You were making claims about Clinton’s war record and I pointed out he had no war (in the legal sense).

In this case I used the generic to describe the action not the legal definition.

Also, we do not need UN approval to go to war.

members of Congress were calling for military action when Clinton was president. They gave Bush the authority and spoke of the danger Hussein presented. These were not based upon what Bush said or his “lies” because many of them said the same things when Clinton was president.

Now you call it a “war” and I am being “stupid” when I remind you of your claim?

D.

DAR
Of course. For emergencies. I checked this before I posted. Iraq was a war of choice, and not in any sense an emergency. My point being, Bush’s use of the Guard was a huge change from the days when he used it to hide from going to war.

Bigd: ANY member of Congress who did not know this should resign… it would make them MORONS.>>

DAR
Well it’s easy to say in hindsight that they were morons for trusting Bush, now that we know how much of a warmonger he is.

My friend Barbara once explained this:

***
“There is a difference between a declaration of war and granting of powers that could ultimately lead to war. In 1941 Congress, at the request of FDR, declared war on Japan. What Bush II got was not the same at all. The war powers requires first going through all channels short of war, including UN, NATO, and other treaty allies. Bush I went through the UN, put together a coalition, and had the obvious act of aggression from Saddam (invading Kuwait) – with the added benefit that 90% of that war was paid out of international funds. Bush II lied to the UN, ignored our treaty allies, and refused to accept any evidence against his pet project. If he’d asked for a declaration of war, he wouldn’t have gotten it. He pulled a sneaky end run by calling war powers the same as a declaration of war. He was not given authority to go to war. He was given the authority to go to all ends short of war, and prepare for war if war was indeed necessary.” –Barbara F.

Combat units were deployed in the 1960s. Advisers were sent in the 50s and they did not fight. We took sides? Are you serious? Of course we took sides against Communists. What moron would not?

DAR
There’s a bit more to that story. As my friend Doug once put it:

“This was another civil war that we entered…. Eisenhower had put almost a thousand U.S. military advisors there years earlier, and we’d been funding the South Vietnamese for years before Johnson. Shall we say Eisenhower “started” it by sending money, advisors, and taking sides?”

D.

You are pointing to semantics to make your point, quite pathetic.

Stop being stupid and quit playing games.