I believe that the War in Iraq was a terrible idea from the beginning, and it was doomed to failure before it was even begun, because of these three reasons: 1) We were morally wrong to start a war against a country that had not attacked us or our allies; 2) The justifications for the War were lies, either deliberate lies or untruths based on incompetence; 3) There was never any chance that a Muslim population would accept "liberation" from a non-Muslim army of invaders, particularly from the USA, which is the strongest supporter of their hated enemy Israel in the world.
In view of these three facts, the War in Iraq was doomed from the start: it never could have succeeded, no matter how well it was planned or administered. And it never can succeed now, no matter how long we stay in Iraq or how many troops we send there.
The Neo-Conservatives disagree with my beliefs. They believe the War was a very good idea, even if the stated justifications were not exactly true. They believe its failures were caused by bad planning and bad administration, not by any flaw in the basic idea. Many of them believe that it was needed to protect Israel. And they believe that everything can still succeed if we merely improve our planning and administration
And so it boils down to these two sides in the debate: those who believe the War in Iraq can succeed, if only we make some changes; and those who believe it cannot succeed, no matter what we do.
If you believe it can succeed, you should support Bush and a continued U.S. presence, "for as long as it takes." If you believe, as I do, that it never can succeed because it was doomed from the start, you should support a complete withdrawal of U.S. forces, as soon as it is physically possible.
There is no real middle ground.
Blessings to you. May God help us all.
http://www.LoveAllPeople.org
Rev. Bill McGinnis is an Internet Christian minister, writer and publisher. He is Director of LoveAllPeople.org, a small private think tank in Alexandria, Virginia, and all of its related websites, including InternetChurchOfChrist.org,CommitteeForTheGoldenRule.org,CivicAmerican.com, and AmericanDemocrat.net. His agenda is to help maximize the happiness and well-being of all people. His blog is located at http://blog.myspace.com/revbillmcginnis
How To End The War
Russ Feingold
February 02, 2007
Russ Feingold is a United States senator from Wisconsin.
Our founders wisely kept the power to fund a war separate from the power to conduct a war. In their brilliant design of our system of government, Congress got the power of the purse, and the president got the power of the sword. As James Madison wrote, "Those who are to conduct a war cannot in the nature of things, be proper or safe judges, whether a war ought to be commenced, continued or concluded."
Earlier this week, I chaired a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee to remind my colleagues in the Senate that, through the power of the purse, we have the constitutional power to end a war. At the hearing, a wide range of constitutional scholars agreed that Congress can use its power to end a military engagement.
The Constitution gives Congress the explicit power "[to] declare War," "[t]o raise and support Armies," "[t]o provide and maintain a Navy" and "[t]o make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces." In addition, under Article I, "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." These are direct quotes from the Constitution of the United States. Yet to hear some in the Administration talk, it is as if these powers were written in invisible ink. They were not. These powers are a clear and direct statement from the founders of our republic that Congress has authority to declare, to define and, ultimately, to end a war.
If and when Congress acts on the will of the American people by ending our involvement in the Iraq war, Congress will be performing the role assigned it by the founding fathers-defining the nature of our military commitments and acting as a check on a president whose policies are weakening our nation.
There is plenty of precedent for Congress exercising its constitutional authority to stop U.S. involvement in armed conflict.
......edited for legal reasons..........click on th elink and read it all, please.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Friday, February 2, 2007 at 5:31:27 PM
