their TDS?

---

You know Congress can vote to amend and change laws, right?

Bunk Moreland said:

---

annie88 said:

---

4stringAg said:

---

So am I wrong that they are ignoring a law already on the books that gives Trump the authority to do this via the 1973 Act? What am I missing other than their TDS?

---

Their own idiocy, their own vanity, they are massive TDS, regardless of any logic and the fact that they can convince really stupid Democrats and liberals to believe they're bull*****

---

There is a widespread belief that a President can enter U.S. troops into war of choice for 60 days without congressional approval. This is wrong. It's based on a misreading of the War Powers Act of 1973. I set the record straight in my latest article, linked in next tweet. pic.twitter.com/JZ84bBUAW8

— Tim Carney (@TPCarney) March 3, 2026

This guy is far from a liberal, and he very simply lays out why this is incorrect in about 3 tweets. Once again, TDS seems to be stronger with the people who believe anything that comes out of his mouth and that of idiots like the Eric Daugherty and Benny Johnsons of the world, and then change their political ideology to match.

---

The problem, and I haven't read this specific article, but have read many regarding the subject, is that congress essentially abdicated their role post ww2 on war declaration. They could still deal with it via budgetary or mechanical means, but they don't


Further, theres question to whether the war powers act is even constitutional because it likely infringes on the cic's authority to determine what is and is not an imminent threat

The fact that congress isnt attempting to change the war powers act beyond controlling this specific action leans to it being driven by personal grievance rather than constitutional authority

That might be a strict reading but its certainly not the reality of how its been enforced/followed

Interesting how the Dems change their mind on things so frequently.....

Did Obama need this to attack Lybia? an action that lasted for 7 months? Nope....

Did Obama need this to lob thousands of drones across the ME, resulting in thousands of deaths? Nope....

But now, "OMG how can Trump do this without approval!!!"


This is all political theater because Trump is not their guy......

Exactly

Specifically doing it for this action while leaving it still available for a future Democrat shows what hypocrites they are and this purely being driven by China owned Dems

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

Barry dropped a bomb every 20 minutes for 8 years and nobody said a word.

---

When did he take out the leader of a country?

---

2020

I wish we had a system where thing like laws and wars went through a functioning congress instead of just executive orders but assuming congress says no war what does that actually mean. No more firing shots as Iran continues to shoot missiles and drones at our bases? It is not like Iran will go, "oh Massie said everyone needs to stop"

Obama took gaddafi out how quickly yall forget.

Raiderjay said:

---

Interesting how the Dems change their mind on things so frequently.....

Did Obama need this to attack Lybia? an action that lasted for 7 months? Nope....

Did Obama need this to lob thousands of drones across the ME, resulting in thousands of deaths? Nope....

But now, "OMG how can Trump do this without approval!!!"


This is all political theater because Trump is not their guy......

---

yep its fing comical

Who?mikejones! said:

---

That might be a strict reading but its certainly not the reality of how its been enforced/followed

---

Correct. Which is why I said in my opinion it was constitutionally extremely questionable at best and absolutely unconstitutional at worst.

I used that example to respond to people acting like anyone questioning the authority must suffer from TDS.

A bunch of legislator losers who will do anything to avoid doing their job....which is to develop legislation. Both sides qualify.

I kinda dig Fetterman

🚨 BREAKING: US Senate REJECTS Democrat-pushed effort to block President Trump's Iran strikes 48-52, with Sen. JOHN FETTERMAN (D-PA) joining Republicans

Rand Paul (R-KY) voted with Democrats

TRUMP WINS AGAIN! Iran strikes are full-steam to victory 🔥🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/rntpPFmbv8

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) March 4, 2026

We've entered the early Roman Empire stage of our historical arc. The Republic as envisaged by the constitution is dead. The corrupt Senate is next to useless, having abdicated its powers, but the constitutional forms are still followed. They get to vote on and approve a few things but the executive acts mostly with his own powers and by executive order. In a couple decades, even that form will fall away, and whichever party controls (i.e., pays then most to) the military will be able to install its man/woman as President, just like the late Empire. The currency will be increasingly debased, and civil wars between opposing factions will break out every few years until finally the whole thing falls apart.

The tds part comes in because practically every president since Truman has initiated "war" actions without a declaration from congress or without being directly attacked. Somehow only now does it matter, mostly because its trump

all those years of war in Afghanistan never an issue now all of sudden ILlEgaL wAR when Trump does something.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

That might be a strict reading but its certainly not the reality of how its been enforced/followed

---

Correct. Which is why I said in my opinion it was constitutionally extremely questionable at best and absolutely unconstitutional at worst.

I used that example to respond to people acting like anyone questioning the authority must suffer from TDS.

---

An interesting legal question would be whether the 79 attack on the embassy and subsequent attacks by Iran and proxies on US property, personnel and interests could be considered the "attack" referred to under the Act. No one will litigate it because how SCOTUS rules might tie their hands in the future.

There are people on the left who are against Trump action in Iran, but would be for it if Kamala was doing it.

There are people on the right who are for Trump action in Iran, but would be against it if Kamala was doing it.

Together, this is the vast majority of America. Even though neither side will admit it. There are a few hardcore Israel jock sniffers that would support it either way. The rest are libertarian types who oppose it either way, based on principle, like Rand.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

That might be a strict reading but its certainly not the reality of how its been enforced/followed

---

Correct. Which is why I said in my opinion it was constitutionally extremely questionable at best and absolutely unconstitutional at worst.

I used that example to respond to people acting like anyone questioning the authority must suffer from TDS.

---

First of all, thanks for providing some additional info to the thread via some clarifications on the War Powers Act. I at least appreciate the extra info.

You'll have to forgive some of us for assuming TDS is the primary reason for Congress taking this vote, primarily because of past "war" actions of Democrat Presidents and the hypocrisy that seems to come from the Democrats on this subject, the complete insincerity in Congress suddenly trying to reclaim abdicated power when they've for decades been a self-neutered body, plus their almost reflexive reaction to oppose anything Trump does.

Very true. Tis the nature of politics.

Id would've been for anyone taking out iran, and have said so for a long time. In fact, this very board has been mostly pro removing iran as long as I can recall (been here since 2007)

That's separate and apart from Israel or what they want. They dont infect my thoughts all that much

Fetterman

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Very true. Tis the nature of politics.

Id would've been for anyone taking out iran, and have said so for a long time. In fact, this very board has been mostly pro removing iran as long as I can recall (been here since 2007)

That's separate and apart from Israel or what they want. They dont infect my thoughts all that much

---

Pretty sure almost all of Trump supporters would be echoing this if Biden or Kamala were striking Iran. Doubt F16 would criticize Trump or oppose this type.of rhetoric:

Trump (in 2011):

“Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. He’s weak and he’s ineffective.” pic.twitter.com/Y1sER7ENTO

— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) February 28, 2026

How many billion dollars in cash did Obama and Biden send to Iran after their negotiation with them that Iran then used in direct military action or thru their proxies against us and our allies?

FobTies said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Very true. Tis the nature of politics.

Id would've been for anyone taking out iran, and have said so for a long time. In fact, this very board has been mostly pro removing iran as long as I can recall (been here since 2007)

That's separate and apart from Israel or what they want. They dont infect my thoughts all that much

---

Pretty sure almost all of Trump supporters would be echoing this if Biden or Kamala were striking Iran. Doubt F16 would criticize Trump or oppose this type.of rhetoric:

Trump (in 2011):

“Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. He’s weak and he’s ineffective.” pic.twitter.com/Y1sER7ENTO

— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) February 28, 2026

---

No, I disagree. I've been here long enough and seen many many posts on texags wishing we would strike iran over the years.

If I could pull up the thread when they kidnapped some of our sailors under obama, or when they killed some under Biden i could show you. But, all that was deleted.

FobTies said:

---

There are people on the left who are against Trump action in Iran, but would be for it if Kamala was doing it.

There are people on the right who are for Trump action in Iran, but would be against it if Kamala was doing it.

Together, this is the vast majority of America. Even though neither side will admit it. There are a few hardcore Israel jock sniffers that would support it either way. The rest are libertarian types who oppose it either way, based on principle, like Rand.

---

It's not just about Israel as much as it's about nuclear capabilities. Iran can never have nukes. Period.

They are true haters, and you never know what they will do. If they were ever able to secure a functional ICBM, it would only take one, and the world would never be the same again.

We are the Great Satan and Israel is the Little Satan. They attack Israel because they can't reach us. Look at how they attacked our nearby bases in nearby countries. They truly hate us and want to annihilate us.