Cheney: A vote for Kerry is a vote for terrorism!

[Drake Tungsten]

So did Iraq. Hell, we were still technically in a state of war with Iraq.

[dannubis]

which you declared in 90-91 btw ...

[Drake Tungsten]

Which the UN declared in 90-91...

[chequita guevara]

We never declared war on Iraq. Funds were authorized to use force, that's all.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Geronimo


Wouldn't it make it easier to catch the Timothy McVeighs that are out there? We can't rely on foreign intelligence for all of our terrorist tips.

How so? FISA has also worked for domestic intelligence gathering, and we don't have the allocated budgets to do the kind of massive, real-time surveillance to pre-empt all the potential McVeighs out there.

Oklahoma City and 9/11 weren't a result of inadequate laws, they were a result of human failures, egos, and bureaucratic turf leading to missed opportunities to identify and disrupt those actions before they were completed.

There are some aspects of PATRIOT which make sense, for example, having phone tap warrants follow a suspect, not a phone number. Those provisions are a minority, not a majority of the substance of the PATRIOT Act.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Oklahoma City and 9/11 weren't a result of inadequate laws, they were a result of human failures, egos, and bureaucratic turf leading to missed opportunities to identify and disrupt those actions before they were completed.

And the psychos responsible...don't forget them...

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Some people still view terrorism as a criminal activity, true. Many people don't, however, and that's why Cheney brought it up. I'm not comfortable with having a Commander in Chief who would treat terrorism as a mere crime even after September 11th. I think the majority of Americans feel the same way.

Much better to have a "war" against undefined individuals, so that you can have a never-ending state of war, and get people to suck up the reasons for your corruption and mismanagement under that guise. We won't have a thousand-year reich, but we will have a thousand-year war.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous


And the psychos responsible...don't forget them...

There are always psychos. The point is for non-psychos to identify the psychos and get them before they blow something up, not after.

[GePap]

Terrorism is a crime. How then could it not be treated as one?

[Sava]

Cheney is evil!

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
We never declared war on Iraq. Funds were authorized to use force, that's all.

Has this issue ever been litigated and decided in court? I recall, it was a major issue to many during Vietnam even though Congress passed the Tonkin Gulf resolution that used similar wording to two Gulf War resolutions. It seems to me that courts would decide that Congress can properly delegate to the president the decision of when to declare war thereby making Vietnam and the two Gulf Wars properly declared wars.

[Ned]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Much better to have a "war" against undefined individuals, so that you can have a never-ending state of war, and get people to suck up the reasons for your corruption and mismanagement under that guise. We won't have a thousand-year reich, but we will have a thousand-year war.

Well, then MtG, what do you think Bush will do next then? Amend the Constitution so that he (or a member of the Bush familiy) can stay in power for 1000 years?

You really have a screw loose.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Joseph
In Napa, I would get a pat on the back.

Until you found out that they were Mexican gardeners and one was the cousin of a deputy sheriff.

[GePap]

How could a court "decide" that, when it violates the simple premise that it is congress that must vote to declare war? I doubt the congress can vote away its own constitutional responsibilities without, say, changing the constitution.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ned


Well, then MtG, what do you think Bush will do next then? Amend the Constitution so that he (or a member of the Bush familiy) can stay in power for 1000 years?

You really have a screw loose.

Actually, I think the loose screw is on your reading glasses. Bush is happy to hide behind perpetual war to justify any program Bush wants to run through a Congress full of bobble-heads, and any inconveniences like a slow economy, job losses, deficits, national debt, casualties in the never-ending war, etc. will all be shuffled under the rug because "there's a war on and we all have to make sacrifices."

So tell me, oh wise one, when do you define the end of a "war on terrorism" that is directed against any individual to be defined at convenience? (a la "a suspected member of a group with ties to Al Qaeda")