Has Congress declared war on Iraq ?
156942
LEARN and REMEMBER people. How many times does it have to be said?\n\n\n\nThe Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public law 107-243, 116 Stat. 1497-1502) was a law passed by the United States Congress authorizing what was soon to become the Iraq War. The authorization was sought by President George W. Bush. It passed the House on October 10 by a vote of 296-133, and by the Senate on October 11 by a vote of 77-23, obviously receiving a limited amount of support from Democrats, and must be considered an overall unsupportive vote when compared to the "war vote" for the Second World War and other more poplularly supported conflicts. It was signed into law by President Bush on October 16, 2002.\n\nThe Resolution cited several factors to justify a war:\n\n    * Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire
172830
To quote Marine Gen. Smedley Darlington Butler about Iraq:\n\nAddressing the Third U.S. Congress Against War and Fascism in Cleveland on January 3, 1936 he urged strict neutrality: See that our Congress writes into law a command that no American soldier, sailor or Marine be used for any purpose except to protect the coastline of the United States, and protect his home-and I mean, his home-not an oil well in Iraq, a British investment in China, a sugar plantation in Cuba, a silver mine in Mexico, a glass factory in Japan, an American-owned share of stock in a European factory-in short, not an American investment anywhere except at home! . . . Let Congress say to all foreign investors: "Come on home or let your money stay out of the country-we will not defend it."
884957
I thought only Congress could declare war.What date was that?
357165
Only when there is a tie vote in the Senate\nNone of the above\nOnly Congress can declare war\nFrom the President\nThere is a law against it\nLobbying\nEvery two years\nBy adding the number of Senators and Representatives that the state has in Congress\nAnother national election is held \nThe House of Representatives\nThe Garfield Act\nEleven\nWorld War II\n12 \nRight to Remain Silent \nFor life\nThe Supreme Court\nThe First Amendment\nTwelve\nTwenty-Nine\nCongress\ndamn, im ashamed at how many i had to guess at.
1083708
Correct Lincoln started the war unconstitutionally. It was never declared a war by Congress. Lincoln ruled as a dictator according to his own hateful whims. Thus always to tyrants.
234887
"Monday, March 14, 2005\nCongressmen With Sons in Iraq\nBy James Joyner \nIt is often noted that relatively few Members of Congress have served in the Armed Forces and that their sons and daughters are quite unlikely to have to fight in the wars that they authorize. CNN highlights a few Members who do have a very personal stake in the Iraq War. \n\nLawmakers share parents’ fears\n\nFor more than a year, Rep. Joe Wilson’s desk at the House Armed Services Committee was the intersection of his personal and political interest in the Iraq war. On the table were bills about how to pay for and supply the conflict. Underneath, a handheld computer buzzed with real-time reports from his son Alan, an intelligence officer in southern Iraq. “I would get a ‘Hey Dad’ message almost every day,” the South Carolina Republican recalls. “I felt like I was voting on legislation, but I was living it simultaneously.”\n\nFor about half a dozen members of Congress who have had kids serving in Iraq, the war is far more than a matter of public policy. They debate it and often defend it — with eyes on public opinion, like almost any elected official. But they also live the war through those most dear to them. Therein lies a lesson about the limits of power. Lawmakers may be able to shift billions of dollars to pet projects or get seats at a state dinner. But none has the muscle to keep a child safe in a war zone, half a world away.\n\nSo at 6 a.m. on February 25, when his radio delivered the not-uncommon news that three Marines were killed in Iraq, Sen. Kit Bond felt it in his gut. “Tightness in my stomach,” Bond, R-Missouri, recalled, a jaw muscle flexing at the memory. “An involuntary reaction.” Bond’s only child, Samuel, 24, had left for Iraq just three days earlier to serve as an intelligence officer in the Marines. Samuel was safe that day.\n\nOf course, six out of 535 Members is still a tiny percentage (1.1%). The article actually mentions only five, four Republicans (Wilson, Bond, Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri, and Rep. Duncan Hunter of California), and one Democrat (Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota). \n\nUpdate/correction (1035): A couple of commenters have questioned whether this percentage isn’t actually rather high given the age of the typical Member. A fair point. I can’t find demographic data with which to compare. The 1.1% Members (even 0.9% if the five listed is the complete set) is likely high compared to others in their wealth/education bracket. It would almost certainly be higher, too, if grandchildren were factored in. \n\nPermalink | Comments (4) | Send TrackBack | Trackbacks Off \n\n\nNOTE: My spam filter automatically deletes any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post. Those doing it manually should ensure they have linked the post before sending the TrackBack ping.\nAlthough I am betting the percentage of troops in Iraq verses the general population is any higher than 1.1%. \n\nI think what is more interesting is that the majority of the children in combat are the kids of republicans, and the one kid of the democrat is a democrat from a state where democrats tend to be of the more conservative variety. \n\nPosted by: Just Me at March 14, 2005 10:20 Permalink \n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nJust did the math, and the percentage of troops verses population is .05%, granted you have to factor in that some people in the general population are too young to have kids, but then many members of congress have kids who are too young or too old to be in the military. \n\nPosted by: Just Me at March 14, 2005 10:22 Permalink \n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nConsidering the age of most of our senators, I wonder if that number increases significantly if you include grandchildren!\n\nWe seem to be creating political dynasties where military service is still a plus. \n\nPosted by: Maggie a
895822
I agree with you. It is amazing that congressmen had the same briefings that the president had. They voted to go to war. Now they see the people cannot tolerate the deaths, so they want out and voted out the people who continue to support it. Since there are more deaths in Washington DC, South Chicago, Detroit, and parts of LosAngeles, each of which surpasses horribly the deaths in Iraq. I think we should pull out of all these cities too. \n\nI don't think the war was a wise decision. We should have taken Saddam out. GW is a christian, who hasn't read the bible. In the old testament, The Christians were not allowed to have offensive weapons. They were only allowed to defend themselves. In that case, this was a mistake. That and the fact that the people hate us even more. But since we are there, we should finish the jobs so those who died for the freedom of lthe people will not have died in vain.
783573
Doctor, Lawyer, Priest. get 3 letters. Go for discharge. Bush just drafted 35,000 from the reserve guard. Congress approved the removal of Saddam by force. They have never declared war on Iraq or on "terrorism", they also never approved the occupation of Iraq. Sadly, your choices are not great but I would go for discharge. Go to the Lawyer first.
1045318
We're not at war with Iraq. We are helping the democratically elected Iraq government fight the terrorist insurgents and the foreign terrorist invaders (from Iran and Syria). \n\nI don't want to sound harsh, but do you have the slightest clue as to what is going on at all?
379490
Bush could not have gone to war without congress's approval,at the time in congress they were already counting votes and it seemed like everyone was leaning toward war with Irak,now like jellyfish most congress men and women are giving all kinds of excuses why they chose to go to war,it's a shame that everyone in Washington are playing with our soldiers lives instead of their own.
865346
And it appears as if they found people just like Saddam to run things. I sent this link to my senators and congressmen/women as well as my state house leaders. I asked them if they were aware of this and if so, how we could allow this to stand. Unacceptable.\n\nAnd yes, I think it is past time to commit to this war, no matter if it was right or wrong to start, we are in it now, get it over with. Win it. Given our technology, hardware and numbers, the only thing we are lacking at the moment is balls.
64563
Not in the event of war ,i.e. (War on terrorism).. The liberals are really trying to get this one to stick, but I'm tellin' ya right now.. This dog ain't gonna hunt.. The lefties need to go find another pseudo-crisis to whine about..
141610
Did he start this war ? And don't natter about 9/11.  We know there was no connection concerning Iraq.
866402
Yes it was just. Saddam Hussein illegally invaded another country with the intent of stealing their oil and land.\nThe world united against him for this unjust act he committed.\n\n    This is in no way relevant to todays war.
364704
Do you think the war in Iraq is a mistake?\n\nUm, YES!
602673
All of the above\nplus they can Vote to declare War.
568024
"...this war.." I am assuming you mean the war on terrorism that was declared in 2001. The last war that was declared was in 1991. Let me recall my CNN video clips since 2001, terrorist in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Afghanistan, Philippians, United States and many numerous other countries have been disarmed or dismembered. By finishing the job in 1991 like we should have been allowed to do, these terrorist would still have been in other countries, including our own.