US Nuclear Charges Fake - Syria

[rogueyam]

Oh for fucksake ...you know exactly what I'm saying. Kyl-Lieberman was a trick to give Bush more authority.

 

It wasn't a trick. It was a vote. That is what Senators do. They draft legislation, they debate it, and then they vote. How does this constitute "bypassing Congress"?

 

[chuckwoww]

By giving Bush the authority to expand his war without going to Congress. Are you stupid?

[TheCorinthian]

I don't know if you were around at the time but the massive bombing raids on Hanoi were supposedly designed to bring the Vietcong to the bargaining table. They decided to kick US butt in Saigon instead.

 

 

No but we study it. And yes, that is a good example how not to fight a war.

 

[rogueyam]

By giving Bush the authority to expand his war without going to Congress.

 

They are Congress.

[Steve]

Think you got it there wrong R. Bush can't wage a war on his own. Only the Congress can declare war. Once in it, the prez is the commander in chief. But both Iraq and Afghanistan were authorized by the Congress. Think you got your facts wrong.

In a crisis the pres has (I think 48 hours) a brief window to respond to an immediate threat but he has to report to Congress for that as well.

Also, once in a war, Congress has the purse strings. You can't fight a war without any money for the military.

 

The U.S. has the arsenal to blow up anyone. However, we won't do it. We'd lose more in terms of our standing in the world than any gain militarily. We had the power to blow up north Vietnam 10 times over and 'bomb them back to the stone age' as it was said back then but we didn't even while losing. Why? The president would not only make the U.S. an international pariah, the citizens would turn on him as well.

 

[rogueyam]

Think you got it there wrong R. Bush can't wage a war on his own. Only the Congress can declare war. Once in it, the prez is the commander in chief. But both Iraq and Afghanistan were authorized by the Congress. Think you got your facts wrong.

In a crisis the pres has (I think 48 hours) a brief window to respond to an immediate threat but he has to report to Congress for that as well.

 

One clear counter-example to this thesis is President Clinton's bombing campaign against Serbia. Seventy-eight days of death from above without one word of authorization from either the United States Congress or the United Nations Security Council.

 

Facts are stubborn things.

 

[Steve]

Can you specify? Are you referring to the war in the Balkans where we were there as part of a NATO mission? Are you saying Congress did not approve our involvement?

[Steve]

On Apr. 28, the House rejected Clinton's war on Yugoslavia by a tie 213-213 vote, and threw out the proposed declaration of war on Yugoslavia by an overwhelming 427-2 vote. On May 4, our sheepish and squeamish Senate voted not to vote. By a 78-22 vote, the Senators put aside indefinitely a resolution which would have allowed Clinton to use "all necessary force" in his undeclared war on Yugoslavia.

 

 

[chuckwoww]

The Kyl Lieberman Act is a good example of how the trick works CS. First declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. That gives Bush the authority he needs to hit them without going to Congress. If they retaliate then the US will be at war with Iran de facto. Then go to Congress for the rubber stamp. They can't refuse without appearing unpatriotic.

[chuckwoww]

I don't know if you were around at the time but the massive bombing raids on Hanoi were supposedly designed to bring the Vietcong to the bargaining table. They decided to kick US butt in Saigon instead.

 

 

No but we study it. And yes' date=' that is a good example how not to fight a war.

[/quote']

 

How would you fight the Vietnam War, knowing what we know now?