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 : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MJ who wrote (12048)	12/4/2007 12:56:33 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 25737

"Give you a point----ideally I agree, realistically not always possible." We are not in disagreement on that last point of yours at all. I TOTALLY agree that - in this modern age - in the event of 'sneak' attacks that require near-real-time military response (I'm obviously thinking of nuclear war, I.C.B.M.s, etc.) there is certainly no time at all available for such niceties as Congressional debates, or anything like that. Thus: we have formal procedures for military responses in these case. But... when the 'war drums' beat for several years leading-up to the US committing itself to major military adventures --- there is NO EXCUSE for avoiding the Constitutional provisions. (Except, perhaps, that politicians always seem to think that they can 'get something for nothing' that way. But - and I think modern American history illustrates this point well - we are only shooting ourselves in the foot that trying to do the the 'easy', the 'expedient' way. The odds for America achieving long-term strategic success falls WAY OFF that way.)