buddha,
Will we see anything other than copy/paste jobs?
It's tough to have a conversation with someone not present. EDIT: Meaning, I can't debate this with the purported author because the piece is static.
For example, over 2/3rds of COngress voted to authorize force if Saddam failed to comply. While the legislation did not contain "Declaration of War," the
language was in no way vague:
(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.
In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon there after as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, and
(2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
(c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS. --
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION. -- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS. -- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS
(a) The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 2 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of Public Law 105-338 (the Iraq Liberation Act of 199
.
(b) To the extent that the submission of any report described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting requirements of Public Law 93-148 (the War Powers Resolution), all such reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the Congress.
(c) To the extent that the information required by section 3 of Public Law 102-1 is included in the report required by this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the requirements of section 3 of Public Law 102-1.
Regarding the specific terminology, "Declaration of War," you'll notice the US COnstitution does not require specific language. The President must be authorized by Congress and was by a super majority.
Next, we are clearly fighting both the hangers-on from the Baathists regime and terrorist elements that were in Iraq prior to the war and have come to Iraq after the war. Among the notables in IRaq prior to the war include Abu Abbas, Abu Nidal and the Jordanian born Palestinian (and top al Qaeda operative),Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Now, regarding the popular support for the Baathists and terrorists, it would be worth noting the localized nature of the turmoil and the relative peace in 95% of the nation. If they enjoyed widepsread support, I'd suspect more widespread violence. If, for example, the majority or a sizeable minority fully supported the groups, the US would have flareups nationwide. It's not the case. Mostly, it's localized in the "Sunni Triangle."
I think the gentleman writing this is also guilty of prejudicial thinking and an inability to put himself in the place of the average Iraqi. While I have little doubt the Iraqis want the US in there, I also think they want the areas secure and for Iraqi forces to be ready before we leave. So, it's a matter of national pride mixed with common sense. I wouldn't think anyone would like their nation patrolled by foreign forces. However, the alternative is more unappealing. The good news is the government is increasing control over vital elements and the security forces grow each day, in the face of bombings at police precincts and recruitment centers. Interesting, isn't it? The Iraqis are defiant in the face of the terrorism striking their nation and continue to line up to get the police, military, security positions.
This person has no way of verifying the numbers of the insurgants or their recruitment. It seems entirely based on specualtion.
While the LOC are shorter, he fails to note the difference in sophistication, speed, and availablity of the US supply lines. If he seriously contends (what he presumes to be) a homegrown insurgancy to have a more effective LOC than a super power with air supremacy and billions at its disposal, I think we cna chalk this up to more ideologically driven speculation.
On his fifth point, he makes a contradictory statement. How can our tactics be so falwed if, in fact, the "body count" he derides is so high on the insurgancy? In other words, they are being killed en masse. I also reject the notion that we are in a "body count" war, especially since the vocal opposition in our nation makes every attempt to remind people of our fatalities and wounded. Yet, I do not hear the Pentagon releasing total sums of enemies killed. Regardless, with 95% of the nation pacified, al Sadr run out of town after town, and the violence localized, I think the strategy is sound and the tactics are good. Now, I may have issues with the execuation, in the sense that the US doesn't want to level Fallujah once and for all. Not "level" in the common sense, but a continued and heavy assault to dig out and kill the Baathists and terrorists in that town.