I have one question for every single person that has stated this war is
illegal or believes it is and has yet to say so.


"What is the defining factor to make this war illegal? What illegal
action was taken in declaring war in iraq?"

And PLEASE, state facts not opinion, Cause I will really like seeing the
non-factual items proven so.

WOW!!! Looks like no one is wiling to come forth and clear up what
illegal activity took place in declaring war in iraq.
Does this mean we all no wagree that the war was legal?

Well, the first time in history that we ever invading another country
without being provoke makes me ashamed, even before I saw that they
doctored CIA data to get congress to approve it. Thats pretty much
enough aint it, You might debate the first unprovoked thing, but the
doctoring of data is public knowledge and fact. I dont think thats open
for debate and it was illegal deception covered in the constitution.

Read this and then tell me if lying to get what you want is legal ...


In Article 1 sect 8, in 1973

SEC. 4. (a) In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which
United States Armed Forces are introduced--
(1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in
hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;
(2) into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while
equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to
supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or
(3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces
equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation; the president
shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report,
in writing, setting forth--
(A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States
Armed Forces;
(B) the constitutional and legislative authority under which such
introduction took place; and
(C) the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.

(b) The President shall provide such other information as the Congress
may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities
with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United
States Armed Forces abroad

(c) Whenever United States Armed Forces are introduced into hostilities
or into any situation described in subsection (a) of this section, the
President shall, so long as such armed forces continue to be engaged in
such hostilities or situation, report to the Congress periodically on
the status of such hostilities or situation as well as on the scope and
duration of such hostilities or situation, but in no event shall he
report to the Congress less often than once every six months.

CONGRESSIONAL ACTION

OH YOUR TALKING ABOUT THE DOCTORED DATE THAT WAS GIVEN TO US BY THE
BRIT'S YEAH I REMEMBER THAT IT WAS UNSOLICITATED TOO.

UNPROVOKED INVASION? LETS NOT FORGET THAT THERE WERE MANY CONFRONTATIONS
WITH THE MUSTACHED ONE, IN FACT CLINTON HIMSELF ORDERED AIRSTRIKES INTO
IRAQ WHILE HE WAS PRESIDENT, I THINK IT WAS A TOTAL OF LIKE SIX TIMES
ALTHOUGH IT COULD BE HIGHER IM NOT 100% ON THAT. AND THEY (IRAQ) DID
SHOOT DOWN AT LEAST THREE US FIGHTER JETS WHILE FLYING PATROLS OVER/NEAR
THE U.N. DIRECTED NO FLY ZONE (and thats iraqi no fly not the US no
fly). SO UNPROVOKED? THE WAR THAT STARTED 15 JAN 1991 NEVER ENDED, NOT
REALLY THERE WAS ALWAYS STUFF HAPPENING THERE, DOESNT REALLY MATTER NOW
THOUGH DOES IT, BECAUSE WE'RE THERE AND WE'RE NOT LEAVING ANY TIME SOON.

HERE A SIDE QUESTION- EVERYONE BASHING ON BUSH FOR THIS, BUT NO ONE
BASHING ON US FOR STILL (13YEARS LATER) BEING IN KOSOVO, AND IT WAS
CLINTON WHO KEPT US THERE- AND LOOKS LIKE YOU FORGOT ABOUT US THERE AS
WELL.

yes fanta the information was doctored. However it was NOT doctored by
or with consent of our president or congress. yes, I am sure President
Bush was adamant about wanting evidence no matter what, but nowhere and
no when has he ever told his cabinet members to falsify the documents.
He acted off of knoewledge that he thought was correct at the time it
was presented. So he did not do anything illegal there. And after that
when it came to light that the evidence was dotored, it was too late to
pull out. We would have had even more dangerous problems than we do
now, as I am sure you will agree.
The war was declared justifiably at the time due to evidence held at the
time.

section 4 para b.


and the congress did take action and voted for authorization for war.



doc

Okay, OP, ur ignorant. The war isn't about helping anyone but
ourselves, its all about oil. So you tell me what sounds good about
that? I don't care what we are told, thats how it is and we all know it.
There's nothing good about war, the only reason we are still even over
there is because Bush knows he can't be voted out of office until the
war is over.

and I would agree with you about invading unprovoked, however the
evidence we had at the time, said that iraq was massing WMD's in order
to either strike or provide to terrorists in order to have struck, us or
our allies. That in my opinion is not unprovoked. And to be honest I
still believe to this day that saddam had the wmd; he was justa dept
enough at hiding them and disposing of them and their evidence before we
could locate them.

Has everyone forgotten 9-11

No, I've not forgotten about 9-11 at all. The problem is that we stopped
fighting the actual target. We went after Sadaam, not Osama, the man
behind the horrid acts. Sadaam was a disqusting dictator who did get
what he deserved, but Osama is still hiding waiting to pounce again, but
are we looking for him? NO! We are fighting over oil.

President Bush 41 (George Bush's father) received approval to go to war
with Iraq in 1991. Following Iraq's defeat, the US agreed to halt
hostilities, under certain conditions. Dismantling of the Iraqi WMD
programs, No-fly zones, inspections are the three conditions that come
to mind. The Iraqis fired at our jets in the no-fly zones. They kicked
out the inspectors. They still had a marginal WMD program. All in all,
the war was fully justified based on the declaration passed by Congress
in 1991. That's ignoring the authorization that was given to George
Bush. It's ignoring the authorization given by the UN in resolution
1382. In short, the war in Iraq was fully justifiable through about
half a dozen different ways.

oil? are you for real, check out the department of commerce and tell me
where most of the US oil comes from, you might sing a different story. i
can give you a hint its not the middle east.


degraded weapons of mass destruction were found, by the warehouse full,
BTW. but they werent considered viable and we wanted to locae the nasty
stuff we knew he had, but...you know that story. even though if we
wanted to lie and make ourself look good, we would have just told you
that we found them and been done with the whole flippin mess.

"Fighting over oil"? LOL That's a canard and a red herring. We aren't
fighting for oil. Bush could have cut a deal for $20 a barrel oil or
less from Saddam, under the condition of removing sactions from Iraq.
The President's "oil buddies" would have made billions and we would only
be paying $2 at the pump at most. It's not about oil, that lie has been
debunked dozens of times.

You really think that the government tells us the truth? Are YOU
serious? I can see from your photo and name you are in the Army. I
respect what you do and do thank you for doing it. I am not against the
soldiers, but I am against this war. We've been there long enough and
are making no more progress than we were 4 years ago. I know you
probably think that we are still an honest Abe kind of country, but wake
up. You do realize that oil prices have sky rocketed since the war
started right? Why do you think that is? They could get oil from over
seas and pay much less before and now we actually have to use our own
and the government hates that. Its all about MONEY, thats it. Our
government only cares about the bottom line, period.

"Okay, OP, ur ignorant. The war isn't about helping anyone but
ourselves, its all about oil. So you tell me what sounds good about
that? I don't care what we are told, thats how it is and we all know it.
There's nothing good about war, the only reason we are still even over
there is because Bush knows he can't be voted out of office until the
war is over. "

1. I higly doubt I am ignorant; I am well learned on this, as I have
done a lot of reading and research on the matter, not only while we were
actually at war, but since. But that is my opinion.

2. Where is your proof that the war is about helping ourselves and oil?
I asked for facts not opinions.

3. "I don't care what we are told..." this statement immediately tells
me that you dont care who says what, that you believe you are omniscient
(all-knowing) at least on this matter.

4. I never said, or suggested, there was anything good about war.

5. "the only reason we are still even over there is because Bush knows
he can't be voted out of office until the war is over." The reason we
are still over there, is we can not safely pull all of our troops out
without causing more havoc, chaos, and trouble than we are already in.
Also no wthat we HAVE gone over there, no matter the reason or
justification, we have the responsibility to help correct the issues
that we helped cause, and to help them get back on their feet, so to
speak. let's say you ran some one over with your car; by accident and
everyone involved agrees it was an honest accident. Should you not as
the offending party, be responsible enough to hel pmake sure the person
or their family gets the help they need in concerns to said accident?
we, as a nation face the same responsibilities of our actions.

"You do realize that oil prices have sky rocketed since the war
started right? Why do you think that is?"

oil prices have skyrocketed because of gready politicians, plain and
simple. and greedy vendors. Our local (state level etc.) governements
are not stopping price goudging cause they get a kickbak, which is why
federal deos nto step in to cite the local governments lack of
involvement. That, right now is my opinion. I am in the process of
researching oil p[rices then (say ten years ago) vs. oil prices now,
location of purchase of oil etc. Once I have a fully educated opinion,
I iwll let you know what I have found.

9-11 had nothing to do with Iraq,

Even believing that possibly we have a president that is comepletly
blind to what his staff does, (in this case his vice president), wand
then backs him up in his lies ( the level of deception in this
administration is unprecedented to the point of being investigated as
being corupt) If your child goes to the neighbors and steals his car,
where does the buck stop?


Doc, I keep getting the sense that you think you are talking for all
vetreans, which you arent, no more than I am. That would be a cheap
arguement for either of us to use. And yes, I was not a soldier of
fortune, I was an American soldier, a GI (government issued to defend
this country for The American People,)lock stock and barrel, theirs,
ours, the peoples Army, not GW's, Ronald Reagan, or any one man's
private Army, and I signed and swore an alligance which gave up my
rights as an individual .... I served before smart bombs, when an
infantry unit faced a real possibility of losing 50-70 percent
casualties when engaged. My life was no longer just mine, and it damn
sure wasnt GW's...

I never said I was all knowing, I just know what I feel. I know that
this war was not started for the right reasons, simple as that. I am
ready for my friends to come home in one piece. They made it sound like
we were fighting back for 9-11, but if thats the case then where's
Osama's body? I would've agreed with going to get him for what he did to
our country, but we gave up on him and then were like "oh, lets go see
who else we can get to fight". Bush is his father's hand puppet.

"Even believing that possibly we have a president that is comepletly
blind to what his staff does, (in this case his vice president), wand
then backs him up in his lies ( the level of deception in this
administration is unprecedented to the point of being investigated as
being corupt) If your child goes to the neighbors and steals his car,
where does the buck stop?"

I am sure I have not read or seen it all Fanta, however, did nPresident
Bush NOT come out oublicly and openly without pressure from the people
and announce there had been false documents, etc.? Did he not
reorganize his cabinet very publicly afterwards due to said documents?
I am sure he did so in a way that would benefit him and his political
group a smuch as possible yes, because first and foremost he is a
politician (sorry for the bad language folks ). However, he
did publicly denounce the wrongful documents, and did what he could to
rectify it.