Replies to post #28221 on Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[goodluck]

Another American Nightmare?
By Carl F. Worden
Published 03. 30. 03 at 18:14 Sierra Time

The last time America engaged in an unconstitutional and illegal war, was during the Viet Nam "conflict". It wasn't a mere conflict, and certainly not if you died or were maimed by it. It was a war to defeat the spread of "evil" Communism -- a preemptive strike, if you will. There was no congressional declaration of war, as required by our Constitution, and the result of that illegal war was 58,000 American kids killed, and untold thousands more psychologically maimed and physically crippled. In the aftermath, this nation has established full trade relations with the victorious Communist Viet Nam, without even requiring their leaders to account for the fate of our remaining POW's and MIA's.

In retrospect, Those who died and were maimed for life, died and were maimed for life in vain. I am sorry if this assessment offends or hurts anyone associated with that "conflict", particularly if they were victims of it, but that is just the way it is. Viet Nam remains a Communist nation to this day, and we have rewarded them by granting them full trade status and enriching them substantially.

Makes you want to sign up for American military duty, donut??

Now about Iraq:

Saddam Hussein is a bad ass. I won't even try to argue otherwise. He is a threat to us all, and many other nations. He is an evil man, and he is a threat to his own people, and he needs to stop breathing as soon as the opportunity presents itself.

Now comes Carl F. Worden before the court of public opinion to express what is wrong with the picture being foisted upon us, and it is this: Following the rule of law is more important than killing Saddam Hussein, because if we fail to enforce the rule of law in this nation, we open the door to allow a Saddam Hussein of our own to take power here. Please read that again, and don't even entertain the thought that it can't happen here. It can happen anywhere when the rule of law is nullified either by intent of by negligence.

The Constitution of the United States requires that only the Congress can declare war on another nation. Nothing in the Constitution allows a sitting president to unilaterally and arbitrarily declare war against another nation like an Iraqi dictator. Further, the officers and enlisted men of the American military have all sworn an oath to the Constitution as well, so if they elect to obey an illegal order from a president who has lost his constitutional compass, they do so at their own peril, and ours. Support our troops? Not if they are obeying an illegal order, because if they follow an illegal order to attack another nation without congressional authority, they will be just as likely to follow an illegal order to open fire on American citizens at some time in the future -- don't you get it?. In short, letting Saddam live is more important than allowing our president to violate his oath of office.

But what am I hearing from the average person on the street? Situation ethics, that's what I'm hearing, and it indicates a corrupt and morally degraded American population. I swear, sometimes I am just exasperated listening to some of these idiots who think it's perfectly okay to violate the rule of law if the "situation" calls for it. Saddam is a bad boy, so it's okay to bypass the rule of law and attack Iraq without the required congressional declaration of war? We are completely out of our minds to allow this.

And by the way, don't fall for the argument that the United States is justified in attacking Iraq under some United Nations resolution that Saddam didn't comply with. When the U.S. agreed to the terms of membership in the U.N., we agreed to comply with the rules of that body, and those rules allowed certain member states to veto a proposal. So when France, Germany and Russia promised to veto our proposal to attack Iraq militarily, our president didn't even look in the direction of a congressional declaration of war, as his oath requires, but instead ordered our troops deployed to attack Iraq like some despot -- and where the hell is the silent Congress in all this?

You flag-waving crazies who think you are being patriotic by rooting for "our team" just don't get it: There is NOTHING you could possibly do that is more treasonous to our nation and our Constitution than to lend your support to a blatant violation of constitutional law! You have become part of the problem, don't you understand that?

Whenever I run into one of these slack-jawed mouth-breathers on the street, they always look at me with a blank stare when I explain to them that what we are doing is illegal and plainly unconstitutional. And do you know what they almost always say? "Yeah, maybe so, but we've got to do something about Saddam Hussein, don't we?" Oh my God...

Yes, we have to do something about Saddam Hussein, but we have to do it by the rule of our law, and nothing short of that will do. The last time we allowed this, 58,000 young men and women my age came back in body bags, and do you remember what the slack-jawed mouth breathers said back then? "Yeah, maybe this war is unconstitutional, but we've got to do something to stop Communism, don't we?"

We are going to pay a terrible price for allowing this, people. Mark my words this date: We are going to pay a terrible price.

Carl F. Worden

http://www.sierratimes.com/03/03/20/carlworden.htm

[otraque]

If haven't yet you should read "Jarhead" and how in its' content it exposes the "interview' sessions.
How they get coached as to what to say( cases of formal rehearsals) and to show their Biceps and look like good strong upstanding American boys.
And then they go off camera and laugh at it all on how the world they talk of to the press and of the real world talked about among themselves be two different worlds.
And as the article says, the key gun at their head is if they speak out of line, that's it, their career is roadkill.
A "blackball" or whatever goes permanently into their file.
Ah the "joys" of fighting for democracy.