You really need to try the decaf there.
And let's get something straight: I do not "fear" anything except God Almighty, although I do subscribe to Will Rogers famous maxim about "no man or his property is safe when the Congress is in session" (paraphrased).
Now moving right along here, the best defense is a good offense, and the Israelis have had no problem with preemptive strikes, and you can bet your ass that if they knew that Iran or Syria were preparing to lob a nuke in their direction, they would preempt them with their own nukes on Damascus and/or Tehran. That IMHO, is a real possibility, but more likely from Iran, which has truly demonic leadership in charge, compared to Syria, which has truly buffoonish leadership in the form of ASSad (rhymes with Asshat) Jr.
Now if, on the other hand you wish to subscribe to the idea that America must not preemptively strike first (be it conventional OR nuclear), then you will need to face the fact that should that day dawn that America is sucker punched with a nuke on our own soil, that the sage prediction of no less than retired General Tommy Franks will come true: we will have an unlimited state of martial law declared, we will cease to be a true Republic, and the military will be running the Country.
That means that all of your Constitutional contemplations will become moot.
That was Twain. If you didn't fear the necessary consequences of a weasely stupid, cowardly vote in Congress, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Now moving right along here, the best defense is a good offense, and the Israelis have had no problem with preemptive strikes, and you can bet your ass that if they knew that Iran or Syria were preparing to lob a nuke in their direction, they would preempt them with their own nukes on Damascus and/or Tehran. That IMHO, is a real possibility, but more likely from Iran, which has truly demonic leadership in charge, compared to Syria, which has truly buffoonish leadership in the form of ASSad (rhymes with Asshat) Jr.
What you are talking about is tactics and strategy. Allow me to cite Clausewitz: "War is merely the continuation of policy by other means." Politics must come first. Ours is a government of the people. That's the way the Founders wanted it and so do I.
Now if, on the other hand you wish to subscribe to the idea that America must not preemptively strike first (be it conventional OR nuclear), then you will need to face the fact that should that day dawn that America is sucker punched with a nuke on our own soil, that the sage prediction of no less than retired General Tommy Franks will come true: we will have an unlimited state of martial law declared, we will cease to be a true Republic, and the military will be running the Country.
Then you didn't read what I wrote very carefully. I have no objection to your tactical preferences, as long as they are authorized by Congress. Both they and the public could use a dose of hard reality necessary to require passage. Such a choice tends to weed the weenies out of the house of the people.
That means that all of your Constitutional contemplations will become moot.
If you read again what I wrote, rather than what you were predisposed to think it meant, you might note what I said above, "If the American people won't support the Congress in passing a contingency plan then we deserve what we get."