Trump invades Venezuela with ground troops

Once one goes thru the congressional process which could take months; the element of surprise and opportunity is long gone. 

If congress gets involved are they going to insist on determining how many and which units are to be used. 

Will they insist on approving any reinforcements?

In the case of the Iran attack Iran could have developed their bombs and mussiles 

This is not the 18th century when communication between parties could take months. 

Fir example, the Battle of New Orleans was fought after the treaty was signed 

The world and decisions moves in seconds now, not months. 

What you babble doesn't change the Constitution one bit.

If the American people want to authorize presidents to wage war without approval from Congress, they can vote to amend the Constitution. Until such time, the Constitution is the law.

Yes, as I remarked, dictatorships often enjoy the element of surprise. You seem to think that we should allow Trump to behave like a dictator because of potential tactical advantage. I for one would rather see him on a short leash, as the founders intended.

You're nothing but a drooling Trump lackey, stupid Tom.

I dont know  the US population views Venezeula as an existential threat to our security....and I dont know  they are OK with outsourcing that determination to the same president that thinks Russia's invasion of Ukriane is somehow Ukraine's fault.

Tom and MAGA are ok with a sitting president unilaterrally making that determination.    Actually they arent.   Just this president.   

Have fun selling this bullshit to the general public.   Once the reports of finances on this endeavor become public the shit is going to hit the fan.    Republicans cant find money to help health insurance premiums but they have billions to start yet another nation building occupation that nobody supports.   

The question that arises then is who determines what types of military actions require Congressional approval and which do not? How is that decision made?

When is it permissible to sacrifice the Constitution at the altar of convenience? 

I believe that the federal government must operate under the confines of the Constitution. If we pick and choose when to follow the constitution based on convenience then there is no constitution.

The Federal Government is transformed from one of limited, deligated, and narrowly defined powers, to one of unlimited, undefined, and broad powers. 

This is something our adoptive forefathers fought very hard against. 

One of the myriad flaws (let's face it) of the government the founders stitched together is that they couldn't imagine a completely self-serving, amoral and narcissistic President such as Trump. They assumed that no matter what, a President would act with honor and decency and fulfill his oath to serve and obey the Constitution. They also didn't realize how one-party rule could obliterate all the checks and balances they so carefully crafted.

It is certainly both wise and logical to allow the President to act without Congressional approval in an emergency. However, "I really really wanna do it" does not constitute an emergency. Disliking Maduro is not an emergency. 

World history is replete with disasters wherein one man decided that it would be lotsa fun to go to war. Affecting millions of people, it's too complex a decision to be handled by one person, however wise. And it's certainly too complex to be handlex by an evil buffoon such as Trump.

The Constitution definitely had some weaknesses. Among other things it didn't put a strong enough check against the executive. 

I think what is important is that we have a rule book or the government and the government follows the rule book. As life goes on and different needs and situations arise that rule book can and should be amended but not ignored. 

What I think nobody wants but many in society seem to argue for is a government that decides the rules for itself based on convenience.  With a president that acts more like a king. In short many seem to be striving for monarchy, dictatorship, or fascism.

Too many people seem perfectly fine with a president or government ignoring the rules or usurping more powers.They are fine with a dictatorship as long as it's their guy that is the dictator and they agree with the goal  They fail to stop to think what might happen when another administration exercises these usurped powers for a goal with which they disagree. 

Well put. They also don't realize the inherent danger in giving an executive/the government free rein, whether they approve of what's done or not. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Forgiving absolutism because it produces a result you like is not only shortsighted; it's an abolition of one's civic duty.

Stupid Tom, Millerscum, Boilerboob et al would have been screaming to high heaven if Obama or Biden took the gross liberties that Trump takes every day. They don't realize that they should be screaming now.

That's a thing that fascinates and confuses me about so many people. It's okay when their guy does it. But wrong when the other guy does it. Or vice versa. 

It is somewhat reminiscent of when I was speaking out against our involvement in Iraq during bush there were so many protests in the streets. Then when Obama took over I felt abandoned because many of the same people were now either silent or in support. The protests practically disappeared overnight.

Or when I was speaking out against Clinton's unconstitutional actions and then Bush took over and many people started supporting the same things that Clinton was doing but it's okay now because it's bush. 

Ideological consistency seems to be a rare trait. 

 Then there is this --

 And this - 2020. Chuck Schumer criticizes Trump for not bringing an end to the Maduro regime. -- https://www.facebook.com/watch?v=1186969166412991