USA TODAY: Surge's Success Holds Chance To Seize The Moment In Iraq; Dems 'Lost in Ti

[mcpeepants]

Again, why not sight the laws that make this war illegal...........

repost:
The war was not about self-defense because Iraq had not attacked us and was not in the process of attacking us, Congress did not declare war and has not done so since WW2, and the UN Security Council did not improve of attacking Iraq (although I don't agree the UN Security Council so justify attacking countries).

[Logan13]

repost:
The war was not about self-defense because Iraq had not attacked us and was not in the process of attacking us, Congress did not declare war and has not done so since WW2, and the UN Security Council did not improve of attacking Iraq (although I don't agree the UN Security Council so justify attacking countries).

I do not want your opinion again, just re-worded. I would like you to sight the law...........

[Logan13]

repost:
The war was not about self-defense because Iraq had not attacked us and was not in the process of attacking us, Congress did not declare war and has not done so since WW2, and the UN Security Council did not improve of attacking Iraq (although I don't agree the UN Security Council so justify attacking countries).

You make my point for me above in bold. Do you think that the US has not engaged in battle since WW2?

US military conflicts since WW2. None of which was done under a Congressional Declaration of War:
Korean war (1950-1953) (BTW, we are still there........)
Bay of Pigs (1961)
Dominican Republic (1965)
Vietnam War (1961-1973)
Lebanon (1982–1984)
Grenada (1983)
Panama (1989)
Gulf War (1991)
Somalia (1993)
Bosnia (1994–1995)
Kosovo (1999)
Afghanistan (2001–present)
Iraq War (2003–present)

Another bit of trivia:
There are fewer troops deployed on foreign soil today than during the average year of the late 20th century. Roughly 386,000 troops were stationed overseas in 2005 compared to an average of 535,540 during 1950–2000. Deploy­ments have ranged from a high of 1,082,777 troops in 1968 to a low of 206,002 in 1999.

Quit reading blogs and start learning for yourself.....
Next week's class, "The History of Liberal Fascism"

[mcpeepants]

You make my point for me above in bold. Do you think that the US has not engaged in battle since WW2?

US military conflicts since WW2. None of which was done under a Congressional Declaration of War:
Korean war (1950-1953) (BTW, we are still there........)
Bay of Pigs (1961)
Dominican Republic (1965)
Vietnam War (1961-1973)
Lebanon (1982–1984)
Grenada (1983)
Panama (1989)
Gulf War (1991)
Somalia (1993)
Bosnia (1994–1995)
Kosovo (1999)
Afghanistan (2001–present)
Iraq War (2003–present)

Another bit of trivia:
There are fewer troops deployed on foreign soil today than during the average year of the late 20th century. Roughly 386,000 troops were stationed overseas in 2005 compared to an average of 535,540 during 1950–2000. Deploy­ments have ranged from a high of 1,082,777 troops in 1968 to a low of 206,002 in 1999.

Quit reading blogs and start learning for yourself.....
Next week's class, "The History of Liberal Fascism"

Congress did not declare war in any of those event. They just a**icated their constitutional powers and have essentially allowed to president to conduct "police actions" as he sees fit.

Explain to me what a liberal fascist is? Your unquestioned belief of whatever the government tells you would make any authoritarian dictatorship.

[Logan13]

Congress did not declare war in any of those event. They just a**icated their constitutional powers and have essentially allowed to president to conduct "police actions" as he sees fit.

Explain to me what a liberal fascist is? Your unquestioned belief of whatever the government tells you would make any authoritarian dictatorship.

Exactly my point!

[thegodfather]

Exactly my point!

What is your point??? That there exists a long history of blatant disregard for the rule of law?

[Logan13]

What is your point??? That there exists a long history of blatant disregard for the rule of law?

Don't be dramatic. Facts are facts. You do not have to like the laws, but what you like and dislike really has no bearing on them. My point has been made, what's your point?

[mcpeepants]

Exactly my point!

You agree that Congress hasn't declared war since WW2 so then what are you arguing about?

Could you explain to me what a liberal fascist is?

[Logan13]

You agree that Congress hasn't declared war since WW2 so then what are you arguing about?

Could you explain to me what a liberal fascist is?

What I agree to is that Congress has not declared war even once since WW2, so why do you insist that the Iraq War is the illegal one? Obviously it is not or this whole "illegal war" issue would have been brought up sometime in the last 60 years. There are 13 examples in the above threads to support my stance. How many are there to support yours'?

[mcpeepants]

What I agree to is that Congress has not declared war even once since WW2, so why do you insist that the Iraq War is the illegal one? Obviously it is not or this whole "illegal war" issue would have been brought up sometime in the last 60 years. There are 13 examples in the above threads to support my stance. How many are there to support yours'?

The war was not about self-defense so that is the main reason I consider it illegal. In WW2, Japan attacked us and his it was about self-defense and Congress declared war on Japan. Germany and Italy declared war on us a couple days later and we did likewise. Congress has been a**icating it's constitutional authority since WW2 by not declaring wars. The reason probably is politically so Congress can take credit if the war goes good and blame the president when it goes bad. The war was not approved by the UN Security Council so that make illegal. I don't think the Security Council should be deciding wars but if people say one of the reasons we attacked Saddam was because he violated UN Security Resolution, then we can't be violating UN Security Council too. Your first sentence up to that comma agrees with and reinforces what I have been saying.

[Act of God]

repost:
The war was not about self-defense because Iraq had not attacked us and was not in the process of attacking us, Congress did not declare war and has not done so since WW2, and the UN Security Council did not improve of attacking Iraq (although I don't agree the UN Security Council so justify attacking countries).

You have a one track mind. Saddam violated his previously signed surrender agreement with us from the Kuwait incident. Game over.

[Logan13]

You have a one track mind. Saddam violated his previously signed surrender agreement with us from the Kuwait incident. Game over.

EXACTLY

[mcpeepants]

You have a one track mind. Saddam violated his previously signed surrender agreement with us from the Kuwait incident. Game over.

Then you must be furious at Bush violating the UN by attacking Iraq without the UN's approval.