We didn't pick this battle. Al-Qaeda picked it for us on September 11, 2001. Ron Paul acknowledged as much when he declared in his Marque and Reprisal act of 2001, Section 2, Finding (6): "That under Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, Congress has the power to grant letters of marque and reprisal to punish, deter, and prevent the piratical aggressions and depredations and other acts of war of the al Qaeda conspirators."
As you Paulettes are so quick to point out, Congress not only has the power to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, it also has the power to declare war. But there is no set, specific terminology set forth in the Constitution that qualifies as a declaration of war. That terminology is left to Congress. And most of us on this forum accept Congress's actions in 2001, authorizing President Bush to confront Al-Qaeda, as a declaration of war. You do not. That's fine. We can agree to disagree.
But since representative Paul has acknowledged that Al-Qaeda has already declared war on the United States, why does he feel the US has no right to defend itself WHEREVER, when we've been notified we're at war by a sworn enemy?