war with Iraq

[mar]

Compelled by WHAT or WHOM?

Congressional approval is not a declaration of war.

Suppose Ashcroft went to Bush and said, "Hey man, this prohibition against unlawful search and seizure thing is *really* making my job tough. Whaddya say we ditch it"?

Bush goes to Congress and says, "Friends, Romans, Countrymen: You know what? In the interest of national security I think we should be able to search and seize people at will. Whaddya think"?

Congress shrugs their collective shoulder, yawns and says, "Yeah man, whatever. You know what you're doing."

You see, that would be unconstitutional too even if it came from Congress. They should be sued for malpractice in such a case.

Anyway.

So we're compelled to go to war you say. Fine.

If the reasons are good enough then there will be a mandate from the people.

Let the system work.

By the way, Iraq is not the only country in the world to ignore international opinion. If that were good enough reason there would be millions of people calling for the overthrow of America.

Oh wait a minute. We could be in trouble.

 

[LJDRVR]

As I understand it, the warpowers act allows congress to authorize the executive branch to wage war. There is nothing unconstitutional about it.

Military action against Iraq has nothing to do with them "ignoring international opinion." It has everything to do with their continued violation of international law and the fact that they WILL provide terrorists with dangerous weapons that anonymous fanatics WILL use to kill Americans. Democracy does not mean we get to hold a special election for war. We elected our congressmen and our president under the auspices of the constitution. The legislative branch has authorized the commander-in-chief to attack Iraq. There will be no mandate from the people.

My question is this: what more are you waiting for? Forget about all those boobs who think Bush is out to "avenge Daddy." Do they really think our President is a vengful 8-year old? I truly believe that if the national command authority is this eager to overthrow saddam, then it really must be a race against time to keep him from destabilizing the region/planet.

Alas, way too much politics for this dumb pilot. Just my opinion dude, totally fallible. Here's the question I'm skeptical about: Why did Mssrss Powell and Schwartzkopf allow ALL those Iraqi armor and ALL those republican guards to slip through our northern lines and escape at the end of the gulf war?

Cheers!

 

[Singlecoil]

Here's the question I'm skeptical about: Why did Mssrss Powell and Schwartzkopf allow ALL those Iraqi armor and ALL those republican guards to slip through our northern lines and escape at the end of the gulf war?

Cheers!

We attacked their retreating armies daily and slaughtered them. Remember the "highway of death"? Some of the pilots were even feeling guilty about it because it was so easy. ( Vipers in the Storm by Keith Rosenkranz) Schwartzkopf wanted to keep pressing the battle all the way to Baghdad, but was ordered to cease operations by George Herbert Walker Bush, because the coalition would have immediatley broken down had we done that. It took very careful diplomacy to get arabs (Saudis, Jordanians)on our side to attack another arab state (Iraq). This was only possible because we were defending and repatriating another arab state (Kuwait).
The administration at the time made what was then the right decision not to press on toward Baghdad as the UN Resolutions that authorized the liberation of Kuwait did not authorize the overthrow of Saddam.

 

[mar]

Singlecoil: Interesting response

Interesting response from Singlecoil--much better than I would've managed.

As for me, What am I waiting for? I guess I'm waiting for a serious change in American foreign policy that gives us more credibility in the international community before we invade and subsequently occupy other sovereign nations.

Waiting, but not holding my breath.

LJDRVR I don't happen to think you're another dumb pilot. You actually use logic and facts to back up your assertions.

I can respect that more than the standard retort of: Hey mar, you just think that way cause the liberal media and the liberal universities have taught you to think like a wuss.

The truth is: I graduated ERAU (hardly Berkley).

And: I only read mainstream media in the bathroom--if you get my point...

Peace in 2003

 

[cocknbull]

My thoughts exactly xXpress1

 

[embdrvr]

I read recently that Iraqui defenses were being consolidated into a multi-ring structure around Baghdad. Saddam is probably smart enough to not engage us in the open desert. An urban conflict is "winnable" but is likely to take a lot longer than what some of the pundits are saying. To complicate things many Iraqui forces will be in civilian garb.

All the financial analysts seem to agree that protracted conflict will damage the economy further and possibly put us back into recession. Gas prices are already skyrocketing around the nation just on the speculation of war. Look at what happened last time around when we went to war in Kuwait. This time could be far worse. We have a weaker coalition and we'd be invading Iraqui home turf. We could see a lot of dead US servicemen and I think we can kiss a lot of our jobs goodbye. Look how weak this industry is now compared to last time. We'll likely see the rest of the legacy majors in bankruptcy and possibly 2 or 3 no longer in existence.

 

[cocknbull]

EMBDRVR

I agree with you on Saddam's strategy for defending Iraq. I think however that the price for leaving Saddam alone will be far greater. The fact is Saddam must fall before our economy will recover. The market and the consumer hate uncertainty. With Saddam in control of a nation as important as Iraq the future is uncertain. Diplomacy has failed for 11 years and it is time to take him out. No one wants to see our soilders in harms way, but by being a soilder you agree to put yourself in harms way for a greater good. Most major finacial consultants now believe the only way to save the airlines maybe to get Saddam out of power and out of mind. Oil prices are up 30 percent since resolution 1441 passed and they will not return to acceptable levels untill Saddam is delt with. The public needs to see progress on this matter before it will feel safe and open up its wallets. Remember 86 percent of Americans feel Saddam is tricking the UN and they believe he will develop weapons of mass destruction and used them to intimidate and strike fear into Americans. With him gone thats 86 percent of Americans who feel safer.

Jobs maybe lost in the short term, but I can assure you it won't be because of Iraq. The airlines may use the war as an excuse for more government help. But I think we all know why the airlines are in such a stink.

 

[embdrvr]

I'm not sure he's as much of a threat as many make him out to be. Many tyrannical despots have wmd's. Saddam wants to stay in power. I think he realizes tht if he lobs bio or chem weapons at his neighbors that he woud give us and NATO countries an incontrovertible reason to take him out. The big question is whether or not that theory is true.
Also if we can't locate any of his supposed weapons is it really a good idea to invade thus insuring that he'll use them if he does have them?

 

[embdrvr]

There is no doubt that we will be successful, and if we can do it quickly I expect better things from this industry and others.

Therein lies the rub. Can we do it quickly without losing a lot of our own and without unacceptable collateral damage?

 

[roughneck]

without unacceptable collateral damage

The unacceptable collateral damage will be on our turf if we don't snuff out the problem now. It is absolutely fact that Saddam is giving the UN inspectors the run-around and he is doing it because he has banned weapons. There is no realistic argument against these facts. Saddam hates us so bad that he would do anything to get these weapons into the hands of terrorists that could "deliver" them to us. (If he hasn't already).

I have heard enough of the complaining and argument that there will be more furloughs, lower stock market, etc. Big Deal. I will gladly give up my job, my 401K, my financial security to insure that my kids will have it. Don't you think it is a little selfish to not want to take care of future problems now so you can have a little bit of job security and a healty portfolio?

Sure, just pass the buck on to our kids and the future generations. We all have ancestors that fought and probably gave their lives so that we would not have to endure the problems of their times. I think we should be willing to do that for our youth. Forget about your furlough or 401K. We are fighting for our country and our freedom. We can always get other jobs.