Read post 93. There are SOME of the differences. Not to mention that, had congress actually said that a state of war exists between the United States and Iraq, we would not now have the funding issues, the “timelines” issues, nor any of the other barbra streisand we have now, as a declaration that we are AT WAR, a FORMAL declaration, COMMITS the congress and the country to WIN it. In the shortest amount of time. Which means doing whatever it takes to crush the enemy and rob him of his will to resist. THAT’S the difference and if you can’t or don’t care to see that, YOU got the problem. Not to further mention that we had no plan in place when we invaded Iraq TO win. A PLAN means having quantifiable goals, knowing when they are achieved, and then LEAVING. No open-ended stays. No endless state of nation-building. As we did in WWI, you beat the enemy until he surrenders unconditionally, then you go home. Oh, and you don’t let your “allies” continue to grind his face in the dirt, as the french and brits did to Germany, or you create OTHER problems for later on.
I’m not sure how a declaration of war ensures what you say it ensures. If you have any evidence of what you write I would love to see it.
As for WWI...yes we came home, not long after that we had to go back in. And we have maintained bases in Europe ever since! Your analogy is horribly flawed.