Almost every President has dealt with foreign policies in a different way than all the other ones. During the 19th century the Presidents of the US were somehow different from their successors because they would take action for serious matters without the consent of Congress but after that they would admit what they did, but support that they had to act quickly in fact (Bazelon, 2005). For example, in April 1861, Fort Sumter was attacked and President Lincoln had to take quick actions (Bazelon, 2005). Since Congress was not in session at that time he decided to take away the writ of “habeas corpus”, an action only Congress could have had power on (Bazelon, 2005). This action come in contrast with the action President Harry Truman took, when he executed troops in Korea without asking Congress and stating that he did not need their approval because he had ultimate power as a president (Bazelon, 2005). Iron states in his book that throughout history the presidents have been increasing the power they have on war far away from its limits (Bazelon, 2005). However this action has not always been a success for the president’s …show more content…
Starting off, Irons states that there are three main points that Congress does not have power over but the president does. First, the executive branch is always working, not like Congress (Bazelon, 2005). Second, the president does not need to try and convince someone to change their belief for something; he only needs to focus on himself (Bazelon, 2005). Third, he is the most knowledgeable and in power person in the entire country (Bazelon,