I am fully aware that Bill Clinton loathed the military, and the Constitution for that matter. But are we no better than him? I personally believe that the U.S. Congress would vote, in the majority, for a Declaration of War. Do the posters on this thread not agree? I know that this scenario presents a slight paradox for us, between doing what we want to do (ie, make Iraq a parking lot tomorrow) and what we are Constitutionally binded to do (ie, pass a Declaration of War through the Congress and then make Iraq a parking lot in two days or so).
He is right in saying a declaration of war by the Congress is the proper and Constitutional way to go. Congress has shirked it's responsibility in that area for some time now (back to Korea?).
I don't agree with him as far as the question of the war itself. I believe Saddam must be dealt with now before it's too late.
What has bothered me about a lot of conservatives/republicans is their cafeteria approach to the Constitution. In that regard too many are just like liberals. They just pick and choose different parts of the Constitution they like.
At least Ron Paul is one of the few in Congress who seems to support the Constitution in total, not just when convenient.
He did, they debated it, they passed it.
The courts have ruled that an authorization for war is a declaration of war. The Constitution does not give majic words to use. They can word it how they want.
The court used a precident from 1800, hardly just made up.