Great idea! now please explain how we could go about doing this!!!

__________________
AMERICA LAND OF THE FREE HOME OF THE BRAVE--BECAUSE OF OUR CONSTITUTION.

Quite simple, you march up, tell each one he is under arrest, cuff him, and drag him off to durance vile.

__________________
If you want change stop electing "liberal: democrats and "radical" Republicans. Find and support true Conservatives; those who believe in fiscal responsibilities, individual accountability, and a smaller government, with less control of your daily life.

Gotta love libs--as this is always their response. What they dont say--it wasnt the bj that caused the uproar--it was the fact Billy BJ couldnt admit to it--and instead chose to LIE TO THE ENTIRE COUNTRY--UNDER OATH--AND COMMITED PERJURY.

On top of that--BJ BILL DISGRACED the office of the presidency--jeapordized the security of our nation--and made the oval office look more like a bathroom in a liberal truckstop.

WHAT A GREAT ROLE MODEL FOR OUR CHILDREN.

WHAT A GREAT ROLE MODEL BILL'S WIFE IS--HAVING BEEN CHEATED ON TIME AFTER TIME--SHE SHOWS WHAT A COMPLETE IDIOT SHE IS.


Look at this Darfur WAR MONGER here--THERE IS NO PLEASING LIBERALS!
An illegal war APPROVED BY DEMOCRATS! An illegal war--that DEMOCRATS STILL REFUSE TO STOP FUNDING--all these Democrats that ran their campaigns on the promises of withdrawl--show exactly what democrats do best--LIE!!!!!!!

So, by your definition, are 1/2 the Dems in Congress............Well the ones that voted FOR it before they voted AGAINST it.

__________________
I love to relax by shooting cans.........AfriCANS, MexiCANS, Puerto RiCANS.................

ROFFLMAO!!! Couldn't admit to it..you guys are scraping the bottom of the barrel now...there were NO charges of ANY criminality involving the independent investigation...even Starr was off the case when they grabbed straws and went for the perjury on the blow job...

Democrats NEVER approved the war in Iraq...there IS no war in Iraq..only CONGRESS can declare a war...you idiot..now show me the link to the democrat approval of you will be looked up on as an A #1 frigging idiot..

Republicans control the Senate..so the democrats do not have enough votes to override a veto..when Bush overrode the Iraqi withdrawal plans, the republicans refused to override it...what do republicans do best? Make the rich military complex richer while STILL denying veterans and working Americans healthcare...

You sure are ignorant on the issues in this nation...show me your links to the Iraq invasion APPROVAL...and best be the link with the wording from Congress...

Or forever be seen as a ranting/raving looney right winger...Dom1

__________________
http://americanpoliticsandmore.com/forum/index.php


When you want to know the truth, search all articles available on your topic. The truth lies somewhere between it all.

Now THATS what I call democracy

__________________

Well I guess that depends on what your definition of "is", is.

I also guess that depends on what your definition of oval liberal truck stop office, is.

Oh is that how it works--thanks for the news flash Tom Brokaw. I guess you will just have to ignore the following

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/

Yes the Senate indeed voted 77-23 to authorize force against Iraq

and yes--the democrat vote was 29 DEMOCRAT WAR MONGERS--21 DEMOCRAT HIPPIES--so yes the DEMOCRATS APPROVED!!

LOL--yes indeed--Senate MAJORITY leader Harry Smear Reid is a myth

Next you will tell me that Nancy Hug-it-out Pelosi is the speaker for the Republican controlled House.

Well that link is from the liberal utopia of CNN--and like all libs--Im sure you fail to realize Sadam had his chances to cooperate--he declined--he paid the price--delivered by the coalition of the willing. IF YOUR ALTAR BOY SADAM WOULD HAVE COOPERATED THE IRAQ WAR WOULDNT HAVE HAPPENED.

Now hopefully your other comrade Amadenajad will cooperate.

Look my bleeding heart lib--your arguments are weak--as with all liberals. And it should not suprise you that anyone with common sense (conservatives) can destroy your views and ideology with ease. And if that means every conservative on AWE is me (right wing conspiracy)--then so be it. Who else can deliver liberal medication better than me--myself--and I.

Ya no shit...
From your link.
The resolution requires Bush to declare to Congress either before or within 48 hours after beginning military action that diplomatic efforts to enforce the U.N. resolutions have failed.

Resolution 1441
Iraq War: Prelude to War (The International Debate Over the Use and Effectiveness of Weapons Inspections) - █ further reading:


Mohamed El Baradei, the IAEA chief inspector for atomic weapons, reported that Iraq had apparently been unable to successfully reconstitute its nuclear weapons program. Although there was disputed evidence that Iraq continued to try to obtain elements of nuclear weapons, it became apparent to inspectors that the destruction or dismantling of Iraq's nuclear program in the early 1990s had prevented Iraq from successfully developing nuclear weapons. Prior to the first Gulf War and the subsequent dismantling of equipment by UN forces, Western intelligence analysts estimated that without intervention, Iraq had been within two years of developing operational nuclear weapons. Based upon El Baradei's report, attention quickly focused on Iraq's chemical and biological weapons program.

Iraq rejected all of the inspectors' negative comments and the Iraqi ambassador, Mohammed A. Aldouri, insisted that Iraq had "fully complied with all its obligations" with regard to UN resolution 1441, which required disclosure of weapons and disarmament by Iraq.

Repeating a stand carefully articulated prior to the passage of UN 1441, President Bush reiterated U.S. resolve to disarm Iraq by force if necessary—even without support by other United Nations Security Council members with veto power (France, Russia, China). The other country with veto power, the United Kingdom, sided with the United States. At peril to their political futures, U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair and Home Secretary Jack Straw (their own Labour party remained deeply divided over the use of force to disarm Iraq) carefully articulated both the strategic need to prevent Iraq from becoming a conduit through which terrorists could obtain weapons of mass destruction, and also of the humanitarian need to liberate the Iraqi people from the despotic rule of Saddam Hussein. Veto-bearing Security Council members (i.e., France, Russia and China)—joined by members Germany and Syria—contended that the inspections process was yielding results and that additional time should be allowed for Iraq's disarmament.

Here's the Clincher....
Events moved to a diplomatic breaking point in early March. France, Germany, Russia, and China staunchly opposed military enforcement of UN resolution 1441 and threatened veto of any resolution that might—even indirectly—authorize the United States and United Kingdom to lead forces to disarm Iraq. The United States, United Kingdom, and Spain put forth a resolution that simply declared Iraq in material breech of 17 prior UN resolutions. President Bush openly declared that he would force countries to "show their cards" with regard to Iraq. In a press conference on March 6, President Bush asserted that Saddam Hussein posed a direct and immediate danger to the security of the United States and, with regard to the United Nations and pending debate and resolutions, asserted that "diplomacy has failed" and that "we really don't need anybody's permission" to defend the United States.

with the UN Security Council deadlocked, the probable votes of the nonpermanent members hotly disputed, and the deadline at hand, the U.S., U.K. and Spain allowed their new proposal to die without a vote. Although he had once promised to call for a vote, President Bush stated that France "had shown their cards" and administration officials declared the "diplomatic window closed." Although France, Russia, and China declared that any U.S.-and U.K.-led coalition action against Iraq would be illegitimate and in violation of the UN charter, U.S. and U.K. officials rested on existing UN resolutions (one reason some experts claimed that another vote was not sought), Iraq's violation of the treaty that ended the Persian Gulf War, and assertions of the right of self defense to legitimize military action.

The administration declared it closed. NOT the UN.

The Congress authorized war on the CONDITION that diplomatic efforts to enforce the U.N. resolutions have failed. THE UN DID NOT DECLARE THIS.

The Bush administration did. They went around the UN when it suited them & used the UN when it suited them.

What is, is, is quite interesting, isn't it.

Linking September 11, 2001, with invasion of Iraq

The bill was originally drafted by President George W. Bush's office, then sent to the Congress for review. It was signed by the President, with few changes, on October 16, 2002. Section 3, Subsection b, Item 2 of the bill required the President to "make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that... acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."

On March 21, 2003, Bush sent a letter to Congress fulfilling the bill's requirements and assuring the Congress that "use of armed force" was necessary to "protect the national security of the United States" and was "consistent with" acting against those responsible for the 9/11 attacks. It said that Bush had "reluctantly concluded" that "only the use of armed force will accomplish these objectives and restore international peace and security in the area [of Iraq]." Neither the 2002 Authorization nor Bush's 2003 letter mentions full-scale invasion and occupation of Iraq. The occupation's legality relies heavily on the leeway provided by the clause authorizing the President "to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" to "defend" U.S. national security and unilaterally "enforce" UN resolutions on Iraq.

On September 18, 2003, six months after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, President Bush "explicitly stated for the first time" that there was "no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved" in the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Senator Byrd said from your article Dumb-matha' f'kr
"This is the Tonkin Gulf resolution all over again," Byrd said. "Let us stop, look and listen. Let us not give this president or any president unchecked power. Remember the Constitution."

Turns out he was right.

Details, details. Something you are not too good at grasping.

So in essence It's OK to use the UN when it suits them & ignore the UN when it suits them. The problem is the Congressional authorization was dependent on the UN unequivocally failing at Diplomatic resolutions, the Administration decided on their own in defiance of the law passed by congress to preemptively attack Iraq, the UN had not proven they failed diplomatically, not only that but the U.S. Bush administration just decided to do it without the UNs approval.

They broke the Law.

There is no is about it Dumbmotha' F'kr.

__________________
The crows seemed to be calling his name, thought Caw.
- Jack Handy

again and again and again.... this Subject is SO Old.........

Some people just can't move ahead......

__________________
"You are Republican, you would not understand what it is to support the platform of the Democratic party" = Cats Meow..
http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/

Neo-Nazi Fools.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...ican_neo-Nazis

If it ain't broke, Don't Fix It!

Ya when you've been here as long as I have, though not as long as some others. Pretty much every subject is a

Why do you think I spend more than half my time jokin' around?

__________________
The crows seemed to be calling his name, thought Caw.
- Jack Handy