Invading armies and occupations will not stop terrorism and by its

[mmonk]

nature is counterproductive. When the next session of Congress convenes, get behind Dennis Kucinich's attempt at getting Congress to reassert its Constitutional duties on issues of war through invoking the War Powers Resolution of 1973 and using Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. Do so before another Bush takes office or another Congress run by the likes of another Delay or Hastert. Remember, separation of powers as originally established has not been reinstated nor all our treaties or rule of law. This could be the next step in restoring these protections for the future.

[mmonk]

1. Those that disagree, state your reasons.

[bigtree]

2. it's interesting that the Speaker has said the Kucinich withdrawal resolution will do

. . . for a vote on Afghanistan.

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Rep. Dennis Kucinich's proposed resolution to pull troops out of Afghanistan seems to be getting a favorable reception from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich announced last week that he'll be introducing a resolution to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. At a roundtable with reporters on Wednesday afternoon, Pelosi said many House members "are eager to have a vote soon on Afghanistan" and the resolution the Cleveland Democrat plans to introduce early next year will likely satisfy that need.

Since Kucinich announced last week that he'll be introducing a resolution to withdraw troops from Afghanistan, a dozen colleagues from both political parties have agreed to cosponsor his measure.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7253250
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/12/17-3

[mmonk]

5. That is interesting. That in itself is Congress re-establishing its role.

[madokie]

3. The only way to stop terrorism is to stop doing the things that make those people hate us

until we do that it is only going to get worse. For every one we kill or maim or village we destroy or water plant or any number of the things we're doing in Afghanistan and Iraq is only making the problem bigger which was the intent of the dick. He knew what he was doing and he wanted to get us into a perpetual war where he and his like minded friends could clean up on selling the government war machines and services know full well none of their families would be directly involved with the waring part, you know the getting your ass blown off kind of thing.

Get out of those peoples lives and leave them the fuck alone is my advice on all this strife throughout the world. If we can make a possitive change somewhere and are asked for the help in doing that then get involved but otherwise do as I do and leave people the fuck alone. Whats os difficult about that anyway?

[KharmaTrain]

4. But It's Productive To The Government...

It's why this nation ends up in one war or another every 20 years or so. We have a military/industrial complex that consumes billions of dollars a year to develop and built weapons...a major cog in this nation's economy and thus wars for profit have become a major source of revenue that winds its way back into the pockets of many legislators. To some it's not the needless slaughter thousands of miles away but hundreds of jobs and votes at a local munitions plant.

Both parties will not cede giving the Executive unlimited war powers as it serves their overall political means. Both parties have launched wars without getting declarations of war from either body, instead going for a far more obtrusive resolution or other form of legislation that ends up giving them powers beyond what the founders had envisioned. As we've seen time and time again, once a power is granted, it's all but impossible to rewind.

Unfortunately the only way this country will push for reigning in the Executive powers to launch and wage wars is when they become too expensive not only in blood but treasure.

[mmonk]

6. Having a private secret army if you will, like the CIA under

the executive branch, makes things harder. The executive can do the "regime change" thing or just shotgun destabalization such as was done in Afghanistan. Either though, is a clear act of war, and should invoke the Congress.

[KharmaTrain]

7. Also Conflicts Within That Army...

We've just had a demonstration of it with the underware bomber...the CIA kept its information from the FBI and DOD. We're sure to hear more noise about this in days to come and a call for even more draconian laws to "make us safe". Bank it.

You bring up a very important facet and change in this country since World War II. It also reminds me of discussions we had back in the stoned ages of Vietnam. It's that US now views itself as the superpower and with it all interests are grounds for military action as the term "national interest" expands. It's grown from protecting our borders from invaders (including imaginary ones) to economic and social ones. We were rightly condemned for the invasion of Iraq, however many of those critics also called for a U.S. military intervention in Darfur. It all depends on whose interests are at stake.

Congress has gladly abdicated its war making powers as its political dynamite. Look at how many Democrats caved when attacked as not being "patriotic" or "American" during the IWR debate. I'll bet that Hillary Clinton privately kicks herself not over her vote but having to be in the position she was in making that vote. Sadly it will require a war of such devestating proportions that there's true hardships felt in this country before Congress will act. War is just another part of doing business.

[mmonk]

11. I'm afraid you are right.

And because Americans are more insulated from the world away from our borders, its hard to get them to see the picture and possibilities inherent in certain actions especially through the fog of fears put into their heads by others. I shudder to think what devastation or economic disaster it would take and how long it would take them to recognize it.

[Soylent Brice]

8. K&R

[polly7]

9. I'm not aware of any invading armies whose purpose was to go in

and stop terrorism.

Oil, pipelines, permanent military bases to guard them and prepare for more illegal killing and decimation. 'Protecting ones interests' I think is what it's called. 911 was committed by no one country, most were Saudi nationalists. Not many I know believe the illegal invasions and occupations of whole sovereign nations had anything to do with terrorism. Stopping it would have meant taking advantage of the worldwide willingness to use intelligence, shared resources and a true desire to get those responsible.

[Greyhound]

10. Every time one of our 'hawks' goes on a paranoid rampage and this subject comes up,

there is no answer from them. I just don't know how these people can convince themselves that they are at all liberal when they crave the use of force.
:kick: & R