Replies

I could care less what he called for.

That is obvious. It's all about a dangerous party loyality to Bush right or wrong isn't it? He DARED say no to a Bush. OH My GOODNESS I feel faint!

Let me set you straight on something here and now. Going to war is the most serious and somber act our government can do. It very well deserves more than some Donkey lawyers in congress writing enforcing U.N. mandates type Congressional Resolutions and sending our troops to enforce such. That was not Constitutional they did not have thet power. The congress and troops take an oath to our nationa nd our Constituion not the U.N.

OUR TROOP DESERVED NO LESS THAN A FORMAL DECLARATION OR WAR BINDING CONGRESS AND POTUS TO IT'S RESOUTION AND COMMITS THEM TO SEE IT TO THE FINISH.

OUR TROOP DESERVED NO LESS THAN A FORMAL DECLARATION OR WAR BINDING CONGRESS AND POTUS TO IT'S RESOUTION AND COMMITS THEM TO SEE IT TO THE FINISH.

What is more, as I mentioned in #26, if Congress had determined that the situation in Iraq genuinely merited a Constitutional Declaration of War, a formal Declaration of War would also have entitled our kidnapped troops to formal Prisoner of War status.

As a result of Congress' abdication of its responsibility to Constitutionally Declare War in Iraq, our Troops who are kidnapped by the Enemy there are denied "Prisoner of War" status.

Sadly, another member of the American Military is now ambiguously classified as "Missing-Captured" when his true status is Prisoner of War. Why is the United States Government so unwilling to refer to these servicemen as Prisoner of War? From our observation, the answer is simple. The ambiguous designation "Missing-Captured" allows a public with a notoriously short attention span to forget that these men were taken alive and held by the enemy. The "Missing-Captured" designation is a question mark in the minds of a generally unaware public. There is no question mark attached to the designation Prisoner of War. It is a clear description of status.... Unfortunately, the United States Government has never had any difficulty leaving any man behind. The elimination of the POW designation makes it that much easier. The perception foisted on an unsuspecting public that there are no POWs in Iraq is simply wrong. -- POW/MIA InterNetwork, January 27, 2007 (http://www.aiipowmia.com/inter27/in270107bitsnaf.html)

Ron Paul is the ONLY Republican Candidate standing up for our missing Prisoners of War!
"Ron Paul is one of only two co-sponsors of H. Res. 123, for the establishment of a Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs to 'conduct a full investigation of all unresolved matters relating to any United States personnel unaccounted for from the Vietnam era, the Korean conflict, World War II, Cold War Missions, or Gulf War, including MIA's and POW's.' (POW-MIA InterNetwork)"

Bring 'em home alive, Ron!

POW*MIA -- You Are Not Forgotten

That is where people like you get it wrong. He said no to Petraeus, the general that wanted the extra troops to assist our soldiers there. He said our troops do not need the reinforcements to win. I can't wait for the next vote to cut off funding for the war, Ron Paul will be right there to support it and eternally seal his defeat of ever seeking higher office.