Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CWOJackson
LOL! Surrender by any other name is still surrender. You can parse it any way you want, nothing changes.

If Ron Paul's argument is that we cannot legitimately deploy troops the way we have without a declared war, and if he (per #192) has indeed sought to have a clear and unambiguous declaration of war, how would you describe his actions if he sought to bring our troops into compliance with the Constitution?

To be sure, if that were his intention I would think a better way to describe it would be to say he'd threaten to pull the troops home unless a proper declaration of war were passed. Though depending upon the state of Congress at the time, such a declaration might not again be possible.

200 posted on 01/11/2007 10:27:14 PM PST by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies ]


To: supercat
In his infinite wisdom and knowledge of the Constitution, I'd really love to know how Representative Paul would word a declaration of war against an ideology.

It seems to me that the whole nature and concept of our enemy is beyond his ability to grasp.

201 posted on 01/11/2007 10:34:00 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson