Bush never lied to us

[carolaa]

Quote:

Iraq was a distraction. W wanted Iraq long before 911.

These are liberal talking points & every old ones. I expect a little more in a discussion than the regurgitation of old talking points.

Quote:

If Guantanamo is for the "worst of the worst," why have children been held there?

Children are terrorists too...

LOL. I see. If the conservatives keep repeating that the liberals' "talking points" aren't true, pretty soon people will start to believe it. No need to disprove it when you can discredit it.

I guess we'll just have to disagree that children are the "worst of the worst" terrorists and/or that they should be held for years without charge.

[carolaa]

Originally Posted By: carolaa

So who exactly have we officially declared war against?

Authorization for Use of Military Force: September 18, 2001

Quote:

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002

Quote:

The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to-- (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

So it looks like we have not actually declared a war, even though some like to call it that (like with Vietnam). Is there anything that could legally keep Congress from voting tomorrow to withdraw troops?

[Woody]

The Democratic controlled Congress has tried to stop the war but does not have the will nor the votes.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I just felt like these needed to be seen again, horrible as they are...

[Neil D]

and 9/11 is connected to the war in Iraq...how again????

Afghan, that I understand....but Iraq????

[Woody]

We've been down that road many times Neil. The record is clear.

[Neil D]

Ok, Redwood...

Explain it to me one more time....9/11 was a caused by Osama Bin Lauden, who resided in Afghanistan.....

But these pictures, are related to the Iraq War...how????

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

So it looks like we have not actually declared a war

Wrong. Authorizing the use of force is how Congress declares war under the War Powers Act of 1973. Congress never authorized the use of force in Vietnam or Korea. The War Powers Act of 1973 was passed to prevent a President from taking the nation to war again without Congressional approval as it did in Vietnam and Korea. Some argue that President Clinton should have gotten Congressional authorization for the use of force in Bosnia. Since he didn't, Bosnia wasn't an official war for the US.

Quote:

Is there anything that could legally keep Congress from voting tomorrow to withdraw troops?

Absolutely. Congress could stop funding the war. They could also vote to unauthorize the use of force. They don't have the votes to do either which is why neither is done.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

and 9/11 is connected to the war in Iraq...how again????

9/11 gave us the resolve to do what we knew we should have done years earlier. The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 was passed under President Clinton. It stated, "It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime." That was 1998 under President Bill Clinton. So the US had already adopted a policy geared toward regime change in Iraq prior to President Bush becoming President.

Imagine if your neighbor continually threatens to kill your son. He even once hired someone to kill your son but luckily they didn't succeed. Then one day your daughter's boyfriend kills your daughter. It is completely unrelated to the threats against your son. But your neighbor keeps threatening your son and on top of that he now is allowing your daughter's murderer to hide in his house. So you finally pull out your shotgun, go next door and kill him and your daughter's killer too. That pretty much is what the US did with Iraq.

The neighbor in this story is symbolic for Saddam. The daughter's killer is symbolic of Al Quieda. While Saddam was not directly connected to 9/11, he continued to violate the UN resolutions after 9/11 and gave safe harbor to Al Quieda. So the US moved in and took out both Saddam and al-Zarqawi.

[Neil D]

Quote:

So it looks like we have not actually declared a war

Wrong. Authorizing the use of force is how Congress declares war under the War Powers Act of 1973. Congress never authorized the use of force in Vietnam or Korea. The War Powers Act of 1973 was passed to prevent a President from taking the nation to war again without Congressional approval as it did in Vietnam and Korea. Some argue that President Clinton should have gotten Congressional authorization for the use of force in Bosnia. Since he didn't, Bosnia wasn't an official war for the US.

The War Powers Act of 1973 (Pub.L. 93-148), also referred to as the War Powers Resolution, is a resolution of the Congress of The United States of America that stated that the President of The United States of America can send troops into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or if the United States of America is already under attack or serious threat. The War Powers Act requires that the president notify Congress within 48 hours of committing troops to military action and forbids troops from remaining for more than 60 days without an authorization of force or a declaration of war.

Seems to me that there is no "declaration of war"...only an authorization to use military force....and that is NOT exactly the same thing.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Seems to me that there is no "declaration of war"...only an authorization to use military force....and that is NOT exactly the same thing.

The Constitution give Congress the authority to declare war. It does not say how Congress must go about doing that. In the post 1973 world, an authorization of the use of force is how Congress declares war. Congress has not issued a "Declaration of War" since 1973 and probably will never issue one again unless the Supreme Court rules the War Powers Act of 1973 is unconstitutional for some reason. To claim that Congress has not declared war, although it has authorized the use of force, is simply playing with words and is intellectually dishonest.

[Neil D]

The War Powers Act requires that the president notify Congress within 48 hours of committing troops to military action and forbids troops from remaining for more than 60 days [color:#990000]without an authorization of force or or a declaration of war.

......

Thus in light of the speculation concerning the Gulf of Tonkin Incident and the possible abuse of the authorization that followed, in 1973 Congress passed the War Powers Resolution, which requires the president to obtain either [color:#660000]a declaration of war or within 60 days of initiating hostilities with a full disclosure of facts in the process.

Sorry, Shane...but NO DECLARATION OF WAR exists currently. We have an authorization from congress to use our military...but NO DECLARATION OF WAR.

[Dr. Shane]

An authorization for the use of force is just another means of declaring war. Those that are not intellectually honest are pained to admit that. They want to play games with semantics. If President Bush would have asked for a "Declaration of War" on September 18, 2001 he would have certainly gotten one. At no time had the country been so willing to go to war since Pearl Harbor was bombed on December 7, 1941.

So why did President Bush ask for an authorization to use force instead of a "Declaration of War"? Because they are the same thing!!! They both result in the same thing. A "Declaration of War" does not result in anything different than an authorization to use force does. They both officially take the nation to war with Congressional approval. I suspect we will never ever again see the US issue a "Declaration of War" on anyone unless the Supreme Court finds the War Powers Act of 1973 unconstitutional.

President Bush followed the rules first with Al Quieda and second with Iraq. He went to Congress for authorization to use force as per the War Powers Act of 1973. Congress granted him the authority to use force both times. To say what is going on in Afghanistan and Iraq is not a real war because Congress never issued a "Declaration of War" is very disingenuous. Those making such claims speak volumes about their own bias and worldview.

[carolaa]

The Democratic controlled Congress has tried to stop the war but does not have the will nor the votes.

It's because of the fear-mongering that Bush puts out. But people are slowly getting wise to it and demanding that Congress do something.

[there buster]

Fear mongering.

I know what you mean. Like the crazy notion that someone might crash planes into tall buildings and kill 3000 people. Or blow up trains in Madrid and London. Yup. Crazy.

[carolaa]

Yeah, exactly. Don't you wish we'd go after those guys instead of going further into debt with this Iraq distraction? I bet those Blackwater guys could find them and take care of them in no time.

[LifeHiscost]

Fear mongering.

I know what you mean. Like the crazy notion that someone might crash planes into tall buildings and kill 3000 people. Or blow up trains in Madrid and London. Yup. Crazy.

ichabod, the thing that is crazy is that your logic makes too much sense. It leaves no room for the disciple of Christ to love their enemies in/with the hope there may be someone willing to die for those who might be willing to receive Jesus and live eternally instead of being blown to smithereens, which eliminates any personal decision whatsoever.

It is a complex problem, especially when we know it is the Lord of glory who sets the heads of state in their position.

"He changes the times and the seasons; He removes kings and sets up kings. He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to those who have understanding!" Daniel 2:21 AMP

Regards!

[Dr. Shane]

If we wouldn't have invaded Iraq Saddam would have used the oil-for-food scandal to get sanctions lifted and resumed his WMD program. Hillary Clinton said before she voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq she talk with some advisers that served in her husband's administration and they advised her to vote for the war. Did Bush tell those Clinton advisers to lie too? Were they part of his neocon group?

[there buster]

Yeah, go after those guys. Wait a minute! According to their own communications, "those guys" are on the run, and despairing. THey think they're in a desperate situation.

Oh, well. What do they know? The radical left knows the truth. This war is lost. No matter what the AlQaeda say, what the Iraqis say, what the people actually involved say. Barack Obama can tell from thousands of miles away what those on the spot cannot. Amazing.

[there buster]

Quote:

chabod, the thing that is crazy is that your logic makes too much sense. It leaves no room for the disciple of Christ to love their enemies

Sorry, you're quite mistaken. It's quite common. You pose a false dichotomy, exhibit a failure of imagination.

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

chabod, the thing that is crazy is that your logic makes too much sense. It leaves no room for the disciple of Christ to love their enemies

Sorry, you're quite mistaken. It's quite common. You pose a false dichotomy, exhibit a failure of imagination.

I'd be fascinated to hear how your imagination will allow those who have been blown to bits will be able to make a choice for a Savior and how they had choice about when their lives would be forfeited, in accord with the Scripture.

Regards!

[Robert]

Quote:

This preemptive strike on Iraq has taken us down a road from which we will never recover.

As a student of history I believe the Indian Wars, The Spanish-American War and our involvement in WW1 were more grievous and more reflective of America as the lamb-like beast than the Iraq War has been.

You are merely excusing current bad behavior with past bad behavior!

[Dr. Shane]

President Wilson loaded down a passenger ship with arms to sell to the British in a war that the US was suppose to be neutral in. When the Germans sank the ship President Wilson told the American public that it was an unprovoked attack and the US became involved in WW1. That is an example of the President lying to the American people. When ideologues today start saying goofy things like this is the most unjust war or the worse administration it only goes to show they don't know history. President Bush didn't lie to us. The war hasn't went well but given what he knew at the time, he acted responsibly.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: ichabod

Quote:

chabod, the thing that is crazy is that your logic makes too much sense. It leaves no room for the disciple of Christ to love their enemies

Sorry, you're quite mistaken. It's quite common. You pose a false dichotomy, exhibit a failure of imagination.

I'd be fascinated to hear how your imagination will allow those who have been blown to bits will be able to make a choice for a Savior and how they had choice about when their lives would be forfeited, in accord with the Scripture.

Regards!

Ask God. He has used this method rather frequently throughout history.

[there buster]

The beast in Revelation is not lamb-like.

He is given horns like a lamb, but he speaks like a dragon.

My recollection is that this buffalo notion is based on a non-SDA 19th century fad interpretation; neither John nor his audience would have had any idea what a buffalo was.