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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (140192)	7/13/2004 7:08:40 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 281500

And some of those wars have been dismal failures. I wonder if this will be one of them.

To: Ilaine who wrote (140192)	7/13/2004 7:54:42 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

To say we will not wait till we have an actionable cause to go to war, rather we will go to war based on our "intelligence" about potential causes is new to our foreign policy -- and when the first war of this new breed of wars turns out to be based on intelligence that we now know to be completely wrong, we need to, and are, asking questions about how we could have been so wrong. But we need to go further than this and also ask whether the decision to go to war took the intelligence that was available and selectively used it to make a case for war that the intelligence itself, even if it had been correct, would not have justified. The intelligence was iffy -- but the pronouncements from the Bush Administration used to sell the war to Congress and the American public deleted any sense of the iffiness of the intelligence and posed weak data from dubious and often single sources as if we had extremely well founded, ironclad certainties. This is a large part of the answer to the question "how could we be so wrong"? We were wrong to make extreme pronouncements of certainty when the certainty just was not there at all. In doing so, not only did we end up with a decision to go to war that would be wrong with hindsight, but we also embarked on a course of action whereby intelligence is shaped, distorted, and selectively used more for political purpose than to arrive at objective decisions for our national security. This matter goes to the heart of the Bush policy of preemptive unilateral war -- and this is precisely why we could not rally allies, almost all of them knowing instinctively that this was a bad development for the civilized world to have a sole "superpower" taking matters into its own hands unopposed <you are with us or you are against us> -- and using whatever scraps of "intelligence" that might be available to justify military aggression for political gain. None of them could realistically support our new foreign policy. Nor did the people of other countries support our new foreign policy. In fact, our new foreign policy contributed greatly to provide new reasons to be deeply suspicious of the United States. In the end there has been little if any gain for the United States, and substantial losses all the way around. I feel most sorry for those that lost their loved-ones to a war without justification -- a war with a large dark cloud over its mission.

To: Ilaine who wrote (140192)	7/13/2004 10:29:20 PM
From: dumbmoney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Cobalt, Congress did not, strictly speaking, declare war. To be sure, the war authorization bill was the moral equivalent of a declaration of war, since most reasonable people assumed that Bush would use the authority. But it was not a declaration of war. The key text: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002'. SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS. The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to-- (1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and (2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq. SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. (a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to-- (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq. (b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that-- (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and (2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. (c) War Powers Resolution Requirements- (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution. (2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution. --- Now here's what a real declaration of war looks like: Whereas the Imperial Government of Japan has committed unprovoked acts of war against the Government and the people of the United States of America: Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the state of war between the United States and the Imperial Government of Japan which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Imperial Government of Japan; and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.