[angkor]

He doesn’t understand that the ‘rule of law’ is intended for a country’s citizens to maintain order _within_ the country, not to conflate with or abridge wartime actions from foreign enemies.

Unfortunately it's the case that GWB did not set the entire 9/11 response on solid ground because he DID NOT demand a formal Declaration Of War from Congress from the very outset, and I have been baffled about that since Sept. 2001.

Had that been done we would NOT have these kinds of judicial and legal problems today.

And we would NOT have Zer0 taking advantage of the resulting ambiguity to return to the old Clinton program of "terrorism is a criminal act" and this new "preemptive incarceration", potentially of U.S. civilians.

The opportunity to conflate criminal law and military law has been - very unfortunately - provided by this very crucial decision at the outset, eight long years ago.

[muawiyah]

He has a declaration of war.

You guys keep bringing up this "formal declaration" yet nowhere in the Constitution is such a thing required.

"W" went out with a Congressional authoriation to do all the nastiness he needed to do.

[Kent C]

Unfortunately it's the case that GWB did not set the entire 9/11 response on solid ground because he DID NOT demand a formal Declaration Of War from Congress from the very outset, and I have been baffled about that since Sept. 2001. Had that been done we would NOT have these kinds of judicial and legal problems today.

While I may agree that a formal Declaration of War would have been better, (although many wars have been fought without it), it is _delusional_ to think that the Democrats who have neither no interest in what the Constitution actually says nor worse, would not and have not uphold the principles embodied by it, would by the mere Declaration of War, change their approach to making Bush/Cheney responsible for every ill or perceived ill that exists today.