I think he'd be pro-war, provided it was actually a declared WAR and not arbitrary action on the part of the executive branch.
Expecting that wars should be declared before they are fought is hardly an un-American position.
Um, no he wouldnt be for involvement in Iraq, and if it was a matter of the formalisms, he's just pretending cluelessness.
Teh ytook a vote that gave Congressional authorization. Was he the only one who didnt notice that?
He knows, or should know, what is at stake with his votes.
He's opposed 'regime change' against Iraq from the get-go.
In 2002, Ron Paul said in no uncertain terms that he was against going to war in Iraq. He also gave a speech two weeks after 9/11 which blamed US foreign policy for terrorism.
Voting to cut off funds to troops in combat is most certainly an antiAmerican position as it was in the days of McGovern, George and Cooper, John Sherman and Church, Frank and Fonda, Jane.