Have you ever heard of PDD 25? AKA; "Presidential Decision Directive 25." You probably haven't because it remains classified. However, leaks to the media, White House statements, and various sources in Washington give us at least an idea of what the document contains. PDD 25 is a preliminary leap that integrates "OUR" armed forces into the United Nations army. We have already seen Bill Clinton assert authority (though unconstitutional) under PDD 25 by placing U.S. forces under the control of a UN (foreign) commander.

Remember, the Pres is on record as saying that he despises the military. So now this dope smoking draft dodger is surrendering our sovereignty to a socialistic United Nations. Men and Women of the US military, that swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States only, are now forced (under threat of penalty) to serve under and wear the uniforms of the U.N. If they refuse to wear the uniform as Michael New did, they can expect a court martial. That's what Michael received for believing that he owed his allegiance to the United States alone.

Bill Clinton is a "hippie" era "New Ager" who believes the philosophy of "Communitarianism". He has stated so. Many on the "hill" and around the world also espouse that philosophy. That philosophy is the basis of the United Nations constitution. The goal? A world community. A world without borders(Border Area 21). No individually soverign countries with a central government. A world where animals are more important than humans and you must pay to exist there. All will work for the global good and redistribution of wealth will make everyone equal. FOLKS, that's socialism al a communism and has never worked nor ever will. Redistribution of wealth will work only once. After most of the wealth has been taken away from the fellow who was motivated to make it, the motivation will cease. No reason to work your butt off if you'll get the same reward when you don't.

Though much of what is in PDD 25 is not known to us, we assume it is just more of the same socialistic crap that keeps spewing from Washington. It matters not to them what you or I think, or want, or demand! The power base has an agenda and they intend to keep it. If the thought of PDD 25 doesn't bother you then the rest of this discourse will neither. But read on, you may become incensed or even inspired to voice your outrage.

Alone, the President of the United States doesn't have the lawful power to send men into combat. (I use the word "lawful" because much of the crap he pulls off is deemed "legal".) Under Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 11, only Congress has the power "To declare war..." How is this cowardly President able to pull off an act such as sending our troops to Bosnia, Haiti, Macedonia and anywhere else?

One way, is that he claims legality because its called a "peace keeping" mission. Curious isn't it? We enter a country armed to the teeth with millions of dollars worth of the latest in warfare equipment and call it a "peace mission." Bet you fellers that fought in the various wars didn't know you were only there to be peaceable! Another way is through the "War Powers Resolution" oft times in concert with the "War and Emergency Powers Act". Yet another is the "Executive Order."

Congress enacted the War Powers Resolution in 1973, overiding President Nixon's veto. Most everyone has claimed it to be unconstitutional for one reason or another. Some say it's too restrictive of the authority of Commander-in-Chief granted the President by the Constitution. Others claim it gives to him power that was reserved to Congress only.

Congress can only "declare war" they do not have the power to "make war." The founders of our nation wanted to maintain a balance of powers. They assigned the position of Commander-in-Chief to the President and the decision to declare war became a political question for Congress to resolve. There have been about 200 armed conflicts in our history but we've declared war only seven times. So we can't say there can be no war without declaring one.

The original concepts adopted by the framers were sound but there are some occasions that require methods beyond that. One example is; our borders come under an actual attack while Congress is in recess and the President is unable to contact the appropriate Congressional leaders. I don't think anyone would want the Pres to wait until Congress returned from recess before sending in the troops. Situations like this is the reasoning behind the War Powers Resolution.

U.S.C.A. 1541(c) limits the power of the President to these: "(1)a declaration of war, (2)specific statutory authorization, (3)a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces." This section says, that without specific advanced Congressional approval the President is not allowed to send troops into combat. A national emergency created by an attack on U.S. armed forces or territories is the exception. But the President must report immediately to Congress after doing so. Unless Congress approves the action he must "terminate any use" of troops within 60 days.

Though this legislation (or any legislation for that matter) is well intentioned, the failure of it is due to the lack of moral character of the people who may use it. After it's enactment, Presidents have simply ignored the limits of the War Powers Resolution. And the current President plainly wipes his nose with it. When it came to Bosnia, Clinton, with brazen orbes, told Congress to take a flying leap.