Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:40 am Posts: 2114 Location: Coventry
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
_________________ "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them" -Karl Popper
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am Posts: 37778 Location: OmaGOD!!! Gender: Male
PJDoll wrote:
Hallucination wrote:
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
I'm not sure I even buy the idea of "illegal war". There are justified wars, and there are unjustified wars, and as much as the UN would like to believe it, there really is no such thing as "international law" because it all comes down to who agrees to follow the law.
--PunkDavid
_________________ Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
I'm not sure I even buy the idea of "illegal war". There are justified wars, and there are unjustified wars, and as much as the UN would like to believe it, there really is no such thing as "international law" because it all comes down to who agrees to follow the law.
--PunkDavid
Exactly. If a country decides to go to war, then there is a war. As you said, there really is no 'international law' war doesn't really even fall into a category of 'legal' or 'illegal'.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:40 am Posts: 2114 Location: Coventry
If you think there's no such thing as an illegal war fair enough, but your reasoning behind saying there's no international law is bent. Some domestic laws are not followed by all people, does that mean they don't exist?
_________________ "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them" -Karl Popper
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:59 am Posts: 18643 Location: Raleigh, NC Gender: Male
Hallucination wrote:
If you think there's no such thing as an illegal war fair enough, but your reasoning behind saying there's no international law is bent. Some domestic laws are not followed by all people, does that mean they don't exist?
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
Actually, it is. I refer you to Section 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution, regarding Congressional powers. According to this, the US Congress is the body that fuctions to:
"Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
A bill authorizing the president to use force if necessary is hardly a 'declaration of war'.
So yes, we went to war in an unconstitutional manner.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:40 am Posts: 2114 Location: Coventry
The U.N, such as during operation desert fox. Of course, that was no more justified than shock and awe, but I'm not expressing an opinion, just stating facts. Who will justify domestic law? The police will try, but if they don't 100% succeed, does that mean the law doesn't exist?
_________________ "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them" -Karl Popper
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:59 am Posts: 18643 Location: Raleigh, NC Gender: Male
Betterman0986 wrote:
PJDoll wrote:
Hallucination wrote:
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
Actually, it is. I refer you to Section 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution, regarding Congressional powers. According to this, the US Congress is the body that fuctions to:
"Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
A bill authorizing the president to use force if necessary is hardly a 'declaration of war'.
So yes, we went to war in an unconstitutional manner.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:59 am Posts: 18643 Location: Raleigh, NC Gender: Male
Hallucination wrote:
The U.N, such as during operation desert fox. Of course, that was no more justified than shock and awe, but I'm not expressing an opinion, just stating facts. Who will justify domestic law? The police will try, but if they don't 100% succeed, does that mean the law doesn't exist?
Right, the UN. Sure. Ok.
The UN is a toothless organization by nature. As soon as you have a superpower acting with a middle finger towards the UN, it's useless in terms of "international law".
The city or state police in your town wouldn't have any authority if there was anarchy either.
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
Actually, it is. I refer you to Section 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution, regarding Congressional powers. According to this, the US Congress is the body that fuctions to:
"Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
A bill authorizing the president to use force if necessary is hardly a 'declaration of war'.
So yes, we went to war in an unconstitutional manner.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am Posts: 37778 Location: OmaGOD!!! Gender: Male
Athletic Supporter wrote:
Hallucination wrote:
If you think there's no such thing as an illegal war fair enough, but your reasoning behind saying there's no international law is bent. Some domestic laws are not followed by all people, does that mean they don't exist?
Who's going to enforce this "international law"?
Exactly.
--PunkDavid
_________________ Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:59 am Posts: 18643 Location: Raleigh, NC Gender: Male
Betterman0986 wrote:
Athletic Supporter wrote:
Betterman0986 wrote:
PJDoll wrote:
Hallucination wrote:
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
Actually, it is. I refer you to Section 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution, regarding Congressional powers. According to this, the US Congress is the body that fuctions to:
"Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
A bill authorizing the president to use force if necessary is hardly a 'declaration of war'.
So yes, we went to war in an unconstitutional manner.
Did we ever declare war?
In World Wars I and II we did.
Did we in Iraq? (Unless you're making my point, which would be funny )
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am Posts: 37778 Location: OmaGOD!!! Gender: Male
Betterman0986 wrote:
PJDoll wrote:
Hallucination wrote:
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
Actually, it is. I refer you to Section 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution, regarding Congressional powers. According to this, the US Congress is the body that fuctions to:
"Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
A bill authorizing the president to use force if necessary is hardly a 'declaration of war'.
So yes, we went to war in an unconstitutional manner.
WHY CONGRESSIONAL POWER TO DECLARE WAR DOES NOT PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE CHECK ON THE PRESIDENT
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
Actually, it is. I refer you to Section 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution, regarding Congressional powers. According to this, the US Congress is the body that fuctions to:
"Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
A bill authorizing the president to use force if necessary is hardly a 'declaration of war'.
So yes, we went to war in an unconstitutional manner.
Did we ever declare war?
In World Wars I and II we did.
Did we in Iraq? (Unless you're making my point, which would be funny )
Nope, never did in Iraq, which is the point I'm making.
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
Actually, it is. I refer you to Section 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution, regarding Congressional powers. According to this, the US Congress is the body that fuctions to:
"Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
A bill authorizing the president to use force if necessary is hardly a 'declaration of war'.
So yes, we went to war in an unconstitutional manner.
WHY CONGRESSIONAL POWER TO DECLARE WAR DOES NOT PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE CHECK ON THE PRESIDENT
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:59 am Posts: 18643 Location: Raleigh, NC Gender: Male
Betterman0986 wrote:
Athletic Supporter wrote:
Betterman0986 wrote:
Athletic Supporter wrote:
Betterman0986 wrote:
PJDoll wrote:
Hallucination wrote:
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
Actually, it is. I refer you to Section 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution, regarding Congressional powers. According to this, the US Congress is the body that fuctions to:
"Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
A bill authorizing the president to use force if necessary is hardly a 'declaration of war'.
So yes, we went to war in an unconstitutional manner.
Did we ever declare war?
In World Wars I and II we did.
Did we in Iraq? (Unless you're making my point, which would be funny )
Nope, never did in Iraq, which is the point I'm making.
Right. We never declared war. This is a military operation, not a war. Wars are declared. Quite the work-around Bush had, huh?
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:53 am Posts: 4470 Location: Knoxville, TN Gender: Male
Athletic Supporter wrote:
Betterman0986 wrote:
Athletic Supporter wrote:
Betterman0986 wrote:
Athletic Supporter wrote:
Betterman0986 wrote:
PJDoll wrote:
Hallucination wrote:
Soldiers shouldn't be able to pick and choose which LEGAL wars they fight in - the war in Iraq doesn't come under that category.
This isn't an illegal war. That's nonsense.
Actually, it is. I refer you to Section 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution, regarding Congressional powers. According to this, the US Congress is the body that fuctions to:
"Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
A bill authorizing the president to use force if necessary is hardly a 'declaration of war'.
So yes, we went to war in an unconstitutional manner.
Did we ever declare war?
In World Wars I and II we did.
Did we in Iraq? (Unless you're making my point, which would be funny )
Nope, never did in Iraq, which is the point I'm making.
Right. We never declared war. This is a military operation, not a war. Wars are declared. Quite the work-around Bush had, huh?
How many times do you want to bet that Bush has used the words "war in Iraq" on TV or interviews.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:59 am Posts: 18643 Location: Raleigh, NC Gender: Male
Cartman wrote:
How many times do you want to bet that Bush has used the words "war in Iraq" on TV or interviews.
Thousands. Perhaps millions.
An illegal war in the terms you're using would be if GW had called a special session of Congress, a State of the Union, a televised address etc and said
"Today, I am declaring war on the nation of Iraq."
Under your terms, Panama, Grenada...etc..all wars.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:40 am Posts: 2114 Location: Coventry
Athletic Supporter wrote:
Cartman wrote:
How many times do you want to bet that Bush has used the words "war in Iraq" on TV or interviews.
Thousands. Perhaps millions. An illegal war in the terms you're using would be if GW had called a special session of Congress, a State of the Union, a televised address etc and said "Today, I am declaring war on the nation of Iraq."
Under your terms, Panama, Grenada...etc..all wars.
They were. And to think you told us to pull out of Suez...
_________________ "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them" -Karl Popper
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
)