Brownback: Iraq Was a "Declared War"

[Suzu]

Someone tell me he didn't really say that!

[andrewgreve]

No, he said it.

[erowe1]

I've often wondered about that. How does somebody prove Paul's argument that the Iraq war was not declared? In the constitution the authority to authorize war is placed in the hands of the congress, and the exercise of this authority is called a "declaration of war". We had a congressional authorization for the Iraq war. So how is that not a declaration of war?

[mavtek]

Bwha HA HA HA HA Brokeback!

[Korey Kaczynski]

I've often wondered about that. How does somebody prove Paul's argument that the Iraq war was not declared? In the constitution the authority to authorize war is placed in the hands of the congress, and the exercise of this authority is called a "declaration of war". We had a congressional authorization for the Iraq war. So how is that not a declaration of war?

Congress gave bush the "right" to enforce UN resolutions. Underhanded tactics.

[Cindy]

The underhanded tactic was Brownnose saying congress did declare war on Iraq right after Paul said, they did not.

Brownback lost the debate to me overall.

[Matt]

I've often wondered about that. How does somebody prove Paul's argument that the Iraq war was not declared? In the constitution the authority to authorize war is placed in the hands of the congress, and the exercise of this authority is called a "declaration of war". We had a congressional authorization for the Iraq war. So how is that not a declaration of war?

Because Ron Paul introduced a resolution to declare war on Iraq and nobody voted for it (including him). I believe the entire text of the bill was.

"A state of war exists between the United States and Iraq"

Since nobody voted for it they can't say it was a declared war.

[Richandler]

Congress could not legally declare war according to international treaties. Iraq did not attack us and the world doesn't not believe in pre-emptive war. Therefor we are not at war nor have we ever been at war. Merely this is one giant and screwed up skirmish.

[mavtek]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States

[Suzu]

The underhanded tactic was Brownnose saying congress did declare war on Iraq right after Paul said, they did not.

Brownback lost the debate to me overall.

No question about it, he was the "biggest loser". Followed by Keyes and Hunter.

Is there a winner poll somewhere?

[CodeMonkey]

I've often wondered about that. How does somebody prove Paul's argument that the Iraq war was not declared? In the constitution the authority to authorize war is placed in the hands of the congress, and the exercise of this authority is called a "declaration of war". We had a congressional authorization for the Iraq war. So how is that not a declaration of war?

Congress has the power to declare war, not to pass that authority to the executive branch. Their authorization said that the President could attack Iraq or not at his own discretion. Congress itself must decide whether or not we will go to war, and then the President is responsible for executing it. Congress should determine our policies and the President should carry them out. What we have now in the Iraq war and other areas is the President setting the policies and carrying them out, while Congress does their best to cover their asses and get re-elected.

[RJB]

He's a CFR weasel.

[jumpyg1258]

When he said that the guy next to me yelled "LIAR!". I will have to download the debate to see if you can hear it in the audio.

[dircha]

I've often wondered about that. How does somebody prove Paul's argument that the Iraq war was not declared? In the constitution the authority to authorize war is placed in the hands of the congress, and the exercise of this authority is called a "declaration of war". We had a congressional authorization for the Iraq war. So how is that not a declaration of war?

Gonzales himself said to the Senate Judiciary Committee that there was no declaration of war:

"There was not a war declaration, either in connection with Al Qaida or in Iraq. It was an authorization to use military force. I only want to clarify that, because there are implications. Obviously, when you talk about a war declaration, you're possibly talking about affecting treaties, diplomatic relations. And so there is a distinction in law and in practice. And we're not talking about a war declaration. This is an authorization only to use military force."

[Question_Authority]

But....but....what about the MUSEUM! He's developing an African American museum! I could not believe he used that in 2 answers, one of the questions was about unemployment...and he mentioned the damn museum! So funny.

And was he the one who said the government should officially apologize for slavery? I have no strong opinion on that one way or another, but he just lost about half of his base on that one. Which probably amounts to about 11 voters at this point.

Time for Brownback to pack it in.

[The Good Doctor]

Yeah, I was like WTF?


Someone tell me he didn't really say that!

[max]

i hate when RP talks about "declaring wars"...It's totally irrelevant....

This war is unjust, immoral, ans a tragic waste...

Whether it's declared or not is secondary...would it be any less unjust if it was declared?

He should just stick to the fact that the war was uneccessary and we were lied into it and it is killing our troops with no end in sight

[V-rod]

If the war is declared, the people who voted on it would be held accountable. That is why the Congress passed off the responsibility to the President. You could make the argument that World War I was immoral but the Americans still were behind it united because their representatives voted to enter.

[hard@work]

i hate when RP talks about "declaring wars"...It's totally irrelevant....

This war is unjust, immoral, ans a tragic waste...

Whether it's declared or not is secondary...would it be any less unjust if it was declared?

He should just stick to the fact that the war was uneccessary and we were lied into it and it is killing our troops with no end in sight

It's not irrelevant. War is a tragedy no matter the cause. This is understood by all great warriors in our history. The point behind a declaration is that we enter a true state of war. There is a meaning behind this that goes beyond the existing weak concepts of war we have in the U.S.

If a declaration of war is made we go in to fight. When Dr. Paul says we go in to fight it and win it, he means we go all in. Every resource we have available is pooled, every man we can spare is sent, and every attempt to ask for volunteers and war donations is made. A declaration of war means our country mobilizes, not our equipment from the military industrial complex. Not our small army that's available from the network of imperial bases. We go all in, all of us. You, me, everyone we can spare and we do it willingly.

And we win. We destroy the enemy no matter the cost no matter the method, we cannot stop until we win it or surrender ourselves to the enemy. This is what he means and this is what was lost when they found a way to go to war without the consent of the people through their representatives. And this is what the chickenhawks pretend is not true in order to maintain their feelings of superiority over those who truly understand patriotism and what it means to be willing to sacrfice your life for your country. A declaration of war means that there must be a treaty. That we must fight a war to the end. Be that a victory, a surrender, or a truce. It means there is a government threatening us and a standing army for us to oppose. But even if it is an evil war, an unjust war, a war for domination and power we must declare it. Even if the people fall so far from grace as to desire the imaginary strengths of empire, to not declare a war is to be nothing more than a rogue state.

The chickenhawks who know this run the Republican party right now. And they have bred a legion of chickenhawks under them to keep sreading the message of war without end. We cannot allow chickenhawks to rule our nation's war ever again.

[fj45lvr]

The president is to control the direction but the Congress (representatives of the people) should decide if we are to go or not to go to war....that intuitively makes alot of sense....can you imagine that the founders would have ever thought that the country should go to war when the people did not support the war???

The representatives should have taken it upon themselves the responsibility and as accountable to represent those people that elect them. (who elects them anyhow??)

[mrchubbs]

When he said that the guy next to me yelled "LIAR!". I will have to download the debate to see if you can hear it in the audio.

Yes there were lots of people muttering things when Brownback uttered those words. MUCH disagreement in the audience. Many people sitting around me were heard saying things like "what?, we didn't." etc..

[Cowlesy]

Does anyone else notice Brownback starts each question by going, "First let me thank you for the question. It's a good and/or important question." Every single time. Then he gets that stupid 'tard grin on his face, squints his eyes, and determines "If we had strong families, nothing would be wrong in the world."

I can just picture the question: "Senator Brownback, the average rate of speed a loaf of bread goes stale in the United States is up 16% over the past 5 years. If you were President, what would you do to combat this trend?"

His answer: "First off Brit, let me thank you for the question..I think it's a very important question. See, if we focused on families, the strong bonds in families, we could eat that loaf of bread faster. We'd care about the loaf. Families are caring units, and I don't think it's the bread gets stale faster, it's that we don't sit around the dinner table long enough. Families-families-families. Thank you."

[Electrostatic]

i hate when RP talks about "declaring wars"...It's totally irrelevant....

This war is unjust, immoral, ans a tragic waste...

Whether it's declared or not is secondary...would it be any less unjust if it was declared?

He should just stick to the fact that the war was uneccessary and we were lied into it and it is killing our troops with no end in sight

It IS NOT irrelevant... Please read the post above where Gonzalez was quoted emphatically denying that this was a declared war... He did that for a reason. Not only does it affect our treaty relations, but it also affects the PAY and BENIFITS of our armed forces. (Mainly reservists, who are not fully entitled to equal compansation unless we are in a declared war of national emergency)

"The United States Supreme Court has ruled "in time of war" to mean a congressionally declared war, and not contingency operations such as Southwest Asia or Somalia..."
http://www.amc.army.mil/amc/pe/html/civdeploy.html

That means any laws on the books concerning "war time" activities are not in effect.

"A Reserve member who is called to active duty for more than 30 days in time of war or national emergency is entitled, while on that active duty, to the pay and allowances prescribed for active duty."
http://www.defenselink.mil/comptroller/fmr/07a/07a_01.pdf , Page 19, Section D, Paragraph 1.

Also, in an "undeclared" war CENTCOM has no power to command or discipline "contractors" on the battlefied. (Blackwater, Aegis, ect...) They are also fully immune to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
http://www.usafa.af.mil/jscope/JSCOPE00/Campbell00.html

[LizF]

Does anyone else notice Brownback starts each question by going, "First let me thank you for the question. It's a good and/or important question." Every single time. Then he gets that stupid 'tard grin on his face, squints his eyes, and determines "If we had strong families, nothing would be wrong in the world."

I can just picture the question: "Senator Brownback, the average rate of speed a loaf of bread goes stale in the United States is up 16% over the past 5 years. If you were President, what would you do to combat this trend?"

His answer: "First off Brit, let me thank you for the question..I think it's a very important question. See, if we focused on families, the strong bonds in families, we could eat that loaf of bread faster. We'd care about the loaf. Families are caring units, and I don't think it's the bread gets stale faster, it's that we don't sit around the dinner table long enough. Families-families-families. Thank you."

Lol...indeed. :p

I was watching the debate tonight with my mom, and whenever it was Brownback's turn, we were both like, "Oh please, not this empty rhetoric again"

[Cowlesy]

Lol...indeed. :p

I was watching the debate tonight with my mom, and whenever it was Brownback's turn, we were both like, "Oh please, not this empty rhetoric again"

Sam would say "I'm glad you watched it with your family."

[Johnnybags]

Sam would say "I'm glad you watched it with your family."

I sincerely doubt there would be any shortage in military personnel. I think its the fear on numbnuts Bush sending you off to all interventions in the world that keep people from joining. Defend the USA, not the world. We have a rental army now for gloabal elitists. Screw that.

[belian78]

anyone notice that everyone (emphasis on Huck and Brownback) used Ron's exact words all night long? What really pissed me off is in Huck's first question about why he came and why he accepted the invitation he said "because i'm running for president of the US not President of the Republican party".

that made me jump straight off the couch. that's Ron's line from one of the first debates!!! I swear, Avaroth needs to make a vid showing how all the other 'candidates' are now trying to mimick Ron, and how Ron's been saying these things for years. I'm so sick of them trying to rip everything off and call it their own.