So what was Hamilton's response to Jefferson, re: Barbary Pirates?
Hamilton's position was that when attacked America automatically is in a state of war and no formal war declaration is necessary in order to respond with military action. However, at the time, Congress did enact a statute to empower the president to use force specifically in the "Bey of Tripoli," as a response to the Barbary Pirates. So that's what happened, no formal declaration of war ever having been made.
Now, to modern days. When Al Qaeda, under Afghanistan's Taliban cover, attacked the US indeed America had every right--according to Hamilton--to respond forcefully against them. But I remind you that this had nothing to do with Iraq, a separate sovereign nation having nothing to do with either Al Qaeda or the Taliban.
Consider also that Iraq never even diplomatically recognized the Taliban as a legitimate governmnent of Afghanistan. Those nations that diplomatically accepted the Taliban were: United Arab Emirates, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
In fact, bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were enemies. You see, Saddam presided over a secular government and one ideologically opposed to bin Laden's want and quest for theocratic government.
So I ask: What do the Barbary Pirates have to do with Iraq? |
