Going to the UN is *literally* what the Memorandum called for!
We didn’t even declare war against Vietnam nor Afghanistan. The last time we declared war was when it was an existential threat, ww2. Why is it that you are pushing things back to such a time? Oh, it is because of your a priori approach towards this whole thing.
Good to know that the constitutional provisions regarding how America's military might must be levied mean so little to you.
And you passed up the chance to moderate this particular dispute, showing where your intentions lie.
Asking for others to 'moderate a debate' is a common troll tactic, so what would be the point? No one's obliged to moderate a 'debate' when one side is manifestly refusing to ignore the plain documentary evidence, notwithstanding your trollish and unserious demands for one.
It obliges “respect” for Uke borders and sovereignty. That’s in the treaty. You have no comment on that. INVADING the other country is a straightforward violation of that treaty.
So when we sends weapons, materiel, people, information, et al to fight the invader all the way up to the original borders mentioned in the treaty, is that showing “respect” for those borders and sovereignty? Was the original INVASION showing respect for such things?
By just blithely skipping over this salient point, you have fallen into the troll well.
Kevmo: We didn’t even declare war against Vietnam nor Afghanistan. The last time we declared war was when it was an existential threat, ww2. Why is it that you are pushing things back to such a time? Oh, it is because of your a priori approach towards this whole thing.
US7: Good to know that the constitutional provisions regarding how America’s military might must be levied mean so little to you.
***There are congressional authorizations for sending force throughout our history without declarations of war, just like Vietnam, Afghanistan, Grenada, Gulfwars1&2, etc. It’s even signed off that there can be unauthorized force applications for a full 2 months before congress even has to be asked.
Kevmo:And you passed up the chance to moderate this particular dispute, showing where your intentions lie.
US7: Asking for others to ‘moderate a debate’ is a common troll tactic, so what would be the point?
***I’m not aware that such a thing is a common troll tactic. Since it is so common, you could easily provide 3 recent examples and since I haven’t heard of them I figure I could moderate such debates. Go ahead, find those 3. Should prove interesting, except for the obvious foreseeable event that you won’t be finding them.
No one’s obliged to moderate a ‘debate’
***There you go again with that “obliged” stuff. I ASKED you to consider it. I didn’t OBLIGE you. Try to stop doing that strawman argumentation stuff, it doesn’t look good on you. Lose that intellectual weight.
when one side is manifestly
***You came in at the end. Nothing “manifestly” about it other than you upholding a priori reasoning as sound, and obviously falling into the troll well. You never went to the front side of the argument.
refusing to ignore the plain documentary evidence,
***When you get hit by a train, it’s not the caboose that kills you.
notwithstanding your trollish and unserious demands for one.
***Demands? It was a fricken REQUEST. You’re all twisted around like a pretzel. Ask yourself when was the last time there was a 40-nation coalition to kick a regional bully out of a country he had invaded over oil resources? Yup, it was when we kicked Saddam out of Kuwait.