Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (150028)	8/19/2002 8:12:59 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1580828

Ted if we where still in the habit of declaring wars things would be clearer in this area. If war had been declared on Iraq back when they invaded Kuwait then we would still be at war with them unless the ceasefire went beyond that and was an actual peace treaty. It can be argued since wars are not declared anymore that we where at war with them, and since there was no peace treaty we are still at war just that the war was suspended by the cease fire agreement. On the other hand it can also be reasonably argued that if war does not have to be declared that peace doesn't have to be as formally declared either and that a cease fire agreement amounts to peace, however since the agreement is conditional it can be argued that the peace is over when it is violated. There is some benefit to the old idea of formal declaration of war. It makes these things simpler. Tim

To: tejek who wrote (150028)	8/19/2002 8:30:56 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580828

What makes this attack on Iraq very dangerous from a Constitutional point of view is that Bush thinks he has the authority to move ahead without Congress's approval, developing his war plans within the context of the war on terrorism There is no question Bush will seek and receive Congressional approval before moving ahead with the war. There is also no question that he not only THINKS, but in reality DOES have authority to move ahead without Congressional approval. There is a reason presidents do not seek approval prematurely. War continues to be, de facto, a presidential prerogative, by virtue of the fact that the president seeks approval only after it is essentially too late for Congressional intervention, except in the most unusual circumstances (which I don't believe we've ever seen to date). Bush is conducting this policy just as other presidents have before, and there should be nothing alarming about it. At this point, he is merely negotiating to get what he wants. Once he commits us to war, we'll have a strong worldwide coalition to support us. There is no need for panic.