**** the troops! - Page 15

BigRed · #**141** (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Publius Infinitum

ROFLMNAO...

I absolutey ADORE this canard...

This is where the pro-terrorist, anti-American jack@$$ in question runs to demand that "CONGRESSS NEVER DECLARED WAR ON IRAQ!"

As if there is only one means of declaring war and the USC provided a specific outline in triplicate form which, unless that form is filled out and properly filed with the Clerk... the US can't go to war...

Well here's the thing girls; the Congress gave the President authority to go to war... They didn't pass on the responsibility; they didn't transfer power; THEY AUTHORIZED THE PRESIDENT TO USE MILITARY FORCE AGAINST A SOVEREIGN NATION: AND BY ANY OBJECTIVE MEASURE, WHEN YOU USE MILITARY POWER AGAINST A SOVEREIGN NATION FOR ANY PURPOSE, BUT PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU USE MILITARY POWER TO DIRECTLY, OVERTLY AND UNAPOLOGETICALLY OVERTHROW THAT SOVEREIGN GOVERNMENT: YOU'VE DAYUM WELL COMMITTED AN ACT OF WAR.

An act, which in this case, was authorized by Congress; an act of war thus 'declared' through that authorization.

You'll take careful note that there is NOTHING in the USC which determines the means by which Congress must declare war; and while I know you are loathe to accept this analysis, because it completely destroys your insipid rationalization, the fact remains, it destroys your rationalization and that's that...

So... Case closed. CHECK MATE... and get lost ya pacifist ****!

Actually, yea there is only one way. Unless you amend the Constitution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by C-D-P

The UN can not force us to go or not to go to war. They do not hold that type of power.

That is something you seem to forget everytime you bring that up.

Yet, one of the reasons we went to war was to enforce a UN resolution. Granted, we weren't forced to do such, the fact that it is a reason for war is horrible.

bugalugs · #**142** (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobcat1

This merely says that the security council will make recommendations concerning international conflicts.

N0 - you don't understand the law. You are misunderstanding the language used:

The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Get it. The UNSC SHALL DETERMINE - not the USA or George Bush or John Howard or anyone else - the Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace

Anikdote · #**143** (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 01:35 PM

MMk. So we're just supposed to hand over our national security to the UN security council. That sounds brilliant since they have such a long history of actually acting on their sanctions. Americans shouldn't have to trust the security council to determine whether there is or isn't a threat against us.

Quote:

and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance

So even if it determines said events to be a 'threat', they can still only make recommendations OR determine what actions will be taken. But this said action taken would be by the UN not by the member state.

C-D-P · #**144** (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bugalugs

N0 - you don't understand the law. You are misunderstanding the language used:

The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Get it. The UNSC SHALL DETERMINE - not the USA or George Bush or John Howard or anyone else - the Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace

It seems as if you are the one that does not understand the law. That means that they will determine (they can determine all they want. Nothing in the wording says that they decide for the other nations).

Make recommendations. You keep ignoring that part.

I am still waiting to see where article 39 says. And I quote

Quote:

Originally Posted by bugalugs

Invading a UN member nation without sanction from the UN Security Council is illegal under Article 39 of the UN Charter

Can you please show me where it says that? I thank you in advance.

Publius Infinitum · #**145** (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigRed

Actually, yea there is only one way. Unless you amend the Constitution.

ROFL... Really SFB? Then why don't you tell me what the 'way' is and cite the Article within the USC which defines it.

And just to save ya some time: Great concession and ya did the best ya could, God bless ya.

Quote:

Yet, one of the reasons we went to war was to enforce a UN resolution. Granted, we weren't forced to do such, the fact that it is a reason for war is horrible.

You best get that info directly over to your Comrade there Red... He feels the US invasion was absent the approval of the UN, thus a violation of soem unstated legal statute... and here you are, a fellow comrade declaring the US invaded Iraq to enforce UN sanctions...

WEAK!

BigRed · #**146** (**permalink**) 05-08-2008, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Publius Infinitum

ROFL... Really SFB? Then why don't you tell me what the 'way' is and cite the Article within the USC which defines it.

And just to save ya some time: Great concession and ya did the best ya could, God bless ya.

The fact that I have to point something out in the United States Constitution to you is odd to me. The fact that I have to provide a source is odd to me.

The source has already been provided in this thread. Congress can only declare war. Not the President. That's that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Publius Infinitum

You best get that info directly over to your Comrade there Red... He feels the US invasion was absent the approval of the UN, thus a violation of soem unstated legal statute... and here you are, a fellow comrade declaring the US invaded Iraq to enforce UN sanctions...

WEAK!

So one of the reasons wasn't to enforce resolution 1441?

C-D-P · #**147** (**permalink**) 05-08-2008, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C-D-P

I am still waiting to see where article 39 says. And I quote

And I am still waiting.

Bobcat1 · #**148** (**permalink**) 05-08-2008, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bugalugs

N0 - you don't understand the law. You are misunderstanding the language used:

Oh please.

Quote:

The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.

This simply means they are going to call a war a war. And that's it.

Quote:

Get it. The UNSC SHALL DETERMINE - not the USA or George Bush or John Howard or anyone else - the Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace

Sorry, you are giving the UN powers it does not have.

Publius Infinitum · #**149** (**permalink**) 05-08-2008, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigRed

The fact that I have to point something out in the United States Constitution to you is odd to me. The fact that I have to provide a source is odd to me.

The source has already been provided in this thread. Congress can only declare war. Not the President. That's that.

FAIL!

You intentionally failed to address the issue; thus your argument fails, again (AS USUAL)...

For the edification of the objective third party that may read this thread: The issue was that the USC does NOT declare the method by which Congress shall declare war... That, in fact, Congress did declare war post 9-11 and did so in authorizing the use of military force. Where one sovereign uses military force against another sovereign nation, WAR is the only potential function of that use; thus authorizing the executive to use military force against another sovereign the congress, IN POINT OF FACT: DECLARED WAR.

There is NOTHING in the USC which requires Congress to use any particular language in delcaring war; it does not mandate that the phrase "DECLARE WAR" must be used when congress asserts its authorization.

The member is being intentionally obtuse to protect a failed position and has repeatedly refused to answer the salient question in that failed defense. [/quote]

MrRelevant · #**150** (**permalink**) 05-08-2008, 06:13 AM

I still find it hilarious (and stunning) that some of you seem to take comfort in the fact that the UN charter somehow supercedes your US Constitution.Even more funny is how you still ignore the fact that UN cannot even police itself and was deeply intertwined with scandals that would deeply effect their ability to make sound judgements in accordance with the procedures necessary for 'authorization' to make any action against Iraq 'legal'.

We are still fighting the war in Iraq IN RESPONSE to an attack on the US.If there were no 911 there'd be no OIF,Saddam probably would still be (*)(*)(*)(*)ting on his 24k gold toilet bowls.Article 51 Un charter makes it alright,dont worry.

The other question that needs asking or perhaps has been asked:

Wheres the indictment from the UN? Sure they bellyached but I dont recall 'war crimes' ever being pushed.If we broke THEIR rules somehow (which we didnt -article 51) shouldnt THEY be the ones demanding justice? Once again liberals advocate for others that choose not advocate for themselves.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What The Troops Really Think About Iraq	Toby	Political Opinions & Beliefs	38	04-09-2008 12:42 PM
Help our troops	abu-afak	Political Opinions & Beliefs	0	04-17-2007 08:51 PM
For all of you who like to say you support the troops	DanM	Veterans	4	01-07-2006 08:58 PM
Help the troops	SedyAlpha	Warfare / Military	0	05-22-2005 11:11 AM
My Time with the Troops	JP5	Current Events	2	09-03-2004 06:16 PM