Sarkasis
28-06-2005, 19:44
I have read a list of conflicts in the 20th and 21th century (up to 2005), and I have just realized how FEW conflicts were fought by the US after a formal declaration of war. WW1, WW2, GW1... that's about it.
But we hear on a daily basis quotes from senior government members saying "We're at war", "A war economy...", "During a war, we have to..."
But still, no war declaration for Afghanistan, Iraq, Grenada, etc.
Isn't it contradictory? We're at war, but we're not at the same time. We're at war only when it suits the government's wishes.
Maybe that's because Congress must vote to go to war (REAL war)... which WOULD include a democratic process...
But right now, nobody has voted for/against war... it's one man's decision. Not the people representatives' decision. I think it makes a major difference on the legitimity of all these "armed conflicts", "operations", and other "let's not call it war" military things.
But we hear on a daily basis quotes from senior government members saying "We're at war", "A war economy...", "During a war, we have to..."
But still, no war declaration for Afghanistan, Iraq, Grenada, etc.
Isn't it contradictory? We're at war, but we're not at the same time. We're at war only when it suits the government's wishes.
Maybe that's because Congress must vote to go to war (REAL war)... which WOULD include a democratic process...
But right now, nobody has voted for/against war... it's one man's decision. Not the people representatives' decision. I think it makes a major difference on the legitimity of all these "armed conflicts", "operations", and other "let's not call it war" military things.