Thread: Illegal War?

Originally Posted by mjollnir

Sorry but the War Powers resolution if 1973 was as unconstitutional as the war in Iraq. The resolution, in fact, was trying to justify wars that we were involved in at the time like Vietnam. The resolution actually tried to interpret the constitution's meaning as to how war can be declared and how the president can send troops into an area without war being declared....just like Vietnam. However, only the SCOTUS is to interpret the constitution. None of the politicians in Washington (except Ron Paul) would be against that resolution because they ALL...democrat and republican...profit from the MIC. Keep us in prepetual warfare so someone in congress can fill a bill with pork in the form of a defense contract for their state! I'm no peacenick hippy but this invasion in Iraq was wrong for SOOOOOO many reasons.

And if it really was about WMDs...why was it called Operation Iraqi Freedom? Why did a president, who ran on the platform of no nation building, see it neccessary to free the Iraqi people?

Thank you for playing, "I am in Denial and no amount of FACTS will change my mind."

If you spent half as much time READING as you do pretending you know what you are talking about, you would almost be informed.

:therethere:

Originally Posted by Dispondent

Some people actually believe that the system of checks and balances works. What is a problem today will be fixed in the future. If you really stop believing that because of what party is in power the whole cause is lost. There have been far worse administrations than this one and somehow we managed to survive.

Why do you think it will be fixed and by whom?

Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have anything to gain from a change. With the current US political system, nothing will change other than for the worse.

Originally Posted by Idletime

Why do you think it will be fixed and by whom?

Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have anything to gain from a change. With the current US political system, nothing will change other than for the worse.

We currently have a weak Congress and strong Executive, those roles will reverse over time. As Congress remembers who it is and what it can do they will start to rectify some of the problems we have now. Take the longer view, its been working for 200+ years, no reason at all to think it will just fail now. Sure it could take a decade, but the balance will return. It has as much to do with history as it does with human nature.

Originally Posted by Truth Detector

Thank you for playing, "I am in Denial and no amount of FACTS will change my mind."

If you spent half as much time READING as you do pretending you know what you are talking about, you would almost be informed.

:therethere:

hahahaha I am in denial? Oh yeah...they hate us for our freedoms, right?

Originally Posted by Dispondent

We currently have a weak Congress and strong Executive, those roles will reverse over time. As Congress remembers who it is and what it can do they will start to rectify some of the problems we have now. Take the longer view, its been working for 200+ years, no reason at all to think it will just fail now. Sure it could take a decade, but the balance will return. It has as much to do with history as it does with human nature.

I think you are dead on...our government goes in cycles...you will see a weaker executive branch in coming years due to the unpopular actions of the current administration.

Originally Posted by larsonney72

I think you are dead on...our government goes in cycles...you will see a weaker executive branch in coming years due to the unpopular actions of the current administration.

Thank Buddah for that. It will be the only positive result of the Bush junta.

Originally Posted by dbelkau

Thank Buddah for that. It will be the only positive result of the Bush junta.

The Bush junta? You specialize in being absurd don't you?

Main Entry: jun·ta
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'hun-t&, 'j&n-, 'h&n-</I>
Etymology: Spanish, from feminine of </I>junto joined, from Latin </I>junctus, past participle of </I>jungere to join</I> -- more at YOKE </I>
1 : a council or committee for political or governmental purposes</I> ; especially : a group of persons controlling a government especially after a revolutionary seizure of power</I> </I>
2 : JUNTO </I>

Originally Posted by Truth Detector

The Bush junta? You specialize in being absurd don't you?

Main Entry: jun·ta
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'hun-t&, 'j&n-, 'h&n-</I>
Etymology: Spanish, from feminine of </I>junto joined, from Latin </I>junctus, past participle of </I>jungere to join</I> -- more at YOKE </I>
1 : a council or committee for political or governmental purposes</I> ; especially : a group of persons controlling a government especially after a revolutionary seizure of power</I> </I>
2 : JUNTO </I>

You might want to untwist the panties occasionally...you're gonna hurt yourself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truth Detector
The Bush junta? You specialize in being absurd don't you?

Main Entry: jun·ta
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'hun-t&, 'j&n-, 'h&n-</I>
Etymology: Spanish, from feminine of </I>junto joined, from Latin </I>junctus, past participle of </I>jungere to join</I> -- more at YOKE </I>
1 : a council or committee for political or governmental purposes</I> ; especially : a group of persons controlling a government especially after a revolutionary seizure of power</I> </I>
2 : JUNTO </I>

Originally Posted by Shadowman

You might want to untwist the panties occasionally...you're gonna hurt yourself.

Really? So what part of the above comment was non-factual?

Oh wait, that's right, you specialize in nonsensical posts like the one above which have no point or purpose.
:dramaqueen:

Originally Posted by Truth Detector

The Bush junta? You specialize in being absurd don't you?

Main Entry: jun·ta
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'hun-t&, 'j&n-, 'h&n-</I>
Etymology: Spanish, from feminine of </I>junto joined, from Latin </I>junctus, past participle of </I>jungere to join</I> -- more at YOKE </I>
1 : a council or committee for political or governmental purposes</I> ; especially : a group of persons controlling a government especially after a revolutionary seizure of power</I> </I>
2 : JUNTO </I>

Wow...you need to relax a little...fight the fights that matter...